Jump to content

Active shooter thread


Hugo Stiglitz

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

BINGO.

We live in a completely post-rational thought (frankly, it's ANTI-rational thought) world.  Logic and reason only make them angry.  Reminding them that even that commie Scalia said firearms could be regulated only results in a "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!" rant, with no support at all.

We are governed by a cadre of toddlers in a temper tantrum, with even less capacity for acting reasonably.  There's no unfucking this.

To be slightly lesser doomer about it, those people are loud and, although growing in number, are both relatively small and have a low ceiling. The real silent majority are united by common sense, a patchwork of centrists, apoliticals, and antipoliticals. I don't want to diminish the threat of the radical right, especially because our archaic constitution gives these shitheads grossly disproportionate political power through the Electoral system and the entire institution of the Senate. They must be dealt with, and I agree with you, @Brisketexan that logic, reason, and basic human decency are ineffective against them.

But they are effective for eroding their recruitment efforts. If they are going to engage in deplorable public discourse, collect the social toll from them every time. Don't let them off the hook by "ignoring" them. Make each politician pay the political price, in full, whenever they court the far right.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

To be slightly lesser doomer about it, those people are loud and, although growing in number, are both relatively small and have a low ceiling. The real silent majority are united by common sense, a patchwork of centrists, apoliticals, and antipoliticals. I don't want to diminish the threat of the radical right, especially because our archaic constitution gives these shitheads grossly disproportionate political power through the Electoral system and the entire institution of the Senate. They must be dealt with, and I agree with you, @Brisketexan that logic, reason, and basic human decency are ineffective against them.

But they are effective for eroding their recruitment efforts. If they are going to engage in deplorable public discourse, collect the social toll from them every time. Don't let them off the hook by "ignoring" them. Make each politician pay the political price, in full, whenever they court the far right.

This is all quite reasonable until you get to your conclusion.  How exactly does one "make them pay" when they are giving their base exactly what it wants?

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Chad Fuck said:

This is all quite reasonable until you get to your conclusion.  How exactly does one "make them pay" when they are giving their base exactly what it wants?

You drag them instead of making the Obama "when they go low we go high" mistake, which Hillary's tonedeaf campaign also arrogantly made.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

We are governed by a cadre of ARMED toddlers in a temper tantrum, with even less capacity for acting reasonably.  There's no unfucking this.

FIFY because we fucking love the "pew pew."  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

You drag them instead of making the Obama "when they go low we go high" mistake, which Hillary's tonedeaf campaign also arrogantly made.

You drag them instead of making the Obama "when they go low we go high" mistake, which Hillary's tonedeaf campaign also arrogantly made.

You drag them instead of making the Obama "when they go low we go high" mistake, which Hillary's tonedeaf campaign also arrogantly made.

You drag them instead of making the Obama "when they go low we go high" mistake, which Hillary's tonedeaf campaign also arrogantly made.

You drag them instead of making the Obama "when they go low we go high" mistake, which Hillary's tonedeaf campaign also arrogantly made.

You drag them instead of making the Obama "when they go low we go high" mistake, which Hillary's tonedeaf campaign also arrogantly made.

You drag them instead of making the Obama "when they go low we go high" mistake, which Hillary's tonedeaf campaign also arrogantly made.

Etc etc. ad infinitum

THIS.  Stop with the kidgloves.  Stop with the "maybe they're just misunderstood well-meaning people."  They are a cancer. Do what you do with cancers.  Cut out what you can, and blast whatever's left with brutal chemo and radiation.  If we do not, they will kill us all.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Firemans4Horn said:

 

Hmmmmm. What do we call police who want to act in secret? Seems there is some handy term for an unaccountable police force, but I just can't quite find it.

This cover-up is an absolute outrage. Police exerting as much control and harrassment as they can manage against the press. Lying about what happened. Denying access to evidence that should prove their claims. 

spacer.png

 

I will tell you all that you need to know.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

Hmmmmm. What do we call police who want to act in secret? Seems there is some handy term for an unaccountable police force, but I just can't quite find it.

This cover-up is an absolute outrage. Police exerting as much control and harrassment as they can manage against the press. Lying about what happened. Denying access to evidence that should prove their claims. 

spacer.png

 

I will tell you all that you need to know.

This is such goalpost-moving bullshit. Release everything you cowardly fucks

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hate said:

I'm curios to see what happened here.  I saw a report that police responded within two minutes, but nobody got shot during that time? 

 

Whatever the reason these kids had to go through it at what should a fun day of camp for them.  Wonder how many details we’ll get, been pretty hush hush so far.

Edited by Covri
Meant to multi-quote with a different post
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Got a problem? What do the guys on TV and in the movies do? The get righteous anger because all causes are black and white, and we all know whom are the righteous! Brave man with a gun goes after bad guys. Brave man with a gun uses any means to get information or what he rightfully seeks.

I don't think that today's gunmen walking among the innocent and willing to kill them sees himself (always a "him") as particularly unique. I doubt that many of these killers and would-be killers are gunning for immortality.

I think the picking up a gun to get your way or revenge is just another possible option for dealing with something. It's pervasive enough in fiction and reality that it's hard to imagine it's not seeming more ordinary in this country every day.

Individualism becomes a celebration of the loner. The lone gunman. 

So many grooves in this downward chute.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

You know, if every American citizen was required to carry at all times, none of this shit would happen.

Question:  how do we arm fetuses?

They’re doing amazing things with technology these days. Maybe modify human DNA so that one fetus arm develops into a gun? Gotta think outside the box. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, HornPhD said:

They’re doing amazing things with technology these days. Maybe modify human DNA so that one fetus arm develops into a gun? Gotta think outside the box. 

rose-mcgowan-grindhouse_trans_NvBQzQNjv4

MAGA AMERICA LAW 1: all fetuses must be carried to term.

MAGA AMERICA LAW 2: all fetuses must be modified in utero to have one limb replaced with an AR with grenade launcher because Second Amendment.

MAGA AMERICA LAW 3: something about all fried food being government subsidized.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, FirstTimeCaller said:

It's not a 48/50/2 Senate. It's a 51/50 Senate. You don't get to say some people are in your party, but they aren't in your party.

And the party can have some fight in them and not just say "aw, shucks." Just look at them crowing  The fact that anyone is celebrating this agreement as some sort of milestone is gross. It's not. It's a loss for a public that is tired of mass shootings and does nothing to stop them. And you can watch and see that it's the only thing that will get done until there is a shooting more horrific than Newtown or Uvalde. In other words, more classrooms are going to have to get shot up before there is even another chance of doing something.

Don't get me wrong. The blame lays at the feet of the Republican party. But Dems are being spineless on this.

And yes, there needs to be a larger Dem majority.

 

There is no legislation that can be passed today that will prevent mass murder. These psychopaths will use a van full of fertilizer or a truck on a busy street or block exits and set buildings on fire. They plan this shit out. 

Banning semi-autos or whatever you think needs done is likely unconstitutional. Even if you think it's not, today's courts sure as shit will find it unconstitutional. If the 9th circuit can't vote to raise the age of AR15 ownership to 21, the SCOTUS sure as fuck won't ban them. Repealing the 2nd amendment isn't happening any time soon. Come to terms with the reality of the legal situation. 

This handshake agreement in the Senate, if put into law, will be far more successful than the superficial '94 AWB... And it won't get struck down by the SCOTUS... IF they get the details right. Pay attention to the definition of boyfriend, for instance. 

 

  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, B00M said:

There is no legislation that can be passed today that will prevent mass murder. These psychopaths will use a van full of fertilizer or a truck on a busy street or block exits and set buildings on fire. They plan this shit out. 

Banning semi-autos or whatever you think needs done is likely unconstitutional. Even if you think it's not, today's courts sure as shit will find it unconstitutional. If the 9th circuit can't vote to raise the age of AR15 ownership to 21, the SCOTUS sure as fuck won't ban them. Repealing the 2nd amendment isn't happening any time soon. Come to terms with the reality of the legal situation. 

This handshake agreement in the Senate, if put into law, will be far more successful than the superficial '94 AWB... And it won't get struck down by the SCOTUS... IF they get the details right. Pay attention to the definition of boyfriend, for instance. 

 

I'm pretty sure there's a limit to the amount of fertilizer I can own. So I don't think that's quite making your argument.

 

Now imagine if there wasn't a limit and anybody could blow up a building and they happened at the same frequency as mass shootings here in America you don't think there'd be some fucking material changes made?.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

You can purchase fuckloads of fertilizer. You just can’t do it discreetly.  

Discreetly? 

How about everything they need to track you down

(2)Specific information requiredFor each sale or transfer of ammonium nitrate, the owner of an ammonium nitrate facility shall—

(A)
record the name, address, telephone number, and registration number issued under subsection (c) or (d) of each person that purchases ammonium nitrate, in a manner prescribed by the Secretary;
(B)
if applicable, record the name, address, and telephone number of an agent acting on behalf of the person described in subparagraph (A), at the point of sale;
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Citing ammonium nitrate as something in your favor if you oppose new regs isn't very supportive of your point.

They want everything you can possibly be asked for short of piss in a cup.

Yeah, let's regulate firearms like a spray license. Gotta pass a rigorous test that the majority fails on first try. Contining ed required. Insurance required. Strict reports of usage. Registrations! Regulations! Every drop accounted for!

Sounds great. Make it happen.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, cactusflinthead said:

Citing ammonium nitrate as something in your favor if you oppose new regs isn't very supportive of your point.

They want everything you can possibly be asked for short of piss in a cup.

Yeah, let's regulate firearms like a spray license. Gotta pass a rigorous test that the majority fails on first try. Contining ed required. Insurance required. Strict reports of usage. Registrations! Regulations! Every drop accounted for!

Sounds great. Make it happen.

The point is, it doesn't matter one single fuck what you or i support. There are structural limits to what is feasible. You accept those and take what you can get or you blow your chance. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, cactusflinthead said:

Discreetly? 

How about everything they need to track you down

(2)Specific information requiredFor each sale or transfer of ammonium nitrate, the owner of an ammonium nitrate facility shall—

(A)
record the name, address, telephone number, and registration number issued under subsection (c) or (d) of each person that purchases ammonium nitrate, in a manner prescribed by the Secretary;
(B)
if applicable, record the name, address, and telephone number of an agent acting on behalf of the person described in subparagraph (A), at the point of sale;

Correct. I was simply replying that it can be bought, to a poster that said he can’t get it. And you can’t do it discretely, by any stretch of the imagination.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about a damn law that all assault rifles have to be hot pink and make a  "aoooooooga" sound with each pull of the trigger.

Keep your AR-15, but you're going to look like a doofus every time you carry it and shoot it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also wonder if there is some sort of technology where a chip is placed in all new guns that disables them if within, say, 50 feet of a transmitter. So a school could have these placed around, and if someone were to try to use a weapon with one of these chips, it wouldn't fire. 

Pipe dream with all sorts of issues to overcome, I know. 

Edited by FirstTimeCaller
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, FirstTimeCaller said:

I also wonder if there is some sort of technology where a chip is placed in all new guns that disables them if within, say, 50 feet of a transmitter. So a school could have these placed around, and if someone were to try to use a weapon with one of these chips, it wouldn't fire. 

Pipe dream with all sorts of issues to overcome, I know. 

Flip the concept.  They're only enabled within, say, 200 feet of a transmitter.  Joe Feral Hogg is just gonna have to set up a bunch of repeaters on his ranch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, B00M said:

The point is, it doesn't matter one single fuck what you or i support. There are structural limits to what is feasible. You accept those and take what you can get or you blow your chance. 

Translation:  It's hard so we shouldn't try.

There's that fighting spirit that once made this country great.

Fucker.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no legislation that can be passed today that will prevent mass murder. These psychopaths will use a van full of fertilizer or a truck on a busy street or block exits and set buildings on fire. They plan this shit out. 
Banning semi-autos or whatever you think needs done is likely unconstitutional. Even if you think it's not, today's courts sure as shit will find it unconstitutional. If the 9th circuit can't vote to raise the age of AR15 ownership to 21, the SCOTUS sure as fuck won't ban them. Repealing the 2nd amendment isn't happening any time soon. Come to terms with the reality of the legal situation. 
This handshake agreement in the Senate, if put into law, will be far more successful than the superficial '94 AWB... And it won't get struck down by the SCOTUS... IF they get the details right. Pay attention to the definition of boyfriend, for instance. 
 

For one, no one thinks anything will PREVENT murder but we sure as shit would like to REDUCE murder.

For two, dipshit high school dropouts don’t get pissy when granny is bitching about the phone bill and impulsively *checks notes* construct an ammonium nitrate bomb to harm her then whip up another one real quick to blow up a school.
  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fucking garbage. Sorry Uvalde, 19 fourth-graders isn't enough to get the most basic gun reform passed -- or anything that would have prevented their death. These are the ideas that can save lives immediately.

Edited by FirstTimeCaller
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, FirstTimeCaller said:

Fucking garbage. Sorry Uvalde, 19 fourth-graders isn't enough to get the most basic gun reform passed -- or anything that would have prevented their death. These are the ideas that can save lives immediately.

I don't understand how he can say that. Is Cornyn saying he would support some of those measures if proposed? Because 49/50 Dems plus him is enough to get a bill passed in the Senate.  

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Dutchrudder said:

I don't understand how he can say that. Is Cornyn saying he would support some of those measures if proposed? Because 49/50 Dems plus him is enough to get a bill passed in the Senate.  

I'd like to see a standalone bill to raise the limit from 18 to 21 for assault rifles. I imagine that at least 2-3 more moderate Senate Republicans would say yes to that. And then let them filibuster a bill that would have prevented Uvalde and Buffalo as they happened if they want to take that track. Hell, let them go for 36-48 hour straight to where there is plenty of coverage of exactly who wants so badly to let those under 21 have these rifles even though it would mean Uvalde didn't happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, FirstTimeCaller said:

Fucking garbage. Sorry Uvalde, 19 fourth-graders isn't enough to get the most basic gun reform passed -- or anything that would have prevented their death. These are the ideas that can save lives immediately.

I don't understand the point of Cornyn's tweet unless it is meant to further reinforce how spineless he and his merry band of shitheels are. All of those things are good ideas that would make an actual difference and instead we get a watered down piece of legislation that doesn't do anything real to protect and save lives. His tweet is a weird flex shining a spotlight on himself for being weak.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Dutchrudder said:

I don't understand how he can say that. Is Cornyn saying he would support some of those measures if proposed? Because 49/50 Dems plus him is enough to get a bill passed in the Senate.  

You're damn straight that's what he's suggesting but doesn't actually mean. 

It's pure-dee chickenshit from Senator Looks-like-a-Senator. Go to third person to avoid the accountability of writing in the first person. This yellow cunt representing Texas (yee-haw!!!! we're so fucking manly down here!) has chosen to be spineless in the face of the NЯA and spineless in admitting his actual stand to those actually human enough to give a shit about 19 dead children and two dead teachers. 

He even has the gall to editorially describe safe gun storage as "unconstitutional' like he has any idea what that even means. Cornyn is the classic stuffed shirt. A haircut that thinks he's a man. In short, he perfectly represents his constituency and my state's drift into Aggiehood: insecure dumbasses bravely claiming superior manhood while doing nothing that suggests such a thing is true.

I hate these people. I hate what they're doing to what seemed to be a sustainable republic. If we make it through this, we must make vigilance and self-assessment key lessons when we teach young Americans about this republic. Complacence was and is killing this place or allowing it to be killed.

And it feels like there's not a fucking thing you can do about it except embrace the irony deafness and go buy an AR, balaclava, combat boots, and a map to your nearest problem. Hello nail, meet Mr. Hammer.

  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, royiv said:

I don't understand the point of Cornyn's tweet unless it is meant to further reinforce how spineless he and his merry band of shitheels are. All of those things are good ideas that would make an actual difference and instead we get a watered down piece of legislation that doesn't do anything real to protect and save lives. His tweet is a weird flex shining a spotlight on himself for being weak.

This is one of those rare instances where the GOP doesn't know what talking points to run with. It keeps changing, probably because there's some behind the scenes infighting about how to deal with Uvalde. I know the NRA people are just hoping the whole thing blows over and people will forget. But it seems like others in the GOP sense this one is different and want the optics of having done something (even if it's just the performative crumbs we're getting).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Pancho changed the title to Active shooter thread


×
×
  • Create New...