Ongoing Mass Shootings Thread pt 2

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Caleb8844

War Child
Joined
Aug 18, 2008
Messages
662
Writing the "pt 2" made me sad.
 

Attachments

  • ImageUploadedByU2 Interference1466479443.249302.jpg
    ImageUploadedByU2 Interference1466479443.249302.jpg
    49.6 KB · Views: 46
Last edited:
Caleb - I don't have much to add to your last post to me in the previous thread. I think we're on similar pages there.

BVS - the shooter of Jo Cox yelled "Britain first" and a few other similar phrases, as attested by multiple witnesses. In court he gave his name as "death to traitors, freedom for Britain".
 
Just remember, it's not the guns. It's never the guns. It's always everything else.

Knives don't chop tomatoes. People do.
 
Keepin' it classy, this guy :up: :|:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/florida-congressional-candidate-announces-ar-15-giveaway-211148840.html

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (AP) — A Republican candidate for Congress in Florida has launched a contest on his Facebook campaign page to give away a semi-automatic rifle on Independence Day.

Greg Evers announced the giveaway barely a week after a shooting at a gay nightclub killed 49 people in Orlando, which is about five hours drive from the Florida Panhandle congressional district Evers seeks to represent.

"With terrorism incidents on the rise, both at home and abroad, protecting our constitutional rights has never been more important," Evers said. "With all that's happening in the world today, I've never felt stronger about the importance of the second amendment in protecting our homeland than I do now."

Evers has served in the Florida Legislature since 2001, including the Senate the past six years. The National Rifle Association has given him an A-plus grade for the past 15 years.

If we needed any further proof that the NRA needs a serious clue...

I can't help but be amused at the fact that whomever wins this rifle will have to pass background and security checks in order to keep it, though :hmm:.
 
I guess we now know which terrorist organization Congress fears most.

It isn't "RADICAL ISLAMIC TERRORISM."
 
With respect to the no fly lists, surely if they are so problematic, there should be a commission (governments love these) to review them asap and introduce new and consistent processes. As an aside I know somebody who was placed on a terror no-fly list a number of years ago, the father of a friend of mine. He had the exact same name (first, 2 middle and last - most of them fairly common) and exact same date of birth as an individual who was identified as an IRA terrorist. It made for one very unpleasant airport experience but he has always said that to remove himself from the list was actually a surprisingly simple and quick process once it was obvious that he'd lived his whole life in rural Alberta working as a welder.
 
And there will the rare and occasional situation like that with gun purchases as well.

But surely the occasional person having to wait a little while longer to purchase a gun is better than what we have now, unless if course you support terrorist activity, which the NRA, its members and those who take money from them, do.
 
The underlying assumption being made is that the only complications will result from government incompetence. To stick with the Patriot Act analogy, this would be akin to arguing that the only time any non-terrorists would find their calls being listened in on would be in the microscopic number of cases in which you have the same name as an actual terrorist


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
I don't even know the details of the bills introduced (other than one being related to the no-fly list, which, although seems like a no-brainer, I was leery of, because the no-fly list is problematic), but it seemed obvious to me that they agreed to have them introduced just to stop the fillibuster, right?

"FINE, all RIGHT, if we say 'yes,' will you SHUT UP?" Of course they were going to be voted down.

If there's other info I'm missing, I'd love to know, because obviously I haven't read up on it too much.

That being said, of course it's incredibly awful that they are so unwilling to even consider anything. Nope, can't even let the CDC do studies on it. It's important to keep the information going on Twitter and Facebook how many of these assholes take money from the NRA.
 
At the end of the day, it's a tricky balancing issue. More assault rifles means more people die in high profile incidents like the Orlando tragedy. But more assault rifles also make for a much safer country because it keeps he criminals in check.
 
At the end of the day, it's a tricky balancing issue. More assault rifles means more people die in high profile incidents like the Orlando tragedy. But more assault rifles also make for a much safer country because it keeps he criminals in check.


Without picking sides, how many lives have been saved by assault rifles from armed citizens who whipped out their AR-15 to stop a bad guy?
 
Hardly any Americans owned assault rifles during World War II and over 400,000 of them ended up dying because of the actions of Germany, Japan and Italy.

Now? None of those countries can do shit to us. :up:


Americans were in World War II for about four years, so that's 100,000 lives lost per year, meaning that assault rifles are saving that many lives a year now. Wow!
 
Hardly any Americans owned assault rifles during World War II and over 400,000 of them ended up dying because of the actions of Germany, Japan and Italy.

Now? None of those countries can do shit to us. :up:


Americans were in World War II for about four years, so that's 100,000 lives lost per year, meaning that assault rifles are saving that many lives a year now. Wow!


You think armed citizens are why no country can do anything to us? You think THAT is a realistic state of mind?

And like, I see that the second part of your message probably implies you're being sarcastic. If so, it's not funny.
 
I think playing devil's advocate has its purpose.

But good reasons to have assault rifles?

Nah, just nah. :lol:
 
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/mom-used-photo-her-3-192722092.html

Quoting from part of the woman's Facebook post here:

Politicians - take a look. This is your child, your children, your grandchildren, your great grand children and future generations to come. They will live their lives and grow up in this world based on your decisions. They are barely 3 and they will hide in bathroom stalls standing on top of toilet seats. I do not know what will be harder for them? Trying to remain quiet for an extended amount of time or trying to keep their balance without letting a foot slip below the stall door?

No one thinks gun control will be 100% crime control. But maybe, just maybe, it helps 1% or 2% or 50%? Who knows unless we try? Why on earth are there not universal background checks? Where is a universal registration database? Why are high capacity magazines ever permitted to be sold to anyone other than direct to the military? Is that really necessary to protect yourself or hunt for that matter? What about smart guns, where are they? C’mon techies! The 2nd Amendment is a beast to battle and wiping out the right to bear arms is not on the table. Does anyone really think that will be accomplished? Because it won’t. Amended to some extent? Maybe. But how many decades will that take? Where’s the evolution of our so called “living document” for this subject matter? A document that originally allowed slavery and prevented women from voting? NRA, are you even trying? Let’s talk mental health. Where is the $500 million that the Obama administration put into the budget for approval…did it go through? Is it being implemented or just sitting there? Where is the access to care for those struggling with mental illness? Politicians, I ask you...how can I help?
 
If the Left spent a little less time virtue signaling, we'd all be better off. "Do you want children to die?!?!"-type arguments make me, and I imagine others, not want to make common cause.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
If the Left spent a little less time virtue signaling, we'd all be better off. "Do you want children to die?!?!"-type arguments make me, and I imagine others, not want to make common cause.
If your only defense of maintaining the status quo is "Why can't the left be more diplomatic and polite after these shootings?" then I have no issue pointing out that the blood is on your hands.
 
If the Left spent a little less time virtue signaling, we'd all be better off. "Do you want children to die?!?!"-type arguments make me, and I imagine others, not want to make common cause.

:shrug: The right does the same thing with the "children" argument all the time. That's long been one of their many arguments against same-sex marriage, for example, or children being raised by same-sex couples-the supposed "negative effects/influence" of such a union on children.

And then of course there's the abortion issue, with the more extreme pro-lifers shoving photos of fetuses in people's faces, and going on and on about the lives those aborted babies could've had, and so on and so forth. Or how about conservatives who get all bent out of shape about rap music's influence on children, or Janet Jackson showing her nipple at the Super Bowl (kids might've been watching!!!!), or other things of that sort.

So I think the left has every right to pull that same card, especially considering how many children and teenagers have died in school shootings over the years. All the GOP lawmakers who claim to be so pro-life, all the people who wring their hands and go, "But what about the children?!?!" whenever any other politically charged issue that impacts kids comes up, they should've jumped at the chance to do something to stop this sort of tragedy after Sandy Hook, or Columbine, or Jonesboro, to name but a few of the many, many, MANY examples.

But for whatever reason, when it comes to the issue of guns, apparently even kids being killed isn't enough to get some people to budge from their "Second Amendment rights!" mantra, and I just cannot for the life of me understand why that's the case.
 
If your only defense of maintaining the status quo is "Why can't the left be more diplomatic and polite after these shootings?" then I have no issue pointing out that the blood is on your hands.


Just finished explaining how I support gun control and why I don't support some specific gun control measures in the last thread. Perhaps the Left could reallocate their time spent virtue signaling to reading, instead.

I tease. I know you probably just didn't see that. I do support gun control, though. I support gun control because the numbers support gun control. I tire of appeals to emotions. Children can tell me how a bill makes them feel. Win the battle of ideas.

:shrug: The right does the same thing with the "children" argument all the time. That's long been one of their many arguments against same-sex marriage, for example, or children being raised by same-sex couples-the supposed "negative effects/influence" of such a union on children.

And then of course there's the abortion issue, with the more extreme pro-lifers shoving photos of fetuses in people's faces, and going on and on about the lives those aborted babies could've had, and so on and so forth. Or how about conservatives who get all bent out of shape about rap music's influence on children, or Janet Jackson showing her nipple at the Super Bowl (kids might've been watching!!!!), or other things of that sort.

So I think the left has every right to pull that same card, especially considering how many children and teenagers have died in school shootings over the years. All the GOP lawmakers who claim to be so pro-life, all the people who wring their hands and go, "But what about the children?!?!" whenever any other politically charged issue that impacts kids comes up, they should've jumped at the chance to do something to stop this sort of tragedy after Sandy Hook, or Columbine, or Jonesboro, to name but a few of the many, many, MANY examples.

But for whatever reason, when it comes to the issue of guns, apparently even kids being killed isn't enough to get some people to budge from their "Second Amendment rights!" mantra, and I just cannot for the life of me understand why that's the case.


And we've collectively mocked the Right each time. And they've lost. Each time. I'm not really playing team sports, here.

I will never understand the "they did it first!" defense. However, I suppose it makes sense that it would be used in defense of these current gun control measures, as the measures themselves are basically saying the same thing, with "it" being the Patriot Act.

Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
Last edited:
If the Left spent a little less time virtue signaling, we'd all be better off. "Do you want children to die?!?!"-type arguments make me, and I imagine others, not want to make common cause.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference


You realize how silly this is right? What about the "armed teachers will save your children", the "this gun is just aesthetically menacing" memes, or the "I'll be prepared when Obama declares martial law so Trump won't be president" arguments?




Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
You realize how silly this is right? What about the "armed teachers will save your children", the "this gun is just aesthetically menacing" memes, or the "I'll be prepared when Obama declares martial law so Trump won't be president" arguments?




Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference


You realize that this is a non sequitur.

Here, let me give you an example of why this doesn't make sense.

If I were to say, "Fuck Michael Jackson for having child porn," saying, "Hey now! Jared from subway had it too!" is not a good rebuttal.

The Right's has historically done their fair share of virtue signaling. That's why they saw a mass exodus of younger voters. But by all means, follow suit in the name of fairness.

Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
And they've lost? How do you figure?


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference


The issues mentioned were same sex marriage, same sex adoption, abortion, sexuality on television, and rap music. Tell me which of those issues the Right won on.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
"I'll be prepared when Obama declares martial law so Trump won't be president"




Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference


I have canned goods to last years, Reba McEntire and Michael Gross's arsenal from Tremors, and I just kidnapped Mary Elizabeth Winstead to live as my girlfriend in my doomsday bunker when that day comes.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
You realize that this is a non sequitur.

Here, let me give you an example of why this doesn't make sense.

If I were to say, "Fuck Michael Jackson for having child porn," saying, "Hey now! Jared from subway had it too!" is not a good rebuttal.

The Right's has historically done their fair share of virtue signaling. That's why they saw a mass exodus of younger voters. But by all means, follow suit in the name of fairness.

Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference


You're kind of all over the place and not making sense.

Your analogy doesn't work because I don't hear anyone saying, if one more person defends Michael Jackson it almost makes me want to be a Jarrod fan.

And what exactly does fairness have to do with this? If you want to be fair point out both sides, but don't point out one and say it makes you want to go against all logic while you sweep the other side under the rug.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom