If everyone at the concert was armed this wouldnt of happened

UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
chemphlegm said:
it is nuts and false too. I dont see one state that would legally allow a person with full on dementia, a mental illness, to carry a side arm.
there could be one of course, please share.

Under 18 U.S.C. § 922(d), it is unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person “has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution.”
Click to expand...
Did you miss the vote in Congress to let the mentally ill carry guns?

Guess they didn't cover that on breitbart or fox
 
Unclebaldrick

Unclebaldrick

Well-Known Member
doublejj said:
If I owned this hotel. I would make a big deal out of replacing all window glass with bullet proof glass......they made it too easy for him.
Click to expand...
The weight would be staggering. Not sure it could handle it. Besides, it wasn't those in the hotel that are at risk. It is those on the street and they aren't paying your bills.

Good PR though. Very good PR.
 
Unclebaldrick

Unclebaldrick

Well-Known Member
Hey @whitebb2727, you have been to a gun show yes? Like one of the manufacturer ones, not the resale ones. Look at how they use sex to sell these guns. Do you think that the guns on the right and left side of your graphic sell at the same rate? Using sex to sell a car is fine, a car is not meant to kill.

This is fucked up.
 
Last edited:
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
whitebb2727 said:
Maybe try to learn English better.

Nothing you said makes any sense. Ar's and ak's are not sub machine guns.

They are not "assault" weapons either. All weapons assault.

They are nothing more than a hunting rifle variant. Matter of fact most hunting rifles pack more of a punch than ar's.

An ar15 is one of the smallest centerfire rifle cartridge made.

View attachment 4021046

Every gun made besides a single shot and bolt action is semi automatic.

This guy could just as easy rented a huge uhaul and ran a bunch of people over.

Pistols kill way more people than rifles. Lots of things kill people. How may die from Tylenol and other medicines?

You will never stop killing. Humans have been killing each other since the beginning.

That said I think some discussion needs to be had. I'm open to sensible gun laws.

We need to get to the root of the problem.
Click to expand...
OK, so cars kill more people in accidents than guns do. The difference is cars are used to accomplish an important task. Most people own guns to 99.99% of the time do nothing. Yet they still kill and maim at higher rates than other countries experience.

Also, so what if there are alternatives? Do we have to just put up with mass murder coming from the barrel of guns?

The point I want to drive home to gun owners is they own this problem. They are the right ones to fix it. If they keep denying anything can possibly be done and don't take action to reduce death and injury by guns then the non gun owning majority will lose patience and tell them what to do. I guarantee gun owners will hate these regulations. Recommend looking at the problem as an opportunity and suggesting what can be done rather than criticize what others are saying.
 
whitebb2727

whitebb2727

Well-Known Member
Unclebaldrick said:
The answer is "no". People could use piano wire and a could of cut-off pieces of broomstick to kill. It is conceivable that they could kill dozens per day this way. But they don't.
Click to expand...
Guns are just the weapon of the day. Thousands were slaughtered with sword and bows.

Unclebaldrick said:
Now that I think of it, those guns are all the same the same way that flaming pie is the same as Lahada. I mean, they both have vaginas and breasts, right? But to say that they have the same physcological impact on a person is naive.

The gun manufacturers know what they are doin. To you they might just be a tool, but to many, many others they are not.

Too bad we can't study this. The NRA won't let us - with the help of their pet party, the Republicans, of course
Click to expand...
The guns are the same. The only difference is appearance and magazine capacity.

I don't support the NRA.
 
whitebb2727

whitebb2727

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
OK, so cars kill more people in accidents than guns do. The difference is cars are used to accomplish an important task. Most people own guns to 99.99% of the time do nothing. Yet they still kill and maim at higher rates than other countries experience.

Also, so what if there are alternatives? Do we have to just put up with mass murder coming from the barrel of guns?

The point I want to drive home to gun owners is they own this problem. They are the right ones to fix it. If they keep denying anything can possibly be done and don't take action to reduce death and injury by guns then the non gun owning majority will lose patience and tell them what to do. I guarantee gun owners will hate these regulations. Recommend looking at the problem as an opportunity and suggesting what can be done rather than criticize what others are saying.
Click to expand...
I have yet to criticize. I'm here as a gun owner. I'm open to discussion.
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
chemphlegm said:
it is nuts and false too. I dont see one state that would legally allow a person with full on dementia, a mental illness, to carry a side arm.
there could be one of course, please share.

Under 18 U.S.C. § 922(d), it is unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person “has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution.”
Click to expand...
Laws without enforcement don't stop anything. Plenty of people with dementia own guns. They owned the guns and ammo then got sick. There is no way my neighbor would have given it up.

https://newoldage.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/07/14/guns-in-frail-hands/

Also, the NRA lobbies hard to make enforcement of gun sale regulations ineffective. The time requirement is too short, funding is crap and everything is -- by law -- done on paper.

Don't regurgitate propaganda. The dribble down your shirt is a bad look.
 
rkymtnman

rkymtnman

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
What I'm saying is gun owners should own this issue. What I hear is why we can't. That's denying the issue, not owning correcting it.
Click to expand...
i own guns. it's either or not both.

get rid of all guns but derringers and people will still kill with them

get rid of all gunpowder guns and bb guns will kill still (22 cal with a well place shot)

how do people kill each other in Australia where they basically confiscated everything except for well regulated hunting arms.

human nature is the problem and the desire to kill.
 
Unclebaldrick

Unclebaldrick

Well-Known Member
whitebb2727 said:
Guns are just the weapon of the day. Thousands were slaughtered with sword and bows.


The guns are the same. The only difference is appearance and magazine capacity.

I don't support the NRA.
Click to expand...
Now you have to know that in all the world, among our peers we have the most liberal gun laws. This isn't happening in those other countries. Not with guns, not with bows and arrows.
 
twostrokenut

twostrokenut

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
I'm OK with you owning the same types of weapons used when that amendment was written. Even then, well regulated militia hardly covers what's going on right now.

Just saying that justifying the ownership of guns by calling it "protection" is a badge of cowardice. You trade a false perception of protection for the very real deaths due to mass murder. That's cowardice pure and simple.

There is plenty that can be done to prevent the kind of shit that's becoming more and more common but gun owners are steadfastly resisting all of them. The tides are against you. Gun ownership is dropping from about 50% in 1970 to 32% of all households today. This means 68% of all households do not have a gun. Those households still favor your right to arm yourself to the teeth but that's dropping too. Eventually shit like this in combination with the pigheaded resistance to any form of regulation by the shrinking minority of gun owners will reach a tipping point. Start thinking about how to reduce these mass murders or people who don't own guns will make the decisions for you. The majority will then take action I guarantee you won't like.
Click to expand...
needs as opposed to rights, need I say more Mr cultural Marx?
 
twostrokenut

twostrokenut

Well-Known Member
Unclebaldrick said:
Uh huh. That's the same lame and incorrect arguement you used to keep your confederat heroes up. "next they will take away our statues of George Washington... Waaaaaaah!"

If you are in favor of removing undesirables, please self emigrate now.
Click to expand...
the supreme court is clear. arms means present arms "of the day" not nessecarily relegated to guns.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top