Active shooter thread

[Captainant 26861]

3 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

If a specific gun is the problem, and it's been available for the last 60+ years, why has it only been an issue in the last 10?

"If seatbelts are so critical for safety, then how am I alive after driving for 60 years without one??? I'm not gonna let no GUBMINT tell me what to do in my CASTLE that I protect with my MyPillowBlackRifleCoffee AR15!"

[fattyflattie 4631]

1 minute ago, Captainant said:

"If seatbelts are so critical for safety, then how am I alive after driving for 60 years without one??? I'm not gonna let no GUBMINT tell me what to do in my CASTLE that I protect with my MyPillowBlackRifleCoffee AR15!"

You're an intelligent guy.  Do you have any thoughts on my question, aside from the hyperbolic analogy?  Would love to hear it.

[Surly Bevo 24247]

5 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

If a specific gun is the problem, and it's been available for the last 60+ years, why has it only been an issue in the last 10?

Because in the last 10-15 years idiots like you have been more connected by the intergoogles, and mass social media to share your dumbass thoughts and ideas with each other.  

So as a society we can either put you and your ilk in a corner for the rest of your life to suck on your thumb and shit in your pants or we can take your toy away.  

[fattyflattie 4631]

Just now, Surly Bevo said:

Because in the last 10-15 years idiots like you have been more connected by the intergoogles, and mass social media to share your dumbass thoughts and ideas with each other.  

So as a society we can either put you and your ilk in a corner for the rest of your life to suck on your thumb and shit in your pants or we can take your toy away.  

So it's the people, not the firearm.  Huh. 

Well, like @Brisketexan I'll pass a background check. Or licensing class.  Or insurance, or tax.  And have been safely and responsibly handling and collecting firearms for 30 years.  So I'm not certain I fall into the group you need to sit in a corner. 

 

[Surly Bevo 24247]

Just now, fattyflattie said:

So it's the people, not the firearm.  Huh. 

Well, like @Brisketexan I'll pass a background check. Or licensing class.  Or insurance, or tax.  And have been safely and responsibly handling and collecting firearms for 30 years.  So I'm not certain I fall into the group you need to sit in a corner. 

 

No it's the toy....it causes too much grief.  Time to take it away like any good parent would from their dumbass kids.

[DDD Dad 14060]

24 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

Lol.  This is your second or third post in this vain.  Any thoughts on this one @Dahobbs?  

Vein.

Is English your first language?

[Brian Fantana 6589]

1 minute ago, fattyflattie said:

So it's the people, not the firearm.  Huh. 

Well, like @Brisketexan I'll pass a background check. Or licensing class.  Or insurance, or tax.  And have been safely and responsibly handling and collecting firearms for 30 years.  So I'm not certain I fall into the group you need to sit in a corner. 

 

Seems like there's no issue with proper gun control checks as far as you're concerned, then.

[TexArcher 36902]

34 minutes ago, Vegas64 said:

With all due respect, if the Roe vs Wade decision from two weeks ago doesn't open the door to everything being on the table to being taken at some point, then what does?

Republicans: we wanted reproductive rights taken away from women and we got it, woo hoo!

Also Republicans, apparently: Jeebus, we'd better go buy more guns before this renegade government (that we run) comes after those!

[TexArcher 36902]

21 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

If guns aren't the problem, why do mass shootings and gun crimes happen with so much more frequency in the United States than in other peer nations?

Because we're the only place with mental illness and rap music.  Duh.

[Willfully Horn 7820]

20 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Are there certain rights that are rock solid, and inviolable?  Are there certain canons of statutory construction that will be applied to any legislation?  Maybe

My layman’s understanding of the founder’s intent was that every right was inviolable, unless an Amendment stated differently. Some rights were explicitly mentioned in the Bill of Rights, as was a clear acknowledgement of further, unstated rights. Roe v Wade enumerated an individual’s right to privacy. 
 

Dishonest chumps, like @Johnny Sack, point to Plessy, which gave the government the power to discriminate, as comparable. Yet Brown v BOE removed that power for government, not individuals. People still have the unenumerated right to discriminate. 

Dissolving an individual right to privacy, sans Amendment, is intolerable to a true patriot. As we so recently would say, Full. Stop.

Gun restrictions are in keeping with the second. While I can see a comparison to be made with gun and abortion restrictions, I think Texas’ last restriction would fit into a gun restriction comparison somewhere along the lines of private citizens being allowed to file suit against parents who allow their toddlers to pose with a firearm. 
 

But, as we have seen, those increasing restrictions on abortion led to an unacceptable outcome. Right now, assault rifle backers are the equivalent of whoever might have argued in favor of near term, partial birth, abortions. Which probably was never a thing, but the comparison seems apt.
 

Edited July 5, 2022 by Willfully Horn

[chainsaw 9440]

3 minutes ago, Willfully Horn said:

My layman’s understanding of the founder’s intent was that every right was inviolable, unless an Amendment stated differently. Some rights were explicitly mentioned in the Bill of Rights, as was a clear acknowledgement of further, instated rights. Roe v Wade enumerated an individual’s right to privacy. 
 

Dishonest chumps, like @Johnny Sack, point to Plessy, which gave the government the power to discriminate, as comparable. Yet Brown v BOE removed that power for government, not individuals. People still have the unenumerated right to discriminate. 
 

Dissolving an individual right to privacy, sans Amendment, is intolerable to a true patriot. As we so recently would say, Full. Stop.

Good post

[fattyflattie 4631]

8 minutes ago, Surly Bevo said:

No it's the toy....it causes too much grief.  Time to take it away like any good parent would from their dumbass kids.

Best of luck.  Just have to GOTV!!1!

7 minutes ago, DDD Dad said:

Vein.

Is English your first language?

Oh got damn, going to need aloe for that one.  Yes, English is my first language. 

8 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

Seems like there's no issue with proper gun control checks as far as you're concerned, then.

We could add some more, on top of actually enforcing the current laws.  I've been vocal and unwavering in that belief whenever it's discussed.   

[Brisketexan 103139]

3 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

So it's the people, not the firearm.  Huh. 

Well, like @Brisketexan I'll pass a background check. Or licensing class.  Or insurance, or tax.  And have been safely and responsibly handling and collecting firearms for 30 years.  So I'm not certain I fall into the group you need to sit in a corner. 

 

Yes.  And it's the people, not the car.  Yet some of both -- firearms and cars -- are not "street legal"/capable of being operated by someone without a special license/training.  You can't just buy an F-1 car and hop on I-35 in it.  No matter who you are, the tool itself is too dangerous to be allowed out among the general public.  For others (all motor vehicles), we set certain limits based on the device that would be operated: a 14 year old can operate a bike on public streets, he can't operate a car on public streets.  We literally have an age limit on the public use and possession of a potentially lethal device (cars) already.

We haven't "banned" functionally ANY weapon: the US still manufactures and sells fully automatic rifles, laser-guided munitions, and claymore mines.  We just have varying levels of regulations governing each, making those things more difficult to obtain and float around the general public than other weapons.  Degree of lethality/mass destruction seems to be a consistent driver in that dividing line.  Huh.  Interesting.  Being that all that the vast majority of us are suggesting is that we draw and enforce a dividing line when it comes to ARs and similar high-rate of fire, high lethality platforms.

Maybe make the process and requirements for acquiring and owning an AR similar to that for a .50 cal belt fed machine gun?  Something like that?

And yes, you ARE part of the group that needs to sit in a corner, because until YOU and I are subjected to those requirements, NOBODY is.  That's the whole point of nearly every safety regulation: for the vast majority of people who aren't psychotic assholes, they're just a hassle (again, every time I go through a metal detector at the airport -- whether or not it's there, I have no intention of ever committing mayhem on a plane....but that metal detector isn't there for me).  And, for the smaller percentage who are intent on committing mayhem, they are an obstacle of pretty decent effectiveness (remember back in the days of airlines being hijacked to Cuba all the time?  How long has it been since a person hijacked a domestic flight with a gun, or any other weapon?).

You.  Keep.  Making.  My point.

[Brisketexan 103139]

6 minutes ago, Willfully Horn said:

My layman’s understanding of the founder’s intent was that every right was inviolable, unless an Amendment stated differently. Some rights were explicitly mentioned in the Bill of Rights, as was a clear acknowledgement of further, instated rights. Roe v Wade enumerated an individual’s right to privacy. 
 

Dishonest chumps, like @Johnny Sack, point to Plessy, which gave the government the power to discriminate, as comparable. Yet Brown v BOE removed that power for government, not individuals. People still have the unenumerated right to discriminate. 
 

Dissolving an individual right to privacy, sans Amendment, is intolerable to a true patriot. As we so recently would say, Full. Stop.

Yes, great post.  But, counterpoint:

[DDD Dad 14060]

3 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

Oh got damn, going to need aloe for that one.  Yes, English is my first language. 

[fattyflattie 4631]

3 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Maybe make the process and requirements for acquiring and owning an AR similar to that for a .50 cal belt fed machine gun?  Something like that?

So holding Mustangs and F1 cars to the same standard.  Great analogy. 

[Sawbonz 26735]

11 minutes ago, TexArcher said:

Because we're the only place with mental illness and rap music.  Duh.

And no prayer in schools

[Brisketexan 103139]

6 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

So holding Mustangs and F1 cars to the same standard.  Great analogy. 

It might be.  For example, we already have rules that restrict driving for drivers under the age of 18, as compared with adult drivers: can't have more than 1 unrelated person in a car, can't be out after midnight, etc.  I actually would be okay with an additional restriction on 16-18 year olds driving vehicles of high HP/speed capability.  Shit, I remember watching my peers (from well-to-do families) getting Mustang GTs back in the day, and shaking my head.  And then a classmate predictably wrapped one around a tree at 100 mph.

So, yeah.....we should evaluate evolving technology and risks and adjust our safety regulations accordingly (we literally did that with young drivers - when I was 16, I could pile 10 people in my car and drive around at 3:00 a.m., which I can tell you was a TERRIBLE idea, albeit lots of fun).  I'd be okay with a higher burden on owning ARs across the board, but I'd settle for having an age requirement of 25.  I won't let perfect be the enemy of good on this one.

Edited July 5, 2022 by Brisketexan

[chainsaw 9440]

Apparently the gun gestapo in Illinois allowed Crimo to legally purchase the rifle. The "strict" gun laws must not apply in affluent communities.

[jimmyjazz 45055]

4 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

So holding Mustangs and F1 cars to the same standard.  Great analogy. 

Thanks for answering my previous question -- you were dropped on your head as a child.

[Brisketexan 103139]

2 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

Apparently the gun gestapo in Illinois allowed Crimo to legally purchase the rifle. The "strict" gun laws must not apply in affluent communities.

Caveat - all I read is that it was legally acquired, not that it was legally acquired in Illinois.  Many firearms in the Chicago area are acquired in Indiana.  Got a link to specifics?  If he got it in Illinois, I'd be curious as to how.

[henrygandorf 28609]

1 hour ago, fattyflattie said:

1) Ok.  Semi-auto pistols?  VA Tech was done with a 9mm and .22LR irrc.  Can someone who's served and is out at 22 own a SA rifle?  Centerfire, or are we taking away .22's from 8 yo's (possess gets tricky).

2) Make it 30, idgaf. 45, whatever it takes to make sure we enforce the laws we already have would be a good start. 

3) OK.  Needs to be reasonable.  Needs to be severe punishment for fuckery (false claims from ex, pissed co-worker, etc).  

4) Awesome.  Take them from the pay for everyone's college budget. 

Appreciate your response.

 

The sad fact is Uvalde could have happened with a pointed stick because the police cowardice.  This HP event looks like 31 sustained gunshots, 7 have perished.  I don't believe that's outside the realm of the damage any firearm can accomplish.  As noted above, VA tech was a couple of pistols, one "low power".  Santa Fe a shotgun, iirc.  It turns out that sending metal projectiles at someone at high rates of velocity is deadly af. 

making arguments and distinctions between the guns/ammo/ages/degrees of whatthefuckever only strengthens the "all guns should be banned" argument.

i hope everyone on the right continues to make them.  that's the only slim chance we have of something actually happening.  if there was a no-brainer thanos snap solution to the issues that everyone agreed with, it would've happened already.

[chainsaw 9440]

2 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Caveat - all I read is that it was legally acquired, not that it was legally acquired in Illinois.  Many firearms in the Chicago area are acquired in Indiana.  Got a link to specifics?  If he got it in Illinois, I'd be curious as to how.

Cops did a presser just now saying it was purchased in IL

[chainsaw 9440]

 

Around the 8 min mark

[Dahobbs 17088]

55 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

Lol.  This is your second or third post in this vain.  Any thoughts on this one @Dahobbs?  

I think you were asking for it. 

[UpperWestside 5990]

39 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

If a specific gun is the problem, and it's been available for the last 60+ years, why has it only been an issue in the last 10?

The short answer is with the rise of white nationalist propaganda that spreads to people susceptible to it, there is an almost naturals rise in violence when it comes to guns like these. As with anything a situation evolves until it reaches its natural conclusion. The NRA helped put us in the position we are in. Congressional leaders helped put us in this predicament by never having the courage to take a stand against guns. Many of them wanted looser gun restrictions. Congratulations you got what you wanted. A country flowing with guns where no community can ever feel safe anymore is the result. The internet, holy sweet Lord on this one, did far more than just the propaganda heavy lifting. It made a whole bunch of people who have delusions of grandeur feel like they have a support network for the violence they want to inflict. This is why the last ten years have been more and more violent with this and similar weapons. We are just in the beginning stages I believe. 
 

All of this has come to a head now and it is like trying to take on a hurricane with a rowboat. 

[27-25 2030]

2 hours ago, NameAlreadyInUse said:

British citizens were armed.  With weapons that could super efficiently fire 4 bullets per minute!

Yeah, but what's the weight of the bullet and muzzle velocity, exactly?  Details matter. <Ducks>

[Brisketexan 103139]

9 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

Cops did a presser just now saying it was purchased in IL

Yep -- looks like the regs on assault weapons are just in Chicago itself.  Which does little good.  That's like Austin banning donuts when Round Rock donuts exists and has a drive-thru.

[Biff Tannen 44917]

The last few pages are literally the same fucking argument with fatty over and over and over and over and over.

[Hate 20037]

21 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

It might be.  For example, we already have rules that restrict driving for drivers under the age of 18, as compared with adult drivers: can't have more than 1 unrelated person in a car, can't be out after midnight, etc.  I actually would be okay with an additional restriction on 16-18 year olds driving vehicles of high HP/speed capability.  Shit, I remember watching my peers (from well-to-do families) getting Mustang GTs back in the day, and shaking my head.  And then a classmate predictably wrapped one around a tree at 100 mph.

One of my best friends in high school had a Mustang GT for 48 hours before killing himself in a high speed wreck.  It was a Christmas present.

I lean more conservative but I would absolutely support some of the things Jimmy Jazz mentioned above...only allowing ranchers to have AR's or only allowing shooting ranges to have them to rent out.  I'd also support banning any and all high capacity magazines so things like Va. Tech can't happen again with hand guns.  I'm really fucking tired of this shit and it makes our country look ridiculous.  I was on an a call with an international team this morning and one of our PM's in Egypt asked me about Chicago this weekend.  There was nothing I could say to make any sense of it.

[SmokeyTheBear 5551]

1 hour ago, David Dennison said:

If guns aren't the problem, why do mass shootings and gun crimes happen with so much more frequency in the United States than in other peer nations?

If guns aren't the problem, why did Wyatt Earp make Tombstone a gun free zone? The wild fucking west had better gun regulations than we do with much higher population densities. 

[elfenix 34000]

1 hour ago, fattyflattie said:

If a specific gun is the problem, and it's been available for the last 60+ years, why has it only been an issue in the last 10?

no one bought them until they could get tacticool versions:

 

[Biff Tannen 44917]

Y'all are arguing with someone who a) does not discuss in good faith and/or b) is just a complete fuckwad.  Quit wasting your time.

[Bozo_Casanova 25499]

3 hours ago, Sawbonz said:

What matters most is capacity, firing rate and access by murderous psychos. For some reason they prefer the AR platform. 

There are LOTS of guns accessible to murderous psychos with the capacity and firing rate to do what the AR-15 does as well or better than the AR-15 does it. Understanding why they use the AR15 to the exclusion of all the others is really extremely important and dismissing the question seems dangerous and foolhardy to me, but I'm obviously a hurr durr libertarian gun nut Trumper why would knowing reasons be worthwhile?

Edited July 5, 2022 by Bozo_Casanova

[Willfully Horn 7820]

37 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

Cops did a presser just now saying it was purchased in IL

There’s a wrinkle in public perception of the varying gun laws in the many states.

 

 

[Sbbruin 21567]

[fattyflattie 4631]

22 minutes ago, elfenix said:

no one bought them until they could get tacticool versions:

Not true.  A-team was responsible for a bunch of sale of semiautomatic .223's, long before they became "tacticool". 

16 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

There are LOTS of guns accessible to murderous psychos with the capacity and firing rate to do what the AR-15 does as well or better than the AR-15 does it. Understanding why they use the AR15 to the exclusion of all the others is really extremely important and dismissing the question seems dangerous and foolhardy to me, but I'm obviously a hurr durr libertarian gun nut Trumper why would knowing reasons be worthwhile?

Bingo.

[C-Man 26535]

Fucking Jerrah: https://www.wfaa.com/article/sports/nfl/cowboys/dallas-cowboys-black-rifle-coffee-tweet-mixed-reaction/287-25038a82-9b9c-4939-b630-81a22ad00b7f?fbclid=IwAR0krzuYCE5-f-gsShPnqkgP5N9--IftM44vfJG40AVgMHdTir-_KZYgbmE#l58o8uf6qquzarbxht

[jimmyjazz 45055]

16 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

There are LOTS of guns accessible to murderous psychos with the capacity and firing rate to do what the AR-15 does as well or better than the AR-15 does it. Understanding why they use the AR15 to the exclusion of all the others is really extremely important and dismissing the question seems dangerous and foolhardy to me, but I'm obviously a hurr durr libertarian gun nut Trumper why would knowing reasons be worthwhile?

I'm all for learning the differences and sussing out the reasons the AR15 seems to be the weapon of choice.  I'm open to the idea you posit that there is a cultural attachment to the weapon itself.

Ultimately, I don't really care if the AR15 is the weapon of choice because it's the best tool for the job or if it's also because it has cultural attachment -- I want it off the market, as well as any other competitors that are equally or more deadly.  I don't think that's an inconsistent point of view whatsoever.

[fattyflattie 4631]

43 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

I think you were asking for it. 

You seem well adjusted.  I'd hope no one makes those same comments to you.  

[Seasick Sailor 3747]

Freedom ain't free I suppose. Enjoy your toys, fuckwads.

 

[Dahobbs 17088]

2 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

You seem well adjusted.  I'd hope no one makes those same comments to you.  

Again, take a break from the internet. You're having a day. 

[Brisketexan 103139]

4 minutes ago, Seasick Sailor said:

Freedom ain't free I suppose. Enjoy your toys, fuckwads.

 

Free-est kid in America.  Don't get no more freedom-er than that.  Lucky fella!  He should just pull up his freedom pullup, and lift himself up by his bootstraps!

[fattyflattie 4631]

4 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Again, take a break from the internet. You're having a day. 

I'm doing just fine.  Thank you for the advice, though. 

[DalTxHornFan 3066]

It looks like Highland Park parade event may have been another one of those "Known Wolf" attacks.

BREAKING: Police Were Told In 2019 That Parade Shooter Vowed To ‘Kill Everyone,’ Did Not Arrest Him

https://www.dailywire.com/news/breaking-police-were-told-in-2019-that-parade-shooter-vowed-to-kill-everyone-did-not-arrest-him

[Longhorn_Fan68 33693]

11 minutes ago, Seasick Sailor said:

Freedom ain't free I suppose. Enjoy your toys, fuckwads.

 

GOD FUCKING DAMMIT

[Bozo_Casanova 25499]

3 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

I'm all for learning the differences and sussing out the reasons the AR15 seems to be the weapon of choice.  I'm open to the idea you posit that there is a cultural attachment to the weapon itself.

Ultimately, I don't really care if the AR15 is the weapon of choice because it's the best tool for the job or if it's also because it has cultural attachment -- I want it off the market, as well as any other competitors that are equally or more deadly.  I don't think that's an inconsistent point of view whatsoever.

it's not, but in many ways you are cutting off the strongest and best argument that's available, which is that the AR-15, specifically, is a fundamentally unsafe and problematic product. Individual products get take off the market all the time.

[Surly Bevo 24247]

4 minutes ago, DalTxHornFan said:

It looks like Highland Park parade event may have been another one of those "Known Wolf" attacks.

BREAKING: Police Were Told In 2019 That Parade Shooter Vowed To ‘Kill Everyone,’ Did Not Arrest Him

https://www.dailywire.com/news/breaking-police-were-told-in-2019-that-parade-shooter-vowed-to-kill-everyone-did-not-arrest-him

Probably come out that his connected father had a hand in preventing any type of law enforcement activity, either directly or at the very least indirectly "we certainly don't want to go there this is Monsignor Crimo's boy after all"

Edited July 5, 2022 by Surly Bevo

[Judge Roybeanbag 11728]

1 minute ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

GOD FUCKING DAMMIT

Thy will be done. 

[Bozo_Casanova 25499]

4 minutes ago, DalTxHornFan said:

It looks like Highland Park parade event may have been another one of those "Known Wolf" attacks.

BREAKING: Police Were Told In 2019 That Parade Shooter Vowed To ‘Kill Everyone,’ Did Not Arrest Him

https://www.dailywire.com/news/breaking-police-were-told-in-2019-that-parade-shooter-vowed-to-kill-everyone-did-not-arrest-him

How weird, to see our system working the way it's designed to work.