WTAF???

Status
Not open for further replies.

Raiyn

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2017
Messages
9,235
Reaction score
6,330
Location
Satan's Armpit, (aka St. Petersburg, FL)
It happened again in Tulsa The individual in question was able to purchase his weapons less than three hours before entering the clinic and killing four before ending himself.

 

Otto99

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2018
Messages
1,884
Reaction score
2,108
Location
Memphis, TN
It happened again in Tulsa The individual in question was able to purchase his weapons less than three hours before entering the clinic and killing four before ending himself.

Fekkin great, now I’ll have to pass through a metal detector going in for the hip replacement.
 
Joined
Apr 28, 2022
Messages
22
Reaction score
35
Lunatics gonna lunatic unfortunately.... the problem faced is not really "how to stop someone lunaticing" more "how to limit the damage of them lunaticing"...

I personally think "military style" long guns are pointless/the problem.

Law abiding US gun owners that have them for your own personal preference please forgive me, this isn't about you, but about a product that can appeal to certain types, for me, these are the tacticool weapons that appeal to whoever, but also particularly appealing to the low self esteem wannabes who have that sort of military but not good enough for the military style to them.... the kind that "would have been a navy seal", but they had a cold on the day they planned to sign up and so on so forth..

There is no point banning "military style" handguns because most handguns are military style, but its the rifles which are the issue in their marketed appeal. Sure, a lot of damage can be done with a bolt action, but they don't have that sort of "cool" appearance to them in the eyes of the nutty.

And again, there are plenty of people that problem have AR style rifles because they look cool, but they also enjoy firing them, but sadly something has to give/change... its either tighter rules in getting hold of one, tighter rules in the types of weapons or an acceptance that in any given year a few schools will get shot up and that's just that.... the latter sounds doesn't sound acceptable to me..
 

The Convert

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2016
Messages
527
Reaction score
530
Location
Chicago
Let’s not let media off the hook.

Since 2012 there has been nearly 1000 school shootings. Do you have a sense that we’ve been made aware of a school shooting every three days for the last ten years? I don’t.

Seems to me that someone thinks anything but the most extreme examples aren’t worth the air time. That too is offensive. I wonder how many smaller shootings were bumped because media thought we’d rather hear a daily update on the Depp-Heard trial. Which lives are worth society’s sorrow and lament.
 

syco

Active Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2022
Messages
196
Reaction score
228
Location
Tuttle , Oklahoma
Let’s not let media off the hook.

Since 2012 there has been nearly 1000 school shootings. Do you have a sense that we’ve been made aware of a school shooting every three days for the last ten years? I don’t.

Seems to me that someone thinks anything but the most extreme examples aren’t worth the air time. That too is offensive. I wonder how many smaller shootings were bumped because media thought we’d rather hear a daily update on the Depp-Heard trial. Which lives are worth society’s sorrow and lament.
Probably depends on which news outlet you watch . On the flipside , you have people complaining that the news is over sensationalizing these shootings .
 

Supersonic

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2016
Messages
1,660
Reaction score
2,433
THREE more mass shootings this weekend including another one a little over an hour away in Chattanooga. It's gotten to the point that I don't even want to read the news anymore. When's it gonna stop folks?


156 days, at least 240 mass shootings​

Some 156 days into 2022, the country has now seen at least 240 mass shootings, according to the Gun Violence Archive. That puts the nation on track for one of the deadliest years on record since the archive began tracking gun deaths. The site defines a mass shooting as any incident in which four or more people are killed or injured by a gun.

Since May 14, when a racist attack at a Buffalo, N.Y., supermarket took the lives of 10 people, there have been at least four dozen mass shootings in the U.S., according to data from the Gun Violence Archive. That includes the attack on Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas that left 19 students and two teachers dead.
 
Joined
May 16, 2021
Messages
51
Reaction score
91
Location
Wellington, New Zealand
As a New Zealander I'd just like to say, not my problem ... but ...
Once you have the number of guns circulating amongst the population that you do in the U.S. with such poor legislation that only a small percentage are trackable, the chance of controlling the situation has long since past.
A govt buyback (as done in New Zealand) only works if all guns are licensed and able to be tracked by the authorities. Otherwise it's down to the honesty of the gun owner to hand it in and it's not the honest gun owners who are the problem.
I have no idea what the solution is over there? It seems to me any legislation against or limiting gun ownership now is like shutting the gate after the horse has bolted?
Or have I got the end wrong end of the stick?
I'd also like to say that from where I sit it appears the NRA have to take at least some responsibility for the tens of thousands of gun deaths in the U.S. each year because of their ridiculous insistance in misinterpreting the 2nd Amendment to suit their own ends.
And of course the spinelessness of the politicians who fail to do anything about the situation because it may cost them their seat.
These are just the observations of someone who isn't in the trees and can clearly see the forest.
 

syco

Active Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2022
Messages
196
Reaction score
228
Location
Tuttle , Oklahoma
As a New Zealander I'd just like to say, not my problem ... but ...
Once you have the number of guns circulating amongst the population that you do in the U.S. with such poor legislation that only a small percentage are trackable, the chance of controlling the situation has long since past.
A govt buyback (as done in New Zealand) only works if all guns are licensed and able to be tracked by the authorities. Otherwise it's down to the honesty of the gun owner to hand it in and it's not the honest gun owners who are the problem.
I have no idea what the solution is over there? It seems to me any legislation against or limiting gun ownership now is like shutting the gate after the horse has bolted?
Or have I got the end wrong end of the stick?
I'd also like to say that from where I sit it appears the NRA have to take at least some responsibility for the tens of thousands of gun deaths in the U.S. each year because of their ridiculous insistance in misinterpreting the 2nd Amendment to suit their own ends.
And of course the spinelessness of the politicians who fail to do anything about the situation because it may cost them their seat.
These are just the observations of someone who isn't in the trees and can clearly see the forest.
Biggest problem we have in the U.S , everybody wants to argue about any asinine thing , but nobody wants to work for a mutually beneficial solution for fear that the people they represent will revolt against them . The absolute hate that the citizens (political parties ) of this country have for one another , is one of the first things that needs to be dealt with . Our " so called " 2nd amendment supporters care more for teaching people to kill /protect , than they do about teaching gun safety/training . I own 18 guns ( 4 of them " assault weapons " ....... Do I need 18 guns ..... NOPE ! , but I also don't need 10 guitars , but alas I have them .
 
Joined
Apr 28, 2022
Messages
22
Reaction score
35
Biggest problem we have in the U.S , everybody wants to argue about any asinine thing , but nobody wants to work for a mutually beneficial solution for fear that the people they represent will revolt against them . The absolute hate that the citizens (political parties ) of this country have for one another , is one of the first things that needs to be dealt with . Our " so called " 2nd amendment supporters care more for teaching people to kill /protect , than they do about teaching gun safety/training . I own 18 guns ( 4 of them " assault weapons " ....... Do I need 18 guns ..... NOPE ! , but I also don't need 10 guitars , but alas I have them .
Same everywhere really. Polarisation is massive and the abusive behaviour to those of opposite views is rife..

You see it with politics, what was typically 2 centrist parties with slightly different edges to them are now labelled far left and far right.. people are labelled far left and far right for questioning things or having concerns...

Anyone questioning a Liberal leaning policy is a bigot, racist. Anyone supporting a Liberal leaning policy is a snowflake etc etc.. we've all become more unpleasant to each, more divided and more willing to turn our backs on common sense in order for our "team" to be the one with the most points...

Education has gone down the pan in many regards...

I can see why people just shrug and go "not my problem"...
 

Axel Morisson

New Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2020
Messages
3
Reaction score
3
I am not from anywhere near the States- and these days, I thank the Lord for that. Just a quick question,17th century reasons notwithstanding, what is the reason the general population needs to be armed? Is it a constant war zone? Even when there's a war out there, even when there's general mobilization ( all valid citizens that can bear arms would do so) not EVERYONE gets a gun. Sometimes someone says: not you, Bubba...you better help with moving these crates or something. Because.. well,, because reasons.
The argument I hear is that criminals would get the guns they want so much no matter what. Yes, true... only those who are really connected. And of course, they would have to pay a lot. A very large part of these horrors are not the work of the mafia or the "career criminals" they're just dumb kids that walk into a store and get a new gun...to shoot, not at the range, because that's boring, not in the woods, because that's lame, I know... in the schoolyard, because that's cool, right? And thrilling...You can't have a school SHOOTING if there's nothing to shoot WITH. I mean the nut comes, enters the store and the most he can get is a..club or a knife. Sure, a madman is a madman and will do mad things- like start flailing a club or knifing around- but once that started, it does not take much to gang up on him and subdue him- even with primitive means (personal weapons, ha!) like chairs, rocks, stones, handbags etc. Now try that when your madman has the equivalent firepower of a small platoon and is not only not afraid to use it, but also very very willing, thrilled actually. A hero or two won't usually be enough- you must have at least a dozen.
That is the argument that the gun loving citizens forget- the laws are not against them, the ones that know how to use the guns and don't go around killing people for fun. It's the loonies that can get the same guns and use them because it's cool...the idea that anyone, literally anyone can buy a gun in the open that's a problem. The same with drugs- yes, some people still buy /find them when they need them etc. Okay. now think they would be legal. Think you could walk in a store and order a kilo of cocaine for example. What to do with it? Well, who knows? Eat it all up, give it to friends, kill someone? It does not matter. Do you think OD cases and other problems would be better or worse? .... it's like we're from another planet really.
 

Whitefang

Active Member
Joined
Mar 26, 2022
Messages
112
Reaction score
107
Location
Lincoln Park, Michigan (home of the MC5)
Peculiar country. People will clamor to insist on dictatorial laws to try keeping people from "murdering" babies, but laws that make it easy for some to murder children seem to be OK. And those who support those laws will always use some twisted, irrelevant logic to reason it. Like, "Guns don't kill people, PEOPLE kill people". That they're killing them with guns somehow escapes their attention. And no, not everyone who kills someone with a gun would have bothered to use something else if the gun wasn't available. That the gun was handy and using it means one need not get up "close and personal" to kill another was the appeal. And in many cases, if no gun was available, the person may have just stalked off in anger or might have had enough time to cool off. The immediacy and impersonal nature of the gun is what makes them dangerous.

Whitefang
 

soulman969

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2015
Messages
2,078
Reaction score
2,165
Location
Fort Collins, CO
Thing is, I agree with you, but you also know (damn well) that if he is using the right terminology and you used the right terminology back, then the argument would no longer be about terminology, but about children being murdered... it goes both ways... he has indeed proven his own point which was "using the wrong terminology diverts the conversation and argument"... and here we have over a page of back and forth replies about "terminology is irrelevant" v "terminology isn't irrelevant"...
Exactly. The only ones who insist on using correct terminology are those trying to deflect from the fact that even those who are or have been in the military will typically agree than an AR15 is nothing more than a civilian version of a military weapon.

A rose by any other name is still a rose and a weapon with a large magazine and rapid fire capability used to kill human beings as efficiently as possible will be called an assault rifle or an assault weapon so debating semantics or it's label changes nothing.

No one with any common sense has ever advocated making all firearms illegal but according to figures from the arms manufacturers approximately 20 million AR15 type rifles have been sold in the US alone. I doubt the entire US military has anywhere near that many weapons of this type so why would US citizens need that many?

The idea that they're needed as defense against a totalitarian government is pure bull. The first time a private militia took up arms against that regime the real military would bury them with their weapons in their cold dead hands. And second most of those militia types walking around armed with them actually support the US having a totalitarian government which they would then protect.

Anyone who wants proof of that need look no farther than Jan 6, 2021. And let's all stop buying into the con job they're needed for home defense. Against who? A mob of Oath Keepers with their AR15s? I submit that for home defense a hand gun or two and a fully loaded 12 gauge shotgun will work quite well. No one needs an AR15 for home defense unless somehow you live in Ukraine.
 

soulman969

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2015
Messages
2,078
Reaction score
2,165
Location
Fort Collins, CO
Heh!

You've just described the AR-15! 😉

Whitefang
Yup and as far as the military goes they are well aware there is only a very slight difference between them and the military version and this opinion came from a Colonel in the US Army.

He even made the point that while a military version has the option of selecting auto fire of multiple rounds it's not frequently used in combat because the weapon is far more accurate when fired by a single round.

Debating terminology is a waste of time and any laws that may be written can certainly describe and AR15 in such as way as to make their ownership illegal. It's been done before and it can be done again.
 

Old as Dust

New Member
Joined
May 27, 2022
Messages
16
Reaction score
6
No one is out to ban handguns because it will never happen. No one is under an assumption that we can prevent all shootings. Larger cities and metropolitan areas will always have issues with shootings. I was born in Chicago and that issue has existed all of my life.

But by restricting the sale and distribution of assault rifles which can and have been modified for auto or semi auto firing we can greatly reduce if not eliminate most of the mass murder type stuff that exists now. No one will ever convince me that it will not. I'm done with excuses.
If my kid flunks a math test, does the pencil get the blame?

I would think any talk of the nature of the thread here, was forbidden.
 

Old as Dust

New Member
Joined
May 27, 2022
Messages
16
Reaction score
6
Most firearms recovered from crimes in DC are bought outside the city. The laws help to prosecute those insurrectionists, but Washington still has a violent crime problem and was "murder capital" for years. The local government wants very, very strict gun laws, but they are dependent on the federal gov't for funding. The conservatives in Congress, who hate the local gov't because the city is overwhelmingly liberal, challenged some handgun restrictions (and won) because some of them wanted to bring their firearms into town (but not into the Capitol bldg) while they were here. So, they made the streets less safe.
Last I checked conservatives are the minority in Congress.
Right to bear arms has nothing to do with hunting.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


Latest posts

Top