Do Trumpers suffer from mental illnesses?

Started by Surtur18 pages
Surtur Restricted

My defense is that if she didn't know this person had a harmless item and all she saw was this guy reaching and pulling something out of his pocket and she fired out of fear for her husbands safety I understand that.

If that is not how it went down..I have said what happened was wrong.

If this went down like the lawyer claims, what would you say?

Robtard Senor Member

Yes, Surtur, this poor victimized woman who brought a concealed gun to a rally, shot into a crowd, hit and almost killed a guy.

NemeBro Senior Member

Originally posted by Surtur
My defense is that if she didn't know this person had a harmless item and all she saw was this guy reaching and pulling something out of his pocket and she fired out of fear for her husbands safety I understand that.

If that is not how it went down..I have said what happened was wrong.

If this went down like the lawyer claims, what would you say?

Why are you defending a trigger-happy retard who fired on someone that she had no reason to believe meant her any harm? Is an assumption that he might be dangerous because some of the protesters have been justification for shooting him? Even assuming he did have brass knuckles, is shooting him when he made no attempt at striking her husband (which is almost certainly the case, considering that he did not in fact have brass knuckles, but in fact a finger-strengthener, unless you're asserting he might have gone after him with that) justifiable?

Also, here's what the item in question likely looked like:

It doesn't really look much like brass knuckles IMO. And even if she did genuinely believe he posed a threat to her husband, this would merely make her a mouth-breathing retard who has no business owning a concealed weapon.

Bashar Teg Senior Mentat

mental illness: confirmed

Robtard Senor Member

This story is a good example of how crucially the US needs gun reform in the form of more comprehensive checks, longer wait times, eradication of gun loopholes and mandatory basic gun knowledge/training.

Maybe being the supporter of a racist and pedophile enabler, mentally unstable and possibly mentally retarded would bring up some flags and an incident like this could be avoided or reduced.

Kurk Restricted

Originally posted by Robtard
This story is a good example of how crucially the US needs gun reform in the form of more comprehensive checks, longer wait times, eradication of gun loopholes and mandatory basic gun knowledge/training.

Maybe being the supporter of a racist and pedophile enabler, mentally unstable and possibly mentally retarded would bring up some flags and an incident like this could be avoided or reduced.

Please elaborate on how those things would've stopped this from happening.

Robtard Senor Member

Well Kurk, one would hope that with more comprehensive background checks a mentally and emotionally unstable person would throw up a warning sign, as an example. YW

chingchangwalla Restricted

Originally posted by Robtard
This story is a good example of how crucially the US needs gun reform in the form of more comprehensive checks, longer wait times, eradication of gun loopholes and mandatory basic gun knowledge/training.

Maybe being the supporter of a racist and pedophile enabler, mentally unstable and possibly mentally retarded would bring up some flags and an incident like this could be avoided or reduced.


95% of mass shootings occur in gun-free zones. I say everyone should have an AR-15, especially teachers at schools

Silent Master Senior Member

That is just stupid, teachers don't need to be carrying AR-15s around school.

chingchangwalla Restricted

Originally posted by Silent Master
That is just stupid, teachers don't need to be carrying AR-15s around school.

Why not. Columbine wouldn't have happened

Silent Master Senior Member

For the sake of argument, let's say that having the teachers armed would have helped during Columbine. why would they need to be armed with AR-15s instead of a .380 or 9mm handgun?

chingchangwalla Restricted

Originally posted by Silent Master
For the sake of argument, let's say that having the teachers armed would have helped during Columbine. why would they need to be armed with AR-15s instead of a .380 or 9mm handgun?

To guarantee victory.

Silent Master Senior Member
Originally posted by chingchangwalla
To guarantee victory.

How does an AR-15 guarantee victory?

Kurk Restricted

Originally posted by Robtard
Well Kurk, one would hope that with more comprehensive background checks a mentally and emotionally unstable person would throw up a warning sign, as an example. YW
This is pathetic Robtard. I would surely expect a person as wordly-wise as yourself to know that even sane humans don't work like that. It's for the same reason that Police Officers can't control their impulse to shoot for center of mass when using a gun against a person.

Humans work in strange ways when under an adrenaline fight-or-flight response. As much as I would like the proportion to be higher, few people actually have the capacity to remain coldly rational in this type of situation.

It has nothing to do with whether a person in psychologically sound. Emotions get in the way.

Kurk Restricted

I wouldn't mind certain physically competent teachers from having a gun, but some are just really...well...not up to the job and would be a bigger threat than asset.

chingchangwalla Restricted

Originally posted by Silent Master
How does an AR-15 guarantee victory?

Just 24% of Mass shootings in the years 1982 to 2013 were done by 'assault weapons' so there's a good chance he'll just have a glock or some other piece of shit. He isn't going to be happy when he sees multiple teachers with AR-15's... or if he does have an 'assault weapon' it'll be an equal fight

Robtard Senor Member

Originally posted by Kurk
This is pathetic Robtard. I would surely expect a person as wordly-wise as yourself to know that even sane humans don't work like that. It's for the same reason that Police Officers can't control their impulse to shoot for center of mass when using a gun against a person.

Humans work in strange ways when under an adrenaline fight-or-flight response. As much as I would like the proportion to be higher, few people actually have the capacity to remain coldly rational in this type of situation.

It has nothing to do with whether a person in psychologically sound. Emotions get in the way.

So you're against better background checks cos reasons. Not surprised tbh, you are very immature.

Silent Master Senior Member
Originally posted by chingchangwalla
Just 24% of Mass shootings in the years 1982 to 2013 were done by 'assault weapons' so there's a good chance he'll just a glock or some other piece of shit. He isn't going to be happy when he sees multiple teachers with AR-15's... or if he does have an 'assault weapon' it'll be an equal fight

That doesn't answer my question. The question was, how does an AR-15 guarantee victory?

chingchangwalla Restricted

Originally posted by Robtard
So you're against better background checks cos reasons. Not surprised tbh, you are very immature.

Anyone with a mental illness should not have a gun. Or somebody who just got out of prison. But I don't like the idea of having the government knowing how many guns I have.

chingchangwalla Restricted

Originally posted by Silent Master
That doesn't answer my question. The question was, how does an AR-15 guarantee victory?

I did answer the question. It's a lot more powerful than a handgun, which are used in a large majority of shootings. I didn't mean a guaranteed victory every time but it would tip things in your favor.