Gunman attacks Dallas Federal Building

[El Diablo 4232]

1 minute ago, Pam Cummings said:

If you can't hold your shit together in a simulated combat situation, why would i trust your instinct with a weapon in a live shoot?

 

That's what carrying a gun and having to use it is. A combat situation. If you are a complete doofus who could not hack it in the army to the point that they took your a gun away, then giving giving you a gun in a real active shooter situation creates more problems than it solves.

so is this the new litmus test? Simulated combat? Fuck you.

[Pam Cummings 9409]

Just now, El Diablo said:

so is this the new litmus test? Simulated combat? Fuck you.

Lol, wow. So like 99% of the argument for owning guns is that they are for protection. So yeah, sorry for wanting to make sure that someone can handle the pressure and ramifications of actually having to use said weapon before letting them run off with it. Fuck me, indeed.

[Pam Cummings 9409]

Just now, BurntEyes said:

Wow this is a terrible fucking post.

Perhaps we should start monitoring paint ball matches too, you know, for those that can't hack it.

Hell, why stop there. If you suck at online FPS games, your second amendment rights should also be pulled.

Also if you have mental health issues, no second amendment rights, which puts the clamp down on a whole string of Liberal Arts colleges because we have to apply it to all your rights.

Jesus fucking Christ that's a shitty post.

See, this sort of hyperbole and bullshit tactic is why people don't take you gun nutters seriously. You just can't have a reasonable discussion about it.

[Pam Cummings 9409]

Just now, BurntEyes said:

Cars are for driving and 99.999% of people are extremely shitty at that too.

Fuck, you just keep piling shit on shit.

Marvelous.

Yeah, but cars have a real purpose in most everybody's day to day life. So they actually aren't comparable to guns at all, really.

[Pam Cummings 9409]

Just now, BurntEyes said:

Take your bullshit to the cloak room.

You're the one showing your ass, sir. I'm definitely calmer'n you are.

[RPM 26073]

I didn't see it CR at all unless you think all gun discussion is CR. I think you're just extremely sensitive and hate a different opinion. That guy absolutely should have been red flagged and kept on a no-buy list.

Edited June 24, 2019 by RPM

[smuggs 9304]

On 6/17/2019 at 1:12 PM, Vic Mackey said:

 

 

I believe this fine weapon to be a Sheffield "Reaper Tac Meridius". This combat-certified piece of equipment is hand crafted in China of 420 stainless steel and can be had for the princely sum of $38.26 over at Discountcutlery.net. 

https://www.discountcutlery.net/SHF11005-Reaper-Tac-Meridius-Machete_p_89841.html

 

 

[Pam Cummings 9409]

14 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

No what you did was bring cloak shit out of the closet with an argument that a simulation should determine civil rights.

Again, take your terrible fucking argument to the cloak room.

Yeah a'ight 🙄

Edited June 24, 2019 by Pam Cummings

[NeverMarryAStripper 21765]

See, this sort of hyperbole and bullshit tactic is why people don't take you gun nutters seriously. You just can't have a reasonable discussion about it.

There is a lot of shit people say that I really don’t want to hear, but I don’t get to pick and choose who get to use their first amendment rights.

[atomheartbevo 88750]

51 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

Also if you have mental health issues, no second amendment rights,

1234.  The system is supposed to keep the mental health cases away from buying/owning firearms.  There are people who do an end-run around it (the Sandy Hook shooter got his stuff from his mom), but for the most part if you have mental health issues or other problems, you should be flagged as not having a right to a firearm.

This instance, and the church shooting, are two cases where people fucked up in the military and should have been flagged as no-buy for weapons.

50 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

Cars are for driving and 99.999% of people are extremely shitty at that too.

If you are shitty enough at driving, you can lose your license.  If you have mental health issues, you can lose your license.

Edited June 24, 2019 by atomheartbevo

[immortal13 4059]

I'd rather not let the government decide who is crazy or not. Opens up a big can of worms

[Blotto 23226]

55 minutes ago, Pam Cummings said:

Lol, wow. So like 99% of the argument for owning guns is that they are for protection. So yeah, sorry for wanting to make sure that someone can handle the pressure and ramifications of actually having to use said weapon before letting them run off with it. Fuck me, indeed.

I dont own a gun and have no interest in owning a gun. I have however fired guns several times in the last few years. Skeet courses and at a buddy's ranch at misc targets. It was fun, and I never once considered it a combat situation. I know lots of people that hunt.

In short, stop being a fucking retard.

Edited June 24, 2019 by Blotto

[Jkwellborn 6536]

The Sandy Hook shooter didn’t get his stuff from his mom. That’s insinuating that she bought it for him or he just borrowed it. Didn’t he fucking kill her first?

[Pam Cummings 9409]

10 minutes ago, Blotto said:

I dont own a gun and have no interest in owning a gun. I have however fired guns several times in the last few years. Skeet courses and at a buddy's ranch at misc targets. It was fun, and I never once considered it a combat situation. I know lots of people that hunt.

In short, stop being a fucking retard.

That's neato. I don't care if those people have guns. I'm sure you and your friends are real responsible. That doesn't mean I think everyone should have unfettered access.

 

Once again, twisting the words of a person who just wants reasonable restrictions on gun ownership into "ban all guns". Not once did i say that.

Edited June 24, 2019 by Pam Cummings

[El Diablo 4232]

1 hour ago, RPM said:

I didn't see it CR at all unless you think all gun discussion is CR. I think you're just extremely sensitive and hate a different opinion. That guy absolutely should have been red flagged and kept on a no-buy list.

Based on what though? Not being suitable for the Army? The opinions of some soldiers? I haven't been privvy to his psych eval or military records, have these been made public and I just missed it?

[RPM 26073]

1 minute ago, El Diablo said:

Based on what though? Not being suitable for the Army?

If the Army didn't trust him with a weapon, he should have been on a no-buy list. Problem would have been solved if they had given him a dishonorable, but they were soft and tried to be nice.

[El Diablo 4232]

48 minutes ago, RPM said:

If the Army didn't trust him with a weapon, he should have been on a no-buy list. Problem would have been solved if they had given him a dishonorable, but they were soft and tried to be nice.

I disagree.  

[RPM 26073]

8 minutes ago, El Diablo said:

I disagree.  

and that's your right.

[immortal13 4059]

1 hour ago, RPM said:

If the Army didn't trust him with a weapon, he should have been on a no-buy list. Problem would have been solved if they had given him a dishonorable, but they were soft and tried to be nice.

No buy list? 

[RPM 26073]

1 minute ago, immortal13 said:

No buy list? 

Whatever it's officially called when they run a background check that dq's you from buying a weapon. Red Flag list? Not on it so not sure what the name is.

[immortal13 4059]

3 minutes ago, RPM said:

Whatever it's officially called when they run a background check that dq's you from buying a weapon. Red Flag list? Not on it so not sure what the name is.

How do you know you're not on it if you don't even know what it is?

[atomheartbevo 88750]

2 hours ago, Jkwellborn said:

The Sandy Hook shooter didn’t get his stuff from his mom. That’s insinuating that she bought it for him or he just borrowed it. Didn’t he fucking kill her first?

She took he and his brother target shooting a lot (she was an enthusiast) and paid for his training.  She was also the reason he wasn't being treated properly - she stopped his interaction with the mental health system after 2006.

She paid for that with her life.

[RPM 26073]

1 minute ago, immortal13 said:

How do you know you're not on it if you don't even know what it is?

Because I can pass the background check and buy a weapon.

[immortal13 4059]

Just now, RPM said:

Because I can pass the background check and buy a weapon.

Ok man, just checking 

[Fondren & Main 6548]

His mom and dad think he wanted to die by cop.  Dad says that his son was a good enough shot and picked a hard target for a reason in his mind.

[Jkwellborn 6536]

That's neato. I don't care if those people have guns. I'm sure you and your friends are real responsible. That doesn't mean I think everyone should have unfettered access.
 
Once again, twisting the words of a person who just wants reasonable restrictions on gun ownership into "ban all guns". Not once did i say that.

There’s no such thing as a reasonable restriction. All gun laws are infringements.

[atomheartbevo 88750]

1 hour ago, El Diablo said:

Based on what though? Not being suitable for the Army? The opinions of some soldiers? I haven't been privvy to his psych eval or military records, have these been made public and I just missed it?

You're right, we don't know what the records were, but his Army buddies said there were a lot of red flags, and from what's been said, it wasn't simply a case of his being a horrible shot on the target range - Hell, he would not have made it out of AIT/OSUT without qualifying.  They would have recycled him into another speciality (the Army needs clerks and cooks).

My few interactions with the Army's mental health systems consisted of testifying in an accident investigation (whether it was suicide or an accident) and reporting a couple of people that I believed to be suicidal (one doing self-harm and writing crazy shit in a journal that he made sure the rest of us saw, another said some crazy shit during basic when we were on a range).  The Army moved fast in dealing with the latter.  

In all three cases, I was fairly impressed, but they had decades of dealing with this stuff and had it down to a science.  I don't believe he was removed simply because he couldn't handle a little stress.

[Pam Cummings 9409]

44 minutes ago, Jkwellborn said:

There’s no such thing as a reasonable restriction. All gun laws are infringements.

People have their rights violated all the time in this country. Yet here you are advocating for this dick cheese. Interesting.

 

Also, if no restriction is reaonable, then why can't a felon own a firearm?

Edited June 25, 2019 by Pam Cummings

[Jkwellborn 6536]

People have their rights violated all the time in this country. Yet here you are advocating for this dick cheese. Interesting.
 
Also, if no restriction is reaonable, then why can't a felon own a firearm?

This may shock you, but a lot of that is bullshit. Sort of like losing the right to vote. Why doesn’t someone lose the right to free speech or religion?