Jump to content

Active shooter thread


Hugo Stiglitz

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Satchel said:

Do you support laws designed to take from women the one tool that keeps them from terminating pregnancies, since women cannot  (in the estimation of the lawmakers)  be trusted to protect life on their own?

Do not. Receipts are in the abortion thread. 
 

eta: I do not like the idea of the late term stuff.  Was ok (on an overall legal note, not really personally) with the law as it’s been my entire adult life.  I understand the Clinton phrase is no longer popular, but that’s where I always landed on it. 

Edited by fattyflattie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

I was just curious, you set the timeline, after all.  You say you can live with the choice you made, but act appalled others can, too. Huh. 

do you know why I set the timeline when I did? what happened in 1994 that was significant to this discussion?

and I'm not appalled that you can live with yourself, I'm appalled that you continue to vote for dead kids

Edited by Longhorn_Fan68
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, fattyflattie said:

Maybe. I’ve got a few regrets, as I assume everyone does. I do find it a bit presumptuous you feel you made the “wrong” choice years ago. Wrong for you now, it very obviously wasn’t then.  

Man....I've had this same discussion with my wife (about my general wrongness -- a subject on which she is the world's foremost authority).  Maybe I made the "best decision I could at the time with the info and experience that I had," but it was still the wrong decision when it comes the very reason for making such decisions -- achieving a long-term desired outcome.

Based on the info I had at the time, it may have been a perfectly reasonable choice to take the right fork in the road on my journey to The Promised Land.  But if it turns out that the right fork actually leads me to a dead end at a steep cliff, and the left fork actually was the right path to get to The Promised Land, then I made a regrettable choice.  An understandable one, maybe.  One where I didn't act with ill intent.  But the wrong choice nonetheless.

I'll make more mistakes going forward (my wife assures me that I will).  But I'm always trying to limit them, and when I have more complete information -- as I now have about what the GQP will do with power -- I make different choices than I would have made 30 years ago.

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

13 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Assault weapons were banned when W ran for office in 2000.

Speaking of masturbatory gun regulations, the AWB is a damn good example. 

What most gun owners want are measures that make sense and can actually impact outcomes while balancing the rights of law abiding citizens.  Y'all get mad at people for not voting D, but the reality is that a good number of D's rhetoric on the issue goes far beyond the bounds of common sense.  See e.g., Beto.  See also e.g., calls backs to the AWB. 

Edited by Anastasis
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

Is it your view that policies have never changed in the parties, thru time?  Never. Something opposed in the 50’s is still opposed?   Also, I don’t cry about the CR meanies. There’s one or two that can fuck their own ass but aside from those few, meh.

Policies certainly change over time. Prior to the 1960's, the democratic party was full of dixiecrats that thought the south would rise again and had to be brought kicking and screaming into the 21st century, and all the racists that boiled off eventually condensed into the modern GQP.

I can honestly say that within my lifetime, the GOP has always been 100% progunflagrockeagle. I grew up similar to LH86 in an incredibly sheltered and jesus-bubbled SBC upbringing and my first couple of votes were for the (R) party because of all the horrible anti-abortion propaganda that was shown to me from 13 and onwards, and the constant drumbeat of fear from the GOP and the religious right.

Guns and gun rights have ALWAYS been the shibboleth of the modern republican party. 

 

But shit man, I don't know why a bunch of us are arguing with an oilman that pridefully stakes out an ignorant position. Fatty wasn't reasoned into his position, and he's not defending it with reason. So I'm not sure why we all share the same mental illness to keep treating him like he's a serious person.

Edited by Captainant
  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

do you know why I set the timeline when I did? what happened in 1994 that was significant to this discussion?

Was it the ban where a plastic stock made a gun bad, but you could get it’s brother with a wood stock at Walmart (where I literally purchased one my mini-14’s)?

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

There’s a lot we can do. Just securing firearms would cut down on literally 10’s of thousands of annual deaths.  Finding ways to support and educate that doesn’t have to be thru law (although awesome if so).  Could be as simple as talking to a neighbor who you know doesn’t secure their shotgun.   
 

There’s a lot more to discussion that a single type of rifle and it’s typical magazine. 

Wouldn’t eliminating firearms with the power and lethality of military weapons in public spaces reduce annual deaths as well?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Captainant said:

Policies certainly change over time. Prior to the 1960's, the democratic party was full of dixiecrats that thought the south would rise again and had to be brought kicking and screaming into the 21st century, and all the racists that boiled off eventually condensed into the modern GQP.

I can honestly say that within my lifetime, the GOP has always been 100% progunflagrockeagle. I grew up similar to LH86 in an incredibly sheltered and jesus-bubbled SBC upbringing and my first couple of votes were for the (R) party because of all the horrible anti-abortion propaganda that was shown to me from 13 and onwards, and the constant drumbeat of fear from the GOP and the religious right.

Guns and gun rights have ALWAYS been the shibboleth of the modern republican party. 

 

But shit man, I don't know why a bunch of us are arguing with an oilman that pridefully stakes out an ignorant position. Fatty wasn't reasoned into his position, and he's not defending it with reason. So I'm not sure why we all share the same mental illness to keep treating you like he's a serious person.

that's a fucking good point. I have ff on ignore yet I've been breaking my own rule responding to his ass - stupidly thinking I might get through. thanks for the virtual wake up slap

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Captainant said:

But shit man, I don't know why a bunch of us are arguing with an oilman that pridefully stakes out an ignorant position. Fatty wasn't reasoned into his position, and he's not defending it with reason. So I'm not sure why we all share the same mental illness to keep treating you like he's a serious person.

How is that?  Are you telling me the people you vote for do exactly what you want, all the time? Or do you vote for what you feel is best, and work on convincing them they need to further their progress towards the additional goals you feel are important?  Because I’m pretty sure that’s how it works. I’m not happy there’s zero compromise on easy to implement issues like safe storage, magazine limits, and other simple shit (binary triggers, suppressors).
 

Your view is I should drop every other concern I have with the other party, put them in full and complete power, so that they can make these small changes that we might see progress in a decade or two?  After the 20m+ ARs and hundreds of millions of handguns have been slowly nitpicked to nothing (hint: full control won’t stop with mag size limits and background checks, see 1000% tax I linked). 

  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How is that?  Are you telling me the people you vote for do exactly what you want, all the time? Or do you vote for what you feel is best, and work on convincing them they need to further their progress towards the additional goals you feel are important?  Because I’m pretty sure that’s how it works. I’m not happy there’s zero compromise on easy to implement issues like safe storage, magazine limits, and other simple shit (binary triggers, suppressors).
 
Your view is I should drop every other concern I have with the other party, put them in full and complete power, so that they can make these small changes that we might see progress in a decade or two?  After the 20m+ ARs and hundreds of millions of handguns have been slowly nitpicked to nothing (hint: full control won’t stop with mag size limits and background checks, see 1000% tax I linked). 

No, you should drop the GQP / GOP because they have no platform at all other than do nothing. Then when they have control, they do nothing to help the common American. But, you won’t listen to anything or anyone that can legitimately prove that to you.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Satchel said:

Wouldn’t eliminating firearms with the power and lethality of military weapons in public spaces reduce annual deaths as well?

Odd phrasing. So pretty much any 9mm or greater handgun, as they are military weapon (9mm and .45). The 5.56 (which is one of several cartridges in the scary AR, but most popular so assuming that’s what you’re asking) is the one everyone is focusing on.  Every Varmint rifle (hunting) I have has more power and lethality.  Every deer rifle (hunting) I have has more power and lethality.  Every bench gun (target) I have is more powerful and lethal.   
 

Public spaces? I’m mostly ok with that. I don’t conceal carry. I’m good with continued CC but with even greater classes and background check (it’s not all that rigorous now) 

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

3 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

How is that?  Are you telling me the people you vote for do exactly what you want, all the time? Or do you vote for what you feel is best, and work on convincing them they need to further their progress towards the additional goals you feel are important?  Because I’m pretty sure that’s how it works. I’m not happy there’s zero compromise on easy to implement issues like safe storage, magazine limits, and other simple shit (binary triggers, suppressors).
 

Your view is I should drop every other concern I have with the other party, put them in full and complete power, so that they can make these small changes that we might see progress in a decade or two?  After the 20m+ ARs and hundreds of millions of handguns have been slowly nitpicked to nothing (hint: full control won’t stop with mag size limits and background checks, see 1000% tax I linked). 

"Thank you, Senator, for keeping my taxes low and minorities at bay. Now would you pretty please with a cherry on top try to keep kids from having their heads blow off while learning math? That would be swell." -ff, probably

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

that's a fucking good point. I have ff on ignore yet I've been breaking my own rule responding to his ass - stupidly thinking I might get through. thanks for the virtual wake up slap

You have me on ignore? Come on man!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

Your view is I should drop every other concern I have with the other party, put them in full and complete power, so that they can make these small changes that we might see progress in a decade or two?  After the 20m+ ARs and hundreds of millions of handguns have been slowly nitpicked to nothing (hint: full control won’t stop with mag size limits and background checks, see 1000% tax I linked). 

No you stupid fucking ditch digger. My view is that if you ACTUALLY gave a shit about implementing the "easy issues" you'd fucking taking some meaningful action to realize that goal. You'd call your representatives and ask for that legislation, and vote in primaries for candidates that are more moderate. But no instead you waive your critical thinking to blindly support whatever extreme candidate the GQP has brought, or you neglect your civic duty and withold your vote.

You're doing that doublespeak thing again by the way. You're taking my statements to their extreme to build a strawman that isn't supported by my posts, and then attacking me for having such an outrageous position.

It sort of gives up the game that you're just looking to culture war and not actually engage with any ideas. You've already decided that there's nothing that can be said to change your mind because you clearly aren't reading what's being discussed in this thread.

 

Enjoy all the dead children. The people you vote for are the ones enabling more children to be gunned down in classrooms. Not the people I vote for. 

  • Hook 'Em 7
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

Odd phrasing. So pretty much any 9mm or greater handgun, as they are military weapon (9mm and .45). The 5.56 (which is one of several cartridges in the scary AR, but most popular so assuming that’s what you’re asking) is the one everyone is focusing on.  Every Varmint rifle (hunting) I have has more power and lethality.  Every deer rifle (hunting) I have has more power and lethality.  Every bench gun (target) I have is more powerful and lethal.   
 

Public spaces? I’m mostly ok with that. I don’t conceal carry. I’m good with continued CC but with even greater classes and background check (it’s not all that rigorous now) 

So, if we resurrected the 90’s era assault weapons ban, you wouldn’t have a problem with us doing so?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Speaking of masturbatory gun regulations, the AWB is a damn good example. 

What most gun owners want are measures that make sense and can actually impact outcomes while balancing the rights of law abiding citizens.  Y'all get mad at people for not voting D, but the reality is that a good number of D's rhetoric on the issue goes far beyond the bounds of common sense.  See e.g., Beto.  See also e.g., calls backs to the AWB. 

Speaking of masturbatory.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Thank you, Senator, for keeping my taxes low and minorities at bay. Now would you pretty please with a cherry on top try to keep kids from having their heads blow off while learning math? That would be swell." -ff, probably

His (and our taxes) are going up if Rick Scott’s plan for the GOP is implemented… and that’s the only platform out there for the GOP.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Satchel said:

So, if we resurrected the 90’s era assault weapons ban, you wouldn’t have a problem with us doing so?

Where things were grandfathered, like that one?  Not really. Would probably make enough to buy a vacation home. 
 

5 minutes ago, Captainant said:

You'd call your representatives and ask for that legislation, and vote in primaries for candidates that are more moderate.

Not how it work on the R side. Choice was Huffines or Beto. Abbott would be your moderate choice. 

  • Fuck You 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, fattyflattie said:

Where things were grandfathered, like that one?  Not really. Would probably make enough to buy a vacation home. 
 

Not how it work on the R side. Choice was Huffines or Beto. Abbott would be your moderate choice. 

Name one issue on which this current iteration of Abbott is moderate?

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

Just now, fattyflattie said:

Not how it work on the R side. Choice was Huffines or Beto. Abbott would be your moderate choice. 

Yes, and you are saying that low taxes and treating women like chattel and banning trans kids from sports are more important than children getting shot into gore and spread on walls.

You have nothing but opposition whenever gun control comes up. You make weak gestural statements that you support one or another small measure, and then tell us why you'll never actually vote for it.

Just be honest. You want lower taxes more than you want schoolchildren to be safe from slaughter. Maybe if a shooter shot up a prenatal ward youd finally start to give a shit

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 3
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Speaking of masturbatory gun regulations, the AWB is a damn good example. 

What most gun owners want are measures that make sense and can actually impact outcomes while balancing the rights of law abiding citizens.  Y'all get mad at people for not voting D, but the reality is that a good number of D's rhetoric on the issue goes far beyond the bounds of common sense.  See e.g., Beto.  See also e.g., calls backs to the AWB. 

You do realize that the AWB has been studied and it was shown that it had positive effect?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

You do realize that the AWB has been studied and it was shown that it had positive effect?

Rand has a nice synthesis of high quality research on the topic broadly, and includes as assessment of the impact of the AWB.  They rate the findings wrt the AWB inconclusive.

https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR2000/RR2088-1/RAND_RR2088-1.pdf

 

 

Scientific evidence on gun policies' effects is modest but supports a few conclusions

Of more than 200 combinations of policies and outcomes, surprisingly few have been the subject of methodologically rigorous investigation. Notably, research into five of the examined outcomes is either unavailable or almost entirely inconclusive, and three of these five outcomes represent issues of particular concern to gun owners or gun industry stakeholders.

Available evidence supports the conclusion that child-access prevention laws, or safe storage laws, reduce self-inflicted fatal or nonfatal firearm injuries, including unintentional and intentional self-injuries, among youth.

There is supportive evidence that stand-your-ground laws are associated with increases in firearm homicides and moderate evidence that they increase the total number of homicides.

There is moderate evidence that state laws prohibiting gun ownership by individuals subject to domestic violence restraining orders decrease total and firearm-related intimate partner homicides.

There is moderate evidence that waiting periods reduce firearm suicides and total homicides and limited evidence that they reduce total suicides and firearm homicides.

No studies meeting the authors' inclusion criteria have examined the effects of gun-free zones, laws allowing armed staff in kindergarten through grade 12 schools, or required reporting of lost or stolen firearms.

 

 

 

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

Other studies differ.  Some of it came down to things like # fatalities per event, etc.  I mean, no shit, Las Vegas, but the data are not wholly inconclusive.

It wasn't a sweeping ban, either.  It had little hope of anything but a modest effect, which it did.

One more thing:  for all the 2A experts I hear from on a daily basis, it seems they sure have a problem acknowledging the fact that, over and over again, the courts have indicated that various actions like the assault weapons ban are NOT unconstitutional.  I mean, when Scalia says it, you have to wonder how solid one's differing position is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, fattyflattie said:

Do not. Receipts are in the abortion thread. 
 

eta: I do not like the idea of the late term stuff.  Was ok (on an overall legal note, not really personally) with the law as it’s been my entire adult life.  I understand the Clinton phrase is no longer popular, but that’s where I always landed on it. 

What about the really late term stuff?

 

33rd trimester?

 

Like the 19 in Uvalde a couple of weeks ago?

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, TexEx15 said:

This is so fucking heartbreaking and infuriating. As a husband of an elementary educator I think it’s important to explain how close these teachers become with these students at such a young age. To think every single student of his that was in the classroom at the time was murdered in front of him is unfathomable.

I saw bits and pieces of this during NBC Nightly News just now.  It was heartbreaking to watch just that short clip on tv.  I’m not sure I would be able to get through this entire interview. 

I’d probably start crying but would mostly be fucking angry. 

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

4 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Other studies differ.  Some of it came down to things like # fatalities per event, etc.  I mean, no shit, Las Vegas, but the data are not wholly inconclusive.

It wasn't a sweeping ban, either.  It had little hope of anything but a modest effect, which it did.

One more thing:  for all the 2A experts I hear from on a daily basis, it seems they sure have a problem acknowledging the fact that, over and over again, the courts have indicated that various actions like the assault weapons ban are NOT unconstitutional.  I mean, when Scalia says it, you have to wonder how solid one's differing position is.

It doesn't matter what Scalia said. It matters what the current court would say, see Roe v Wade. Precedent is dead. 

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

Just now, Dahobbs said:

It doesn't matter what Scalia said. It matters what the current court would say, see Roe v Wade. Precedent is dead. 

Also this.

When you understand that we live in a timeline where Scalia is a pussy-ass socialist libtard to the modern GQP, then you can figure out what's coming next.  None of it's good.

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

19 hours ago, Anastasis said:

I did not conflate anything, but you are the one that brought abortion into the discussion. Sorry if the context of magnitude is off putting.

 

Maybe I should just adopt the hg style of posting.

 

democrats- we were a hairs breathe away from a fascist takeover of the American government.

also democrats - damn right we want to take away your ARs.

 

And I actually generally like Beto and donated to him. 

eta: unfortunately, the following is lost in him and many others.

There are solutions where the vast majority of gun owners will be able to find agreement on expanding gun control measures. But reasonable gun owners are going to push back on nonsensical and performative measures.

Worth a listen for all those who think that "reasonable" gun safety laws have any chance of passage.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/07/podcasts/the-daily/gun-control-polling.html

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Homercles said:

What does he say at the end there?

 

4 hours ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

I can't make it out and I'm wearing headphones

I believe it's 

"How 'bout that shit?"

and

"Maiete (sp?) wrote a letter . . ." (talking about the little girl with the green Chuck Taylors)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, 4th&Five said:

 

 

That's a reference to Biden lying on a 4473. While he was fucking his dead brothers wife, she probably thought he was going to off himself, and went off and threw his .38 in a trash can behind a grocery store. When the FBI came in to investigate, Hunter pivoted to pointing out the suspicious Mexicans working at the grocery store. That dude is a total basket case.  And RJ is a fuckstick. But 4473 violations are severely under prosecuted.  Motherfuckers that lie during the background check process should be prosecuted and put in jail for a long time. 

Edited by Anastasis
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Fuck You 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Anastasis said:

Speaking of masturbatory gun regulations, the AWB is a damn good example. 

What most gun owners want are measures that make sense and can actually impact outcomes while balancing the rights of law abiding citizens.  Y'all get mad at people for not voting D, but the reality is that a good number of D's rhetoric on the issue goes far beyond the bounds of common sense.  See e.g., Beto.  See also e.g., calls backs to the AWB. 

Restricting access to assault weapons (high velocity, high capacity semi auto rifles) would decrease the magnitude of mass shooter events.  That seems rather obvious

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

 

That's a reference to Biden lying on a 4473. While he was fucking his dead brothers wife, she probably thought he was going to off himself, and went off and threw his .38 in a trash can behind a grocery store. When the FBI came in to investigate, Hunter pivoted to pointing out the suspicious Mexicans working at the grocery store. That dude is a total basket case.  And RJ is a fuckstick. But 4473 violations are severely under prosecuted.  Motherfuckers that lie during the background check process should be prosecuted and put in jail for a long time. 

This is pathetic. Even for you.

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

The question I have for hardcore 2A folks is simple: If you could only choose one, would you rather a) defend unfettered gun rights with effectively ZERO restrictions, which is the current position, or b) watch your child grow up instead of being murdered in a classroom?  Because it happened to someone's kids, not yours, doesn't mean it can't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Pancho changed the title to Active shooter thread


×
×
  • Create New...