Sutherland Springs, TX shooting

Started by Surtur15 pages
Originally posted by Bashar Teg
you're just making empty accusations to wh0re for attention. poor lonely squirt. 🙁

Lol exactly, you don't actually care that you're wrong about things you are saying. You give into your emotions because you're an emotionally weak little kid.

You remind me of the guy from the NYT who said tens of thousands of people die each day in this country over guns. Weird thing is: nobody corrected him. He said it on MSNBC, I didn't see any left leaning sites eager to fact check such a claim.

Originally posted by Surtur
Lol exactly, you don't actually care that you're wrong about things you are saying. You give into your emotions because you're an emotionally weak little kid.

You remind me of the guy from the NYT who said tens of thousands of people die each day in this country over guns. Weird thing is: nobody corrected him. He said it on MSNBC, I didn't see any left leaning sites eager to fact check such a claim.

okay so you still havent applied any context or evidence to your spammed accusation, and are simply posturing like an emotionally retarded show-pony. you're a joke.

Lol, and this is why it's not worth it entering into anything remotely resembling a serious discussion here. You misrepresent what was done in terms of mental health, repeatedly. You literally do not care. You literally can't separate whether or not this guy was mentally ill from the misrepresentation by leftists of the gun laws.

It's just not worth it. I'll leave you to this thread so you and your pals can just circle jerk each other. Facts have no place, only fee fees. Enjoy 👆

Originally posted by Bentley
If this forum just had Dadudemon replying to himself post after post the overall quality of the arguments would significantly rise.

And yet we'd be as wrong as we are now biscuits

Ha!

Originally posted by Steve Zodiac
Pretty sure if this guy was a Muslim the responses in this thread would be different.

Sort of. I think you're correct about America, but not necessarily about KMC. I think you'd see the conservatives in the US shitting themselves if it was a Muslim going on a shooting spree. But...from what we know, Muslim Jihadists don't go on shooting sprees in the US...at least not very often (there may be one terror attack like that but I cannot think of any off the top of my head).

Originally posted by dadudemon
It's possible it would have more if you use Glasgow, Jamaica, and other places as examples of increasing homicides after gun bans.

It's also possible that it is far too complicated to ask simple questions like yours. Likely, some areas would see homicide spikes, some would see decreases, and some would see shifts in where homicides and violence occur.

It all has to start from that simple question, and then the complications of getting rid of guns in the U.S. can move on from there.

You can't honestly believe there would be a rise in killings if everyone was suddenly disarmed.

Originally posted by dadudemon

Sort of. I think you're correct about America, but not necessarily about KMC. I think you'd see the conservatives in the US shitting themselves if it was a Muslim going on a shooting spree. But...from what we know, Muslim Jihadists don't go on shooting sprees in the US...at least not very often (there may be one terror attack like that but I cannot think of any off the top of my head).

San Bernardino attack, 14 killed by two Islamic extremist.

Originally posted by Steve Zodiac
Pretty sure if this guy was a Muslim the responses in this thread would be different.

We know it would Steve, because we previous history. No one is calling for any real changes here.

After the Las Vegas mass murder we had a moment of bipartisan support over possibly banning bump-stocks, but that apparently fizzled out.

first they came for our bump-stocks

Originally posted by Surtur
And holy shit, STOP with the mentally ill stuff. It's getting old.

*sigh* You and your pals continually mislead people about this. If a person has been deemed as a danger to themselves OR to others they cannot legally purchase a gun.

Under the Obama rule(that got repealed), information from the Social Security Administration regarding mental disability benefits would be added to the National Instant Criminal Background Check database for use in firearm background checks.

Even liberal rags like Vox have articles like this:

Why disabilities rights activists like me sided with the NRA on an Obama gun control rule

Mental illness is what conservative lawmakers are blaming for mass killings, yet they made it easier for them to obtain these firearms, and they are doing nothing to bring the costs of diagnosis and treatment.

It is getting old, but only because it's still the red herring being used by them to avoid any action whatsoever on current laws on gun sales, gun ownership, and lawful gun usage.

The opinion piece you reference is more about maintaining the rights of the mentally disabled and doing away the stigma of being unstable or incompetent than about gun rights alone. It doesn't change the inconsistent decisions made by conservative lawmakers.

I agree with it, to a certain extent. These are people who do have some type of mental illness, but do not necessarily exhibit violent behavior:

Disability advocates are concerned with setting the precedent that needing help with financial matters implies a lack of capacity to exercise other rights. These concerns are rooted in discrimination people with mental disabilities face in other areas of life, such as parenting and voting rights. On these issues, people with mental disabilities often face an assumption of incapacity, forcing disability and civil rights advocates and attorneys to fight to overturn assumptions that a diagnosis or determination of support need in one area should lead to a loss of rights in an unrelated area. Many of the same groups active in defending the voting and parenting rights of people with mental disabilities chose to weigh in against the Social Security rule for similar reasons; they feared that using the representative payee database for prohibiting gun purchases might constitute a “thin end of the wedge” for loss of more important rights down the road.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
You can't honestly believe there would be a rise in killings if everyone was suddenly disarmed.

Sure but that's a completely unrealistic solution. It's never going to happen. Even if you passed a blanket ban on all guns it's not going to happen.

Originally posted by Emperordmb
Sure but that's a completely unrealistic solution. It's never going to happen. Even if you passed a blanket ban on all guns it's not going to happen.

Probably not, but I think most people in favor of better gun-control or total bans are wanting a sharp decrease in gun-related killings and mass murders, even if it is gradual at first. I don't think anyone on either side of the debate thinks it'll end all gun violence.

No gun law reform person believes in "it will end all gun violence", that's a bullshit argument not held by that side. The point is to lower the rate of gun violence and the severity of it when it happens.

Laws/actions can (and do) lower crime rates though. eg Traffic Laws do not stop all traffic offenses, yet we have them becomes they generally work in maintaining traffic.

Originally posted by Robtard
No gun law reform person believes in "it will end all gun violence", that's a bullshit argument not held by that side. The point is to lower the rate of gun violence and the severity of it when it happens.

Like doing something to stop/lower all our mass shootings.

I hate to be the guy that says it but Murika has a gun culture problem. No matter what's done it's going to take awhile to change that....bump-stocks, ar-15's etc

Originally posted by snowdragon
Like doing something to stop/lower all our mass shootings.

I hate to be the guy that says it but Murika has a gun culture problem. No matter what's done it's going to take awhile to change that....bump-stocks, ar-15's etc

It does, we romanticize guns and what it means to own them.

Originally posted by Robtard
No gun law reform person believes in "it will end all gun violence", that's a bullshit argument not held by that side. The point is to lower the rate of gun violence and the severity of it when it happens.

Laws/actions can (and do) lower crime rates though. eg Traffic Laws do not stop all traffic offenses, yet we have them becomes they generally work in maintaining traffic.

Exactly.

I also think a repeal, or at least a significant reworking, of the Protection of Legal Commerce in Arms Act would help reduce gun violence by holding gun dealers legally accountable for selling guns without going through all the proper checks. Gun manufacturers shouldn't have any kind of immunity, either.

legislator walks out of useless 'moment of silence' 'thoughts and prayers' wank-fest to protest deliberate inaction and indifference, masked by proclamations virtue and piety.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/07/politics/ted-lieu-moment-of-silence-protest-guns/index.html

Originally posted by Eternal Idol
Exactly.

I also think a repeal, or at least a significant reworking, of the Protection of Legal Commerce in Arms Act would help reduce gun violence by holding gun dealers legally accountable for selling guns without going through all the proper checks. Gun manufacturers shouldn't have any kind of immunity, either.

Agreed, if you're selling something specifically designed to kill; which makes it easier to kill, be responsible in how you sell it. I'm all for a business making a profit, but there needs to be some accountability on both sides.

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
legislator walks out of useless 'moment of silence' 'thoughts and prayers' wank-fest to protest deliberate inaction and indifference, masked by proclamations virtue and piety.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/07/politics/ted-lieu-moment-of-silence-protest-guns/index.html

"I respect their right to do that and I myself have participated in many of them. But I can't do this again. I've been to too many moments of silences. Just in my short career in Congress, three of the worst mass shootings in US history have occurred. I will not be silent. What we need is we need action, we need to pass gun safety legislation now." -Ted Lieu of California

Bravo on him and he's absolutely right in regards to these empty posturings followed by inaction which only lead us to the next shooting followed by empty posturings etc. He'll likely get nowhere and he'll be labeled a "cuck" or whatever nonsense, but at least he's trying to cast light on the nonsense of the situation.

maybe he'll start a trend

Originally posted by Robtard
Agreed, if you're selling something specifically designed to kill; which makes it easier to kill, be responsible in how you sell it. I'm all for a business making a profit, but there needs to be some accountability on both sides.

Wait, gun manufacturers are given immunity?