Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 hour ago, fattyflattie said:

My rep takes a thrashing from the usual suspects, and is immediately replenished in the hobbies threads.  Irony defined. 

😝 

tenor (21).gif

Posted
48 minutes ago, ultimaton said:

Just some of the Americans that, in fact, did not survive:

Cassie Bernall, 17; Steven Curnow, 14; Corey DePooter, 17; Kelly Fleming, 16; Matthew Kechter, 16; Daniel Mauser, 15; Daniel Rohrbough, 15; William “Dave” Sanders, 47; Rachel Scott, 17; Isaiah Shoels, 18; John Tomlin, 16; Lauren Townsend, 18; Kyle Velasquez, 16; Jennifer Bragg Capobianco, 29; Janice Hagerty, 46; Louis “Sandy” Javelle, 58; Rose Manfredi, 48; Paul Marceau, 36; Cheryl Troy, 50; Craig Wood, 29; Derrick Brun, 28; Dewayne Lewis, 15; Chase Lussier, 15; Daryl Lussier, 58; Neva Rogers, 62; Chanelle Rosebear, 15; Michelle Sigana, 32; Thurlene Stillday, 15; Alicia White, 15; Naomi Ebersol, 7; Marian Stoltzfus Fisher, 13; Lena Zook Miller, 7; Mary Liz Miller, 8; Anna Mae Stoltzfus, 12; Ross Abdallah Alameddine, 20; Christopher James “Jamie” Bishop, 35; Brian Bluhm, 25; Ryan Clark, 22; Austin Cloyd, 18; Jocelyne Couture-Nowak, 49; Daniel Perez Cueva, 21; Kevin Granata, 46; Matthew G. Gwaltney, 24; Caitlin Hammaren, 19; Jeremy Herbstritt, 27; Rachael Elizabeth Hill, 18; Emily Hilscher, 19; Jarrett Lane, 22; Matthew J. La Porte, 20; Henry Lee, 20; Liviu Librescu, 76; G.V. Loganathan, 51; Partahi Lumbantoruan, 34; Lauren McCain, 20; Daniel O’Neil, 22; Juan Ramon Ortiz, 26; Minal Panchal, 26; Erin Peterson, 18; Michael Pohle, 23; Julia Pryde, 23; Mary Read, 19; Reema Samaha, 18; Waleed Shaalan, 32; Leslie Sherman, 20; Maxine Turner, 22; Nicole R. White, 20;  Beverly Flynn, 47; Janet Jorgensen, 66; Gary Joy, 56; John McDonald, 65; Gary Scharf, 48; Angie Schuster, 36; Dianne Trent, 53; Maggie Webb, 24; Beverly Flynn, 47; Janet Jorgensen, 66; Gary Joy, 56; John McDonald, 65; Gary Scharf, 48; Angie Schuster, 36; Dianne Trent, 53; Maggie Webb, 24; Parveen Nln Ali, 26; Almir O. Alves, 43; Marc Henry Bernard, 44; Maria Sonia Bernard, 46; Hai Hong Zhong, 54; Hong Xiu Mao, 35; Jiang Ling, 22; Layla Khalil, 57; Roberta King, 72; Lan Ho, 39; Li Guo, 47; Dolores Yigal, 53; Maria Zobniw, 60; Michael Grant Cahill, 62; Libardo Eduardo Caraveo, 52; Justin Michael DeCrow, 32; John P. Gaffaney, 56; Frederick Greene, 29; Jason Dean Hunt, 22; Amy S. Krueger, 29; Aaron Thomas Nemelka, 19; Michael S. Pearson, 22; Russell Seager, 51; Francheska Velez, 21; Juanita L. Warman, 55; Kham See Xiong, 23; Christina Taylor Green, 9; Dorothy Morris, 76; John M. Roll, 63; Phyllis Schneck, 79; Dorwan Stoddard, 76; Gabriel Zimmerman, 30; Demetrius Hewlin, 16; Russell King, Jr., 17; Daniel Parmertor, 16; Tshering Rinzing Bhutia, 38; Doris Chibuko, 40; Sonam Choedon, 33; Grace Eunhea Kim, 23; Katleen Ping, 24; Judith O. Seymour, 53; Lydia Sim, 21; Jonathan Blunk, 26; A.J. Boik, 18; Jesse Childress, 29; Gordon W. Cowden, 51; Jessica Ghawi, 24; John Thomas Larimer, 27; Matthew McQuinn, 27; Micayla Medek, 23; Veronica Moser-Sullivan, 6; Alex Matthew Sullivan, 27; Alexander Teves, 24; Rebecca Ann Wingo, 32; Satwant Singh Kaleka, 65; Suveg Singh Khattra, 84; Paramjit Kaur, 41; Prakash Singh, 39; Ranjit Singh, 49; Sita Singh, 41; Charlotte Bacon, 6; Daniel Barden, 7; Rachel D’Avino, 29; Olivia Engel, 6; Josephine Gay, 7; Dylan Hockley, 6; Dawn Hochsprung, 47; Madeleine F. Hsu, 6; Catherine V. Hubbard, 6; Chase Kowalski, 7; Jesse Lewis, 6; Ana G. Marquez-Greene, 6; James Mattioli, 6; Grace McDonnell, 7; Anne Marie Murphy, 52; Emilie Parker, 6; Jack Pinto, 6; Noah Pozner, 6; Caroline Previdi, 6; Jessica Rekos, 6; Avielle Richman, 6; Lauren Russeau, 30; Mary Sherlach, 56; Victoria Soto, 27; Benjamin Wheeler, 6; Allison N. Wyatt, 6; Michael Arnold, 59; Martin Bodrog, 54; Arthur Daniels, 51; Sylvia Frasier, 53; Kathy Gaarde, 62; John Roger Johnson, 73; Mary Frances DeLorenzo Knight, 51; Frank Kohler, 51; Vishnu Bhalchandra Pandit, 61; Kenneth Bernard Proctor, 46; Gerald Read, 58; Richard Michael Ridgell, 52; Sharonda Coleman-Singleton, 45; DePayne V. Middleton Doctor, 49; Cynthia Graham Hurd, 54; Susie Jackson, 87; Ethel Lee Lance, 70; Clementa C. Pinckney, 41; Tywanza Sanders, 26; Daniel Simmons, 74; Myra Thompson, 59; Carson A. Holmquist, 25; Randall Smith, 26; Thomas J. Sullivan, 40; Squire K. “Skip” Wells, 21; David A. Wyatt, 35; Lucero Alcaraz, 19; Treven Taylor Anspach, 20; Rebecka Ann Carnes, 18; Quinn Glen Cooper, 18; Kim Saltmarsh Dietz, 59; Lucas Eibel, 18; Jason Dale Johnson, 33; Lawrence Levine, 67; Sarena Dawn Moore, 44; Robert Adams, 40; Isaac Amanios, 60; Bennetta Betbadal, 46; Harry Bowman, 46; Sierra Clayborn, 27; Juan Espinoza, 50; Aurora Godoy, 26; Shannon Johnson, 45; Larry Daniel Kaufman, 42; Damian Meins, 58; Tin Nguyen, 31; Nicholas Thalasinos, 52; Yvette Velasco, 27; Michael Raymond Wetzel, 37; Stanley Almodovar III, 23; Amanda L. Alvear, 25; Oscar A. Aracena Montero, 26; Rodolfo Ayala Ayala, 33; Antonio Davon Brown, 29; Darryl Roman Burt II, 29; Angel Candelario-Padro, 28; Juan Chavez Martinez, 25; Luis Daniel Conde, 39; Cory James Connell, 21; Tevin Eugene Crosby, 25; Deonka Deidra Drayton, 32; Simón Adrian Carrillo Fernández, 31; Leroy Valentin Fernandez, 25; Mercedez Marisol Flores, 26; Peter Ommy Gonzalez Cruz, 22; Juan Ramon Guerrero, 22; Paul Terrell Henry, 41; Frank Hernandez, 27; Miguel Angel Honorato, 30; Javier Jorge Reyes, 40; Jason Benjamin Josaphat, 19; Eddie Jamoldroy Justice, 30; Anthony Luis Laureano Disla, 25; Christopher Andrew Leinonen, 32; Alejandro Barrios Martinez, 21; Brenda Marquez McCool, 49; Gilberto R. Silva Menendez, 25; Kimberly Jean Morris, 37; Akyra Monet Murray, 18; Luis Omar Ocasio Capo, 20; Geraldo A. Ortiz Jimenez, 25; Eric Ivan Ortiz-Rivera, 36; Joel Rayon Paniagua, 32; Jean Carlos Mendez Perez, 35; Enrique L. Rios Jr., 25; Jean Carlos Nieves Rodríguez, 27; Xavier Emmanuel Serrano-Rosado, 35; Christopher Joseph Sanfeliz, 24; Yilmary Rodríguez Solivan, 24; Edward Sotomayor Jr., 34; Shane Evan Tomlinson, 33; Martin Benitez Torres, 33; Jonathan A. Camuy Vega, 24; Juan Pablo Rivera Velázquez, 37; Luis Sergio Vielma, 22; Franky Jimmy DeJesus Velázquez, 50; Luis Daniel Wilson-Leon, 37; Jerald Arthur Wright, 31; Mary Louise Amzibel, 69; Terry Andres, 62; Michael Oehme, 57; Shirley Timmons, 70; Olga Woltering, 84; Kevin Clark, 53; Kevin Lawson, 46; Brenda Montanez-Crespo, 44; Jeffrey Roberts, 57; Robert Snyder, 69; Hannah Ahlers, 34; Heather Alvarado, 35; Dorene Anderson, 49; Carrie Barnette, 34; Jack Beaton, 54; Stephen Berger, 44; Candice Bowers, 40; Denise Burditus, 50; Sandy Casey, 35; Andrea Castilla, 28; Denise Cohen, 58; Austin Davis, 29; Thomas Day Jr., 54; Christiana Duarte, 22; Stacee Rodrigues Etcheber, 50; Brian Fraser, 39; Keri Galvan, 31; Dana Gardner, 52; Angela Gomez, 20; Charleston Hartfield, 34; Christopher Hazencomb, 44; Jennifer Topaz Irvine, 42; Teresa Nicol Kimura, 38; Jessica Klymchuk, 34; Carly Kreibaum, 33; Rhonda LeRocque, 42; Victor Link, 55; Jordan McIldoon, 23; Kelsey Breanne Meadows, 28; Calla-Marie Medig, 28; Sonny Melton, 29; Patricia Mestas, 67; Austin Meyer, 24; Adrian Murfitt, 35; Rachael Parker, 33; Jennifer Parks, 36; Carolyn Parsons, 31; Lisa Patterson, 46; John Phippen, 56; Melissa Ramirez, 26; Jordyn Rivera, 21; Quinton Robbins, 20; Cameron Robinson, 28; Rocio Guillen Rocha, 40; Tara Roe, 34; Lisa Romero-Muniz, 48; Christopher Roybal, 28; Brett Schwanbeck, 61; Bailey Schweitzer, 20; Laura Shipp, 50; Erick Silva, 21; Susan Smith, 53; Brennan Stewart, 30; Derrick Taylor, 56; Neysa Tonks, 46; Michelle Vo, 32; Kurt Von Tillow, 55; Bill Wolfe Jr., 42; Keith Allen Braden, 62; Robert Michael Corrigan, 51; Shani Louise Corrigan, 51; Emily Garcia, 7; Emily Rose Hill, 11; Gregory Lynn Hill, 13; Megan Gail Hill, 9; Crystal Marie Holcombe, 36; John Bryan Holcombe, 60; Karla Plain Holcombe, 58; Marc Daniel Holcombe, 36; Noah Holcombe, 1; Dennis Neil Johnson, 77; Sara Johns Johnson, 68; Haley Krueger, 16; Robert Scott Marshall, 56; Karen Sue Marshall, 56; Tara E. McNulty, 33; Annabelle Renae Pomeroy, 14; Ricardo Cardona Rodriguez, 64; Therese Sagan Rodriguez, 66; Brooke Bryanne Ward, 5; Joann Lookingbill Ward, 30; Peggy Lynn Warden, 56; Lula Woicinski White, 71; Alyssa Alhadeff, 14; Scott Beigel, 35; Martin Duque, 14; Nicholas Dworet, 17; Aaron Feis, 37; Jaime Guttenberg, 14; Chris Hixon, 49; Luke Hoyer, 15; Cara Loughran, 14; Gina Montalto, 14; Joaquin Oliver, 17; Alaina Petty, 14; Meadow Pollack, 18; Helena Ramsay, 17; Alex Schachter, 14; Carmen Schentrup, 16; Peter Wang, 15; Jared Black, 17; Shana Fisher, 16; Christian Riley Garcia, 15; Aaron Kyle McLeod, 15; Glenda Ann Perkins, 64; Angelique Ramirez, 15; Sabika Sheikh, 17; Christopher Stone, 17; Cynthia Tisdale, 63; Kimberly Vaughan, 14; Gerald Fischman, 61; Rob Hiaasen, 59; John McNamara, 56; Rebecca Smith, 34; Wendi Winters, 65; Joyce Fienberg, 75; Richard Gottfried, 65; Rose Mallinger, 97; Jerry Rabinowitz, 66; Cecil Rosenthal, 59; David Rosenthal, 54; Bernice Simon, 84; Sylvan Simon, 86; Daniel Stein, 71; Melvin Wax, 87; Irving Younger, 69; Sean Adler, 48; Cody Coffman, 22; Blake Dingman, 21; Jake Dunham, 21; Ron Helus, 54; Alaina Housley, 18; Dan Manrique, 33; Justin Meek, 23; Mark Meza Jr., 20; Kristina Morisette, 20; Telemachus Orfanos, 27; Noel Sparks, 21; Debra Cook, 54; Marisol Lopez, 55; Jessica Montague, 31; Ana Piñon-Williams, 38; Cynthia Watson, 65; Russell Beyer, 47; Vicente Juarez, 54; Clayton Parks, 32; Josh Pinkard, 37; Trevor Wehner, 21; LaQuita C. Brown, 39; Ryan Keith Cox, 50; Tara Welch Gallagher, 39; Mary Louise Gayle, 65; Alexander Mikhail Gusev, 35; Joshua O. Hardy, 52; Michelle “Missy” Langer, 60; Richard H. Nettleton, 65; Katherine A. Nixon, 42; Christopher Kelly Rapp, 54; Herbert “Bert” Snelling, 57; Robert “Bobby” Williams, 72; Andre Anchondo, 24; Jordan Anchondo, 25; Arturo Benavides, 60; Leo Campos, 41; Angelina Englisbee, 86; Maria Flores, 77; Raul Flores, 83; Jorge Calvillo García, 61; Adolfo Cerros Hernández, 68; Maribel Hernández, 56; Alexander Gerhard Hoffman, 66; David Johnson, 63; Luis Juarez, 90; Maria Eugenia Legarreta, 58; Ivan Filiberto Manzano, 45; Gloria Irma Márquez, 61; Elsa Mendoza, 57; Margie Reckard, 63; Sara Esther Regalado, 66; Javier Amir Rodriguez, 15; Teresa Sanchez, 82; Juan de Dios Velázquez, 77; Rodolfo Julio Arco, 57; Kameron Karltess Brown, 30; Raul Garcia, 35; Mary Granados, 29; Joseph Griffith, 40; Leilah Hernandez, 15; Edwin Peregrino, 25; Mindy Ferencz, 33; Joseph Seals, 40; Douglas Miguel Rodriguez, 49; Moshe Deutsch, 24; Dale Hudson, 50; Gennady Levshetz, 61; Jesus Valle Jr., 33; Dana Walk, 57; Trevor Wetselaar, 33; Daoyou Feng, 44; Hyun Jung Grant, 51; Suncha Kim, 69; Paul Andre Michels, 54; Soon Chung Park, 74; Xiaojie Tan, 49; Delaina Ashley Yuan, 33; Yong Ae Yue, 63; Tralona Bartkowiak, 49; Suzanne Fountain, 59; Teri Leiker, 51; Kevin Mahoney, 61; Lynn Murray, 62; Rikki Olds, 25; Neven Stanisic, 23; Denny Stong, 20; Eric Talley, 51; Jody Waters, 65; Matthew Ross Alexander, 32; Samaria Blackwell, 19; Amarjeet Johal, 66; Jasvinder Kaur, 50; Jaswinder Singh, 68; Amarjit Sekhon, 48; Karli Smith, 19; John “Steve” Weisert, 74; Madisyn Baldwin, 17; Tate Myre, 16; Hana St. Juliana, 14; Justin Shilling, 17; Johntaya Alexander, 21; Melinda Davis, 57; Sergio Harris, 38; Joshua Hoye-Lucchesi, 32; Yamile Martinez-Andrade, 21; Devazia Turner, 29; Celestine Chaney, 65; Roberta Drury, 32; Andre Mackniel, 53; Katherine “Kat” Massey, 72; Margus D. Morrison, 52; Heyward Patterson, 67; Aaron Salter Jr., 55; Geraldine Talley, 62; Ruth Whitfield, 86; Pearl Young, 77; Nevaeh Bravo, 10; Jacklyn Cazares, 9; Makenna Lee Elrod, 10; Jose Flores, 10; Ellie Garcia, 9; Irma Garcia, 48; Uziyah Garcia, 10; Amerie Jo Garza, 10; Xavier Lopez, 10; Jayce Luevanos, 10; Tess Mata, 10; Maranda Mathis, 11; Eva Mireles, 44; Alithia Ramirez, 10; Annabell Rodriguez, 10; Maite Rodriguez, 10; Alexandria “Lexi” Rubio, 10; Layla Salazar, 10; Jailah Nicole Silguero, 10; Eliahana Cruz Torres, 10; Rojelio Torres, 10; Amanda Glenn, 40; Stephanie Husen, 48; William Love, 73; Preston Phillips, 59; Mark Allan Frey, 50; Charles Edward Minnick Jr., 31; Joshua Robert Wallace, 30; Jane Pounds, 84; Walter Rainey, 84; Sarah Yeager, 75; Katherine Goldstein, 64; Irina McCarthy, 35; Kevin McCarthy, 37; Stephen Straus, 88; Jacquelyn Sundheim, 63; Nicolas Toledo-Zaragoza, 78; Eduardo Uvaldo, 69; Victor Gomez, 30; Pedro Piñeda, 56; Rosa Mirian Rivera de Piñeda, 37; Nicole Connors, 52; Susan Karnatz, 49; Mary Marshall, 34; Gabriel Torres, 29; James Thompson, 16; Lavel Davis Jr., 20; Devin Chandler, 20; D’Sean Perry, 22; Daniel Aston, 28; Kelly Loving, 40; Ashley Green Paugh, 35; Derrick Rump, 38; Raymond Green Vance, 22; Fernando Chavez-Barron, 16; Randy Blevins, 70; Lorenzo Gamble, 43; Tyneka Johnson, 22; Brian Pendleton, 38; Kellie Pyle, 52; Valentino Marcos Alvero, 68; Hongying Jian, 62; Yu Lun Kao, 72; Lilan Li, 63; Ming Wei Ma, 72; My My Nhan, 65; Diana Man Ling Tom, 70; Muoi Dai Ung, 67; Chia Ling Yau, 76; Wen Tau Yu, 64; Xiujuan Yu, 57; Yetao Bing, 43; Qizhong Cheng, 66; Marciano Martinez Jimenez, 50; Zhishen Liu, 73; Jingzhi Lu, 64; Jose Romero Perez, 38; Aixiang Zhang, 74; Arielle Anderson, 19; Brian Fraser, 20; Alexandria Verner, 20; Evelyn Dieckhaus, 9; Mike Hill, 61; William Kinney, 9; Katherine Koonce, 60; Cynthia Peak, 61; Hallie Scruggs, 9; Joshua Barrick, 40; Deana Eckert, 57; Juliana Farmer, 45; James Tutt, 64; Cindy Cho, 35; James Cho, 3; Kyu Song Cho, 37; Elio Cumana-Rivas, 32; Christian LaCour, 20; Daniela Mendoza, 11; Sofia Mendoza, 8; Aishwarya Thatikonda, 26.

Chicago this week?

  • Fuck You 19
Posted
3 minutes ago, dieucla98 said:

Usually I have enough self control to not reply to you and your "I'm smarter than everyone here" bullshit but my god, what a heartless, shit head take. Fuck off.

Earned a neg from me.  And I rarely neg.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Posted
4 hours ago, fattyflattie said:

Cool. I don’t fully agree, but I can mostly understand your argument.   I would place the age at 20.  0-19 is apparently a “child” when discussing guns for “reasons”. That would mean 20 should be considered an adult?  

And the price of tea in China....  look over there,  isn't it funny how it rained on Mother's Day when a Democrat is in office.... I mean why is that?  I think God is sending us a message...

Posted

The simple answer is to require all semiauto rifles to be registered under the NFA, pay your tax and walk away.  Then everyone knows who owns them and much easier to prevent fruit loops from getting them.

Posted
1 hour ago, fattyflattie said:

Chicago this week?

Ah yes, another worse than specious argument: We can't talk about mass shootings and gun control because of Chicago's murder rate. Ideologue talk.

 

Posted

Some one could stand on the sidewalk in Dealey Plaza, just outside the Texas School Book Depository, dressed in shooter garb while holding a loaded military style weapon, and police are forbidden from even questioning such a person. Under Texas law, he/she would have to shoot passersby before law enforcement could intervene, because freedom.

  • Like 1
Posted
5 hours ago, fattyflattie said:

Yeah, my hobbies are hunting and shooting clays. It’s what my family has done for as long as I can remember.  Are you not passionate about your hobbies? 

So your passion isn't guns. The guns are merely the tool used in your hobbies. 

My brother-in-law's hobby is exotic cars. In order to have that hobby he must obtain a license to use them, maintain registration and yearly inspection on them, maintain liability insurance on them, and be subjected to potential imprisonment if his reckless use results in the injury or death of someone else. 

All of this because the tool he uses for his hobby when used recklessly causes thousands of deaths per year. The tool you use for your hobby also causes thousands of deaths per year. Therefore, the tool for your hobby should have similar regulatory oversight and licensing requirements that his does. 

Yet, you fight against it and wonder why people call you a piece of shit. 

  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Like 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Hermanator said:

Yet, you fight against it and wonder why people call you a piece of shit. 

Do I?  I typically only argue about why it's silly to scapegoat a single firearm.  FWIW, I've never spent a second caring if an internet stranger called me a piece of shit.  

Posted
2 hours ago, RomaVicta said:

Ah yes, another worse than specious argument: We can't talk about mass shootings and gun control because of Chicago's murder rate. Ideologue talk.

 

Hint.  That wasn't a serious post about Chicago.  I'd assume it's victims of mass shootings this year. 

  • Fuck You 1
Posted
14 hours ago, fattyflattie said:

Well one would be the $$ I have in them. Second, my little ones use them when hunting. After that, I don’t give too much of a fuck except it’ll be the first of several more to come.  Next will be any other SA, after that anything with capacity over 6, and the list will continue.  The sick will find a new weapon to terrorize us with, just like they did before social media and 24 hour news convinced you this was a new phenomenon. 
 

I’ve been a member and donor to all the usual hunting orgs my entire adult life, but thanks for the heads up. 

We even had a FAWB for ten years and there was no slippery slope. And as I mentioned, if anything hunting was more popular then. 
 

One difference is that most o lf the rhetoric around the FAWB focused on street gangs running wild with cheap TEC-9s and MAC-10s (rhetoric, not reality) even though it affected other platforms. And back then the hunters and other “responsible gunowners/hobbyists” didn’t want to lump themselves in with that, or the weirdo “gun nut” crowd. The inability to go back to it is loaded with all sorts of biases around race and and changing social norms. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
10 hours ago, fattyflattie said:

Hint.  That wasn't a serious post about Chicago.  I'd assume it's victims of mass shootings this year. 

Hint - no shit, Sherlock.

Posted
On 5/13/2023 at 11:40 AM, Brisketexan said:

Murder RATE? You asked a question you don’t want to know the answer to.

_______

From 2016 to 2020, the two U.S. counties to experience the most gun homicides per capita were rural:* (see Figure 1)
Phillips County, Arkansas: 55.45 age-adjusted homicides per 100,000 people
Lowndes County, Alabama: 48.36 age-adjusted homicides per 100,000 people**
From 2016 to 2020, 13 of the 20 U.S. counties with the most gun homicides per capita were rural: (see Figure 1)
80 percent of these 20 counties are in states that received an “F” grade for their weak gun laws, according to Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence’s 2021 annual state scorecard rankings.
In 2020, the total gun death rate for rural communities—when age-adjusted per 100,000 people—was 40 percent higher than it was for large metropolitan areas.

It would really be helpful if you’d cite your source. I don’t doubt you, but I happened to have need for this information yesterday and “Because Brisket said so on Surly” isn’t a convincing source to cite for anyone IRL so I had to go look it up. As long as you’re copying and pasting it here, copying and pasting the URL too just takes a moment and saves everyone else from individually having to track it down.

Here’s the link:

https://www.americanprogress.org/article/gun-violence-in-rural-america/

Maybe that would help us avoid posts like this:

On 5/13/2023 at 6:43 PM, Make em eat Taco Bell said:

Homicides are higher in urban areas, but overall gun deaths—most of which are deaths by suicide—are higher in rural areas, other NCHS data show. Rural deaths by suicide have increased by nearly 50 percent from 2000 to 2018, a separate analysis found.

Says who? What’s your source for that? Brisket just posted info (but lacking any data, the referenced visual aid, or citation) that says otherwise. To quote from Brisket’s missing Figure 1: “In recent years, rural counties' proportional gun homicide rates outnumbered those of urban counties.”

I’m sure that in terms of raw numbers there are more homicides in big cities than in small towns. Of course that’s true. Is that what you were talking about? Because that’s meaningless. Per capita, the data shows that homicide rates in the big cities that Republican politicians like to point to as hotbeds of criminality actually have lower rates of gun homicides (not counting suicides in the numbers at all) than rural areas, areas that are often in Republican controlled parts of the country. Republicans preach it and propaganda outlets like Fox News repeat it over and over again so people believe it, and you parrot it. But it’s not true.

This is what happens when we get comfortable letting people make claims without citing their sources. You post what is apparently false or misleading information without citation and then that’s later referenced by fattie (the post #3693 he mentioned) as if it’s factually true. I trust Brisket not to pass along false information. From him I ask citation simply as a courtesy. I’ve seen you post bullshit before so you don’t get the benefit of the doubt.

Posted
16 hours ago, fattyflattie said:

Well one would be the $$ I have in them. Second, my little ones use them when hunting. After that, I don’t give too much of a fuck except it’ll be the first of several more to come.  Next will be any other SA, after that anything with capacity over 6, and the list will continue.  The sick will find a new weapon to terrorize us with, just like they did before social media and 24 hour news convinced you this was a new phenomenon. 
 

I’ve been a member and donor to all the usual hunting orgs my entire adult life, but thanks for the heads up. 

If you are teaching your children to hunt with semi-automatics then you failed to teach them anything.  It should be an efficient, clean kill, 1 round only.  Start out shooting them through the lungs/heart.   Then get better and shoot them through the neck when the opportunity presents itself and the shot placement percentage is high.   If your kids are pulling the trigger more than once you all fucking failed.  You are not hunting at that point but torturing a critter.    

You are correct that some will find a new way to harm others if all semi-automatics disappear.  But you whistle past the graveyard when you ignore that making easy access to weapons of war will not make these events more frequent and more deadly.   Before the assault rifle ban, this wasn't happening this frequently.   That isn't in dispute with people who lack cognitive dissonance.  You are too smart of a person to set beliefs around a sunk cost.

---------------------------------------------------------

Imagine this scenario: 

I want a bushmaster M242 25mm chaingun.   I have no actual need for this but I think it would be fun.  I think everyone should have one of these mounted to their vehicles.  I am sure that would make motherfuckers think twice about carjackings and cutting me off.   Are you fine with this?  Think law enforcement will rush in to help you if I go crazy and start shooting up your office or your kids at school?   Or the next flight out of IAH?  BTW, I am fine now.  My medical history (private) and antipsychotics (oops) are keeping me calm and happy (thank you UnitedHealthCare), you better just hope that my insurance coverage is consistent.  You really should up-armor those school busses.  It is your fault for not teaching your children how to survive a random 25mm wound.  Their limbs being exploded is a small price to pay for my freedom.   Or explaining to your children how your wife's body was exploded and no longer resembles a human form is a small price to pay for my freedom and how you support me having this freedom you just wish she wasn't taking your elderly parents out to a doctor visit that morning.  Ah well.  As Tahoe always said we should have a little skin in this game.   Because that is all that would be left of your wife.  

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This isn't a threat.  This is meant to personalize the fear and horror that people are going through.  The little girl in Uvalde whose hand alone had over 6 surgeries.  The boy who hides in his room when there is a knock at the door.   That trauma is life altering and enduring.  Who is paying for it?  When it goes away will the case be closed or will it remain open for life?  Will that trauma restrict them from having a 'normal' family of their own?   How will they cope when their children are school aged?   The price of a bullet is $1.   What is the cost of the treatment?   Who is going to pay?  The deceased gunman who spent every dollar he had on a gun and ammo?  Think about it from an economic perspective.  Who fucking pays for this?  You do.  I do.  Our kids will.  One way or another we will pay for it as a society.   

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As a society we enacted seatbelt laws.  Why?  Because people who wore their seatbelts cost the state and insurance companies fewer dollars than those who did not wear them.   I mean what is the percentage of the time you actually need to wear your seatbelt?  It didn't save your life on the way to work this morning.  It didn't save your life on the way to lunch.   This happened because Ronald Reagan's Republican appointed head of the Department of Transportation looked at the statistics on highway deaths and injuries and found that 2% of the people who died of the 30,000 were wearing seatbelts.  The estimate was that 60% of those people could have survived and/or escaped serious injury if they were wearing seatbelts.   They simply looked at the numbers and decided we needed laws to protect people from harm they were doing to themselves.  Is your party (those with whom you align) not capable of being somewhat fiscally minded anymore?  

--------------------------------------------------------

So there you have it.  Financially it makes sense to ban or severely restrict them.   Socially you are teaching your children to use a crutch (more ammo) and that torture of the animal is not a consideration if they require more than a single round).    And quite frankly that is embarrassing.  Next, we all have knowledge that will likely not get passed on due to it being as outdated as a point-style ignition system.  Sunk cost is a fools fallacy, and you are not a fool.   And lastly the empathy element for the victims, bystanders, and loved ones.  And it doesn't even jive with your religion.  

What is keeping you from being convinced really?  Is it peer pressure from your friends?   

 

 

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
  • Drool 1
Posted
17 hours ago, fattyflattie said:

We are a red, white, and blue ball of cancer.  And the ball of cancer is open carrying. I don’t think anyone is contending that. 

You're right we should ignore gun violence.  Because of climate change, racism, deficits, immigration, and health care.  None of which you actually intend to improve anyway.

  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Like 1
Posted

Okay, I can’t edit my above post. I see Taco Bell was quoting from the Scientific American article which was apparently talking about raw numbers. That’s irrelevant when comparing homicide rates between urban and rural areas. That’s not meaningful information.

Posted (edited)
20 minutes ago, Nivek said:

If you are teaching your children to hunt with semi-automatics then you failed to teach them anything.  It should be an efficient, clean kill, 1 round only.  Start out shooting them through the lungs/heart.   Then get better and shoot them through the neck when the opportunity presents itself and the shot placement percentage is high

Oh really?  Thanks for the heads up. It’s the ergonomics of the arm (collapsible stock) and lighter recoil, but surely you know that?.  Believe it or not, my wby’s and 70’s don’t really fit 8 yo girls.  Crazy, I know. I’ve only been hunting for 30+ years, but I’m glad I learned today that heart/lung and neck shots are the way to go.   
 

I really hope this was your attempt at presenting us your version of the Onion   If not, holy fuck  Embarrassing indeed  

 

Edited by fattyflattie
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, fattyflattie said:

Believe it or not, my wby’s and 70’s don’t really fit 8 yo girls.  

I can't believe how stupid Nivek was to neglect the biometrics of 8-year-olds when calculating the necessity of certain weapons. Any responsible parent would have immediately done so. Of course first graders need a collapsible stock and plenty of ammo.

Nivek, you're an idiot and irresponsible person. Think of the children!

Edited by RomaVicta
  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 4
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

I can't believe how stupid Nivek was to neglect the biometrics of a 8-year-olds when calculating the necessity of certain weapons. Any responsible parent would have immediately done so. Of course first graders need a collapsible stock and plenty of ammo.

Nivek, you're an idiot and irresponsible person. Think of the children!

I'm just glad he didn't go with the tried and true reason you shouldn't hunt with an AR.  I've read here they blow up everything they hit, and immediately decapitate it.  Not good.  

Third graders, boss.  And I'll worry about when and how to introduce them into our family hobbies.  Yall worry about the country crumbling because we finally decided to take gun violence super cereal, but only outside of cities that shall not be mentioned because reasons, and only for certain super scary guns because more reasons. 

Edited by fattyflattie
  • Fuck You 2
Posted

Interesting opinion piece of a journalist's interaction from a recent gun convention in Virginia. I like guns... I like shooting them at ranges or friend's with property in the country. But the amount of fear or belief that I have to reliant on myself only for protection just doesn't enter into the equation for me. 

https://wapo.st/3O7p7kh

 

Posted
41 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

Oh really?  Thanks for the heads up. It’s the ergonomics of the arm (collapsible stock) and lighter recoil, but surely you know that?.  Believe it or not, my wby’s and 70’s don’t really fit 8 yo girls.  Crazy, I know. I’ve only been hunting for 30+ years, but I’m glad I learned today that heart/lung and neck shots are the way to go.   
 

I really hope this was your attempt at presenting us your version of the Onion   If not, holy fuck  Embarrassing indeed  

 

There's a weird disconnect here, I learned to hunt when my age was in the single digits and I'm in my 40s, been doing it my entire life. I hunt a lot less nowadays now because I don't really enjoy killing animals anymore and it seems unnecessary, but that's another story. Shooting clays is fun, though, for sure. I learned to shoot with a bolt action .243 (wish I still had that gun for nostalgia purposes but some shitpile stole it when I was in my late teens).

I was also taught that heart shots were the way to go, on deer at least, I don't know what people teach their kids nowadays.

My grandpa was the executor of an estate that had a large ranch down in south TX (Carrizo Springs/Catarina area) that ran invitation only hunts, and my dad did the wildlife management down there. and I know for a fact that anyone that showed up with a semi-automatic rifle to hunt would have been laughed at and sent back home. Maybe I'm just old fashioned, who knows, but when I see a guy hunting with an AR-15 I am instantly suspicious of his character.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

but when I see a guy hunting with an AR-15 I am instantly suspicious of his character.

well it's not fatty, it's his 8 year old daughter sporting the AR (JR?) 15. Allegedly.

  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted
11 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

There's a weird disconnect here, I learned to hunt when my age was in the single digits and I'm in my 40s, been doing it my entire life. I hunt a lot less nowadays now because I don't really enjoy killing animals anymore and it seems unnecessary, but that's another story. Shooting clays is fun, though, for sure. I learned to shoot with a bolt action .243 (wish I still had that gun for nostalgia purposes but some shitpile stole it when I was in my late teens).

I was also taught that heart shots were the way to go, on deer at least, I don't know what people teach their kids nowadays.

My grandpa was the executor of an estate that had a large ranch down in south TX (Carrizo Springs/Catarina area) that ran invitation only hunts, and my dad did the wildlife management down there. and I know for a fact that anyone that showed up with a semi-automatic rifle to hunt would have been laughed at and sent back home. Maybe I'm just old fashioned, who knows, but when I see a guy hunting with an AR-15 I am instantly suspicious of his character.

And that's the way it still mostly is outside of kids and "hog hunters".   When they're big enough to handle a .243/7-08, its what they move up to.  Until then, hard to beat a low recoil 7.62 that actually fits a small frame and is easy to suppress.   

8 minutes ago, Captainant said:

well it's not fatty, it's his 8 year old daughter sporting the AR (JR?) 15. Allegedly.

8 and 11.  Allegedly.  

3 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

Hey look, an actual groomer.

lol.  Hunting bad.  

Posted
18 hours ago, fattyflattie said:

More highly regulated than firearms?  How, specifically?    They are literally regulated by the same fucking agency.  I don’t recall getting a bottle the govt thinks I shouldn’t own by sending them a tax stamp and some fingerprints    That kind of thing?

And the other being the thing this board gets hard over legalizing?   It usually sounds like wah wah war drugs wah wah but what about Uruguay wah. I’m certain you yourself have participated in the apropos thread(s). 

I can walk around nearly anywhere in Texas openly carrying a firearm. I can't walk around openly drinking alcohol in most cities and I can't have an open container in a vehicle anywhere. Go explain that to anyone who isn't a gun humper and they'll obviously think alcohol is more regulated. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
Just now, wildcat09 said:

I can walk around nearly anywhere in Texas openly carrying a firearm. I can't walk around openly drinking alcohol in most cities and I can't have an open container in a vehicle anywhere. Go explain that to anyone who isn't a gun humper and they'll obviously think alcohol is more regulated. 

You cant walk around firing a weapon either.  You certainly can carry either a beer, or a firearm.   Pretty sure it's not legal to go around firing weapons out of a vehicle, but can transport either firearms or alcohol to the destination you intend to use them.  Any more regulations you're unsure about?

Posted
3 hours ago, TXSooner518 said:


To drive a car, my 15 year old kid has to have dozens of hours of classroom time, additional dozens of hours of supervised road practice, get a license, have liability insurance, and the car must also be registered and inspected.

24 months later she can just walk into a store and buy an AR-15 with zero training, licensing, supervision, or direction.

Anyone who thinks this is logical is a dumb sack of flea bitten dogshit.

Also @fattyflattie I didn’t see your response here. Does this reality make sense to you?

Posted
Just now, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

@fattyflattie can you explain your infatuation with gang violence in Chicago?

It appears to be some sort of trump card in this discussion for you but I don’t understand why.

Care to explain?

I couldn't care less if I tried.  I think it's curious why the public focus' on gun deaths here, but not there.  And when it's committed by this type of weapon, but not another.  The left specifically avoids discussing Chicago for several reasons.  It's a D run city, it has very strict gun laws, and it's a calling card for the R's.  The R's like to point out the failure Lightfoot had there, the failure of their strict gun laws, and likely some racial component to it.  So, it is taboo to discuss, I guess.   But infatuation, hardly.  Just pointing to more hypocrisy.   It is very sad that so many "others" tend to get caught up in the gang shootings.  But losing sleep over a dead or shot gang member, lol, no. 

Posted

SA rifles are great for varmints. I get it, even I thought the FAWB was flawed for putting the little Mini-14 ranch rifle in the same box as a Tec-9. But no legislation is perfect. Not flawed enough to repeal. 
 

I used to own an SKS. Yugoslav version. Bought before the AR craze. Cheap, bought at an Abilene pawn shop. Yes, mostly for hogs.  A fantastic gun for a day of hunting them or capping varmints with a spotlight. 
 

That was a weapon of war. Do not tell me it’s a modern sporting rifle. The Yugoslavs procured the tooling from the USSR, made them, and handed them to legions of Ivans in the event they needed to kill Johns in the Balkan Peninsula.

It had a ten round fixed box magazine. That’s what their soldiers got and if they ever fought John outside of Belgrade, they’d have used a ten round box fixed box magazine. 
 

Ban high-capacity magazines, ban stripper clips, all magazines fixed. At the least, make these assholes stop to reload. Five rounds would be better. Do not tell me you need more, do not explain the scenario that you need high capacity detachable mags. Outside of a battlefield, there isn’t one. You don’t even NEED them there. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
1 minute ago, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

Also @fattyflattie I didn’t see your response here. Does this reality make sense to you?

I guess it would depend on the individual.  At 18 they can be sent across the world as cannon fodder, get married, start a company, borrow money, buy a house, go to college, get tattoos, the sky is the limit.  They cannot drink or use tobacco, or rent a car thru some places (though our friends in Europe have no issue with the first two)  Makes you wonder why we can send someone to their death and dismemberment, but not let have a cigarette.  Or take out a 250k loan for college, but not purchase an arm to protect themselves should they live in a crime ridden area.   

Also, I believe he meant 16, or 36 months.  18 is the age to purchase long arms. 

Posted
10 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

I couldn't care less if I tried.  I think it's curious why the public focus' on gun deaths here, but not there.  And when it's committed by this type of weapon, but not another.  The left specifically avoids discussing Chicago for several reasons.  It's a D run city, it has very strict gun laws, and it's a calling card for the R's.  The R's like to point out the failure Lightfoot had there, the failure of their strict gun laws, and likely some racial component to it.  So, it is taboo to discuss, I guess.   But infatuation, hardly.  Just pointing to more hypocrisy.   It is very sad that so many "others" tend to get caught up in the gang shootings.  But losing sleep over a dead or shot gang member, lol, no. 

It's not taboo to discuss and the reason its gun laws aren't more successful at preventing violence is obvious: Gary, Indiana, where it's very easy to buy guns, is half an hour outside Chicago.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
Ah yes, another worse than specious argument: We can't talk about mass shootings and gun control because of Chicago's murder rate. Ideologue talk.
 

Chicago has around 2.7 million population.
According to their Chamber they had 30.7 million foreign and domestic visitors in 2021.
The amount of people not murdered there is pretty impressive!
Posted
22 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

I guess it would depend on the individual.  At 18 they can be sent across the world as cannon fodder, get married, start a company, borrow money, buy a house, go to college, get tattoos, the sky is the limit.  They cannot drink or use tobacco, or rent a car thru some places (though our friends in Europe have no issue with the first two)  Makes you wonder why we can send someone to their death and dismemberment, but not let have a cigarette.  Or take out a 250k loan for college, but not purchase an arm to protect themselves should they live in a crime ridden area.   

Also, I believe he meant 16, or 36 months.  18 is the age to purchase long arms. 

So…what is your answer? Does the reality he described make sense or not?

Posted
40 minutes ago, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

@fattyflattie can you explain your infatuation with gang violence in Chicago?

It appears to be some sort of trump card in this discussion for you but I don’t understand why.

Care to explain?

Hint:  Skin pigment is a huge driver...

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
30 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

I couldn't care less if I tried.

First, I need to point out that you're a liar. Of course you care. If you didn't actually care you wouldn't bring it up ALL THE TIME. But you do bring it up all the time because you do care.

But to address whatever point you think you're making....

Quote

 I think it's curious why the public focus' on gun deaths here, but not there.  And when it's committed by this type of weapon, but not another.  The left specifically avoids discussing Chicago for several reasons.  It's a D run city, it has very strict gun laws, and it's a calling card for the R's.  The R's like to point out the failure Lightfoot had there, the failure of their strict gun laws, and likely some racial component to it.  So, it is taboo to discuss, I guess.   But infatuation, hardly.  Just pointing to more hypocrisy.   It is very sad that so many "others" tend to get caught up in the gang shootings.  But losing sleep over a dead or shot gang member, lol, no. 

"The public" has been focused on gang violence for decades. There have been all sorts of public policy initiatives designed to try and address what is a huge problem in our society. The idea that one group doesn't talk about it or focus on it is a completely made up notion in your head.

But what, specifically, does Chicago teach you about gun violence/control? What is the lesson you draw from it?

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
1 hour ago, fattyflattie said:

I'm just glad he didn't go with the tried and true reason you shouldn't hunt with an AR.  I've read here they blow up everything they hit, and immediately decapitate it.  Not good.  

Third graders, boss.  And I'll worry about when and how to introduce them into our family hobbies.  Yall worry about the country crumbling because we finally decided to take gun violence super cereal, but only outside of cities that shall not be mentioned because reasons, and only for certain super scary guns because more reasons. 

Your side doesn't give a squirt of piss about solving gun violence issues in places like Chicago so long as it's poor people killing other poor people (bonus points if they're minorities AND poor).

  • Rage+1 2
Posted
1 minute ago, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

First, I need to point out that you're a liar. Of course you care. If you didn't actually care you wouldn't bring it up ALL THE TIME. But you do bring it up all the time because you do care.

But to address whatever point you think you're making....

"The public" has been focused on gang violence for decades. There have been all sorts of public policy initiatives designed to try and address what is a huge problem in our society. The idea that one group doesn't talk about it or focus on it is a completely made up notion in your head.

But what, specifically, does Chicago teach you about gun violence/control? What is the lesson you draw from it?


Nothing that the entire states of Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi, the entire deep south and Texas haven't taught him or, on the obverse, that the entire countries of England or Australia haven't taught him. You can't teach a man whose argument hinges on him not learning. 

Posted
Just now, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

First, I need to point out that you're a liar. Of course you care. If you didn't actually care you wouldn't bring it up ALL THE TIME. But you do bring it up all the time because you do care.

But to address whatever point you think you're making....

Let me point out to you I believe I've mentioned it twice.  And once was a surly response.  So no, not ALL THE TIME.   I want to assure you I could not care less about criminals killing each other.  Hell the more it happens, the easier it is to point to their failed policies and the less gang members are still breathing.  I can see no downside. 

2 minutes ago, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

But what, specifically, does Chicago teach you about gun violence/control? What is the lesson you draw from it?

Easy.  That criminals will always have access to firearms, regardless of the law.  It's against the law for them to have them now, they don't care.  So if you rounded up every legal citizens arms tomorrow, guess what?  All you've done is made the violence easier for those perpetrating it.  I've also learned that DA's are extremely picky on who they choose to prosecute.  

 

12 minutes ago, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

So…what is your answer? Does the reality he described make sense or not?

Aside from him being off by up to 12 months in his example, yes, that is the current status of our laws.    Does it make sense, I'm ok with letting someone you'll send to war have access to a firearm to hunt or protect themselves at home, yes. 

Posted
5 minutes ago, C-Man said:

Your side doesn't give a squirt of piss about solving gun violence issues in places like Chicago so long as it's poor people killing other poor people (bonus points if they're minorities AND poor).

I've been trying to tell him that the whole time - no one gaf about these criminals shooting themselves. 

Sneaking in a bit of "RaCiSt" in there really helps your argument, tho. Maybe add some "NaZi'S" next time your having trouble coming up with a valid argument. 

  • Fuck You 1
Posted

We have lots and lots of gun laws.  But they mainly regard what you can do with one and can't do with one once you have one.  Fondren&Main can buy ten AR-15's today, unhinged as he is, and pass them out to 10 18-year old Texans with mental disabilities.  And there isn't a fucking thing anybody can do about it.  But you give one 18 year old one beer, you're locked up for a while.  

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 2
  • Rage+1 1


×
×
  • Create New...