It looks like there was one in IN and it was stopped by someone legally carrying. I believe IN just went permitless carry recently, that might only be permitless open carry though. I will need to have a look.
Indiana shopping mall shooter shot dead by armed 'good Samaritan,' police say Multiple law enforcement agencies responded to the scene
At least four people, including the shooter, are dead and others are injured following a shooting at a shopping mall in the suburbs of Indianapolis, according to local reports.
Greenwood Chief James Ison said "a good Samaritan with a handgun" at the scene killed the shooter. He said two others were wounded and are being treated in area hospitals.
So the good guy with a gun wild west is a celebrated solution (small minds)... Meanwhile, almost 400 cops crapped the bed in Uvalde (snafu)... Any real gun control is off the table because the lunatics control the asylum (wackadoodle)... And the only thing the right wants is more guns and more babies to kill. What could possibly go wrong?
So the good guy with a gun wild west is a celebrated solution (small minds)... Meanwhile, almost 400 cops crapped the bed in Uvalde (snafu)... Any real gun control is off the table because the lunatics control the asylum (wackadoodle)... And the only thing the right wants is more guns and more babies to kill. What could possibly go wrong?
Just think if the teacher in the classroom had been armed and took down the shooter while the cops stood outside sanitizing their hands.
Wackadoodle is thinking it is about "more guns". There's plenty of guns, I want guns in the hands of people so they can defend themselves when the people sworn to do so refuse and stand listening to a slighter for 70+ minutes. That is what went wrong.
Having a gun ready to defend ones' self is not a guarantee you will be successful. Not having one when you need it would seem to reduce one's odds significantly.
What the media never reports is how a gun stopped a situation, even without shots fired. I had that experience, here at my house. No cameras came around though.
It appears IN went permitless carry on July 1 and the guy that ended this was carrying permitless. I understand the mall had a "no guns" sign, but they do not have force of law in IN, you can only be asked to leave and if you don't you are guilty of trespass. In light of stopping the shooting the mall and management company have thanked the young lad that stopped the nonsense.
The statistics do show that in mass shootings the bad guy more often than not ends it, either by walking away (rarely) or ending themselves. Ending themselves is usually after they meet resistance, either civilian or police.
I actually read an article this afternoon about this, and in the comments, people were saying "he's no hero. He illegally carried a gun into a place he couldn't". But, not one word about the guy that carried a rifle and started shooting people. Weird, isn't it?
I actually read an article this afternoon about this, and in the comments, people were saying "he's no hero. He illegally carried a gun into a place he couldn't". But, not one word about the guy that carried a rifle and started shooting people. Weird, isn't it?
They won't let the truth get in the way of the agenda.
The truth is something many wish to avoid. You see, a lot of people have no problem with people who are proficient with firearms carrying guns. In a situation like this one they would be well prepared to deal with the situation like this man did. That's a wonderful thing. What isn't wonderful is claiming that anyone who is 18 can go out and buy a firearm and stick it into their belt and carry. That's a dangerous precedent. In a crowded mall such as this many innocent people could get shot and killed by a wanna be hero that can't hit the broad side of a barn. Be careful what you wish for. These people were lucky.
Quote
The chief said Dicken fired 10 rounds from his handgun, and that as he fired, Sapirman “attempted to retreat back into the restroom and failed, and fell to the ground after being shot.”
“He engaged the gunman from quite a distance with a handgun and was very proficient in that, very tactically sound. And as he moved to close in on the suspect, he was also motioning for people to exit behind him,” Ison said of Dicken.
As of July 1, Indiana law allows anyone age 18 or older to carry a handgun in public except for those prohibited for reasons such as having a felony conviction, facing a restraining order or having a dangerous mental illness as determined by a court.
"Come on down to Big Larry's Gun Emporium! You want to strap a gun on and play tough guy? No shooting experience? Never shot a gun before? No Problem! That stupidity is legal now! So come on down today!"
Hopefully the next time this happens the person pulling out the gun knows what they're doing too.
I've not seen a report one way or the other on what training Dicken had.
Training and qualification should never been required by the government for the exercise of a right. That does not mean training is useless or that people should avoid it, but it should not be required for the exercise of a right.
It does seem this time the person stopping the the shooter knew what they were doing and reacted appropriately.
It does seem this man had the proper qualifications. I would think the party of personal responsibility would want everyone carrying a gun in public to be qualified as well. If not this outcome could have easily been very different. I didn't realize the right to own or purchase a gun included the right to carry one around in public even if you don't have a clue how to handle one.
It does seem this man had the proper qualifications. I would think the party of personal responsibility would want everyone carrying a gun in public to be qualified as well. If not this outcome could have easily been very different. I didn't realize the right to own or purchase a gun included the right to carry one around in public even if you don't have a clue how to handle one.
Of course you didn't realize that. The party of "the government will protect me" keeps saying it isn't. The word "bear" means to carry on one's person. It is part of the right protected by the second amendment.
Personal responsibility is not the same as a government mandate. I have said, and I will say it again so you will ignore it again, I believe everyone carrying should get training, I just don't believe the government should mandate what training you should get.
Quote
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Please reread both the Heller vs DC and NYSRPA vs Bruen before you try any lame arguments about what means what. Not realizing "the right to own or purchase included the right to carry one" indicates you really do not understand what the right entails.
You always insist on glossing over the "well regulated militia" part as if if it doesn't provide context. A well regulated militia would infer training.
You always insist on glossing over the "well regulated militia" part as if if it doesn't provide context. A well regulated militia would infer training.
Tell me you've never read Heller vs DC without telling me you've never read Heller vs DC.
So how does a court ruling change what the Constitution says about a well regulated militia? I still find it odd how you will cite federal court rulings that limit states ability to govern themselves when it suits your purpose yet rally states rights when it also suits your purpose.
The issue is quite simple. You either promote that those walking around in our society carrying firearms be qualified to do so for the safety of all or you don't. You either expect that a certain level of accountability and responsibility be required or you don't. Obviously you find that unacceptable. So be it. Stating court rulings based on when Americans carried single shot muskets and single shot revolvers almost 150 years ago doesn't really bolster your case.
You use a court ruling as an excuse to avoid accountability for those walking around in society carrying guns. What the constitution says is very clear. A well regulated militia.
You use a court ruling as an excuse to avoid accountability for those walking around in society carrying guns. What the constitution says is very clear. A well regulated militia.
No, I use a court ruling that explains things in depth. You refuse to read it because it does not mesh with you idea that the government is the fountain of you rights.
Are you in a militia? Have you turned in your guns? Yeah, didn't think so.
No, I, even though I already had used firearms from a young age, took a CCW class to have the right to carry a firearm. Something that all people who believe in the responsible carrying of firearms in public should support. It's a method of regulating that those in our society who are walking around carrying guns have a minimum amount of knowledge to help everyone around them be safer. I don't believe that the government is the fountain of our rights. I do however feel it's the government's responsibility to use common sense as it pertains to the safety of society as a whole. Supporting that any yahoo that's 18 can just walk around carrying a firearm with no required training or known ability to handle that weapon is the exact type of thing government should be making sure doesn't happen. But then you have people thinking anyone who isn't a felon should have the ability to be walking around carrying one with no regard for the safety of others.
Not any yahoo can. People who are prohibited can't. You'd know that if you read Heller or NYSRPA.
So people should get training is a statement you ignore (gotta have that fight). Government mandates have led to out and out bans. No other fundamental right requires training and qualification testing. None.
Common sense is a cop out. And, frankly, you might realize that if you would actually read the opinions of the court. But you wont.
To this point there has been no "fight". Just two people exchanging opposing viewpoints. But you can spin that any direction you so choose. I in no way support any ban on weapons. I in no way support government overreach which has happened in some states. None of which has been any part of this discussion up to this juncture. Yet I'm the one who continues to get blamed for moving the goal posts. I have no reason to read any court decisions that directly rules against what the constitution outright states. Well regulated.
I do however understand that someone who thinks anyone that has zero training in the handling or discharge of a gun should be walking around in public carrying one would disagree and how using common sense in such a matter would be considered a cop out from their perspective.
To this point there has been no "fight". Just two people exchanging opposing viewpoints. But you can spin that any direction you so choose. I in no way support any ban on weapons. I in no way support government overreach which has happened in some states. None of which has been any part of this discussion up to this juncture. Yet I'm the one who continues to get blamed for moving the goal posts. I have no reason to read any court decisions that directly rules against what the constitution outright states. Well regulated.
I do however understand that someone who thinks anyone that has zero training in the handling or discharge of a gun should be walking around in public carrying one would disagree and how using common sense in such a matter would be considered a cop out from their perspective.
You've continued to not read the SCOTUS opinions, doing so willfully so you can continue an incorrect argument. "Well regulated" was know to mean well prepared. I have explained this in the past, you have ignored it. Understand that the founders understood more than muskets has been explained in the past, you have ignored it
Do you understand you are the "yahoo" you are referring to? Maybe you do and that scares you. You are not special. You are not exceptional. You are just some average yahoo. That is part of the point, everyone (even some average yahoo like you) has the right to KEEP and the right to BEAR arms. As long as your reasoning for doing so is constitutional conduct the constitution would protect it. (You'd understand that if you read NYSRPA).
You mentioned doing a TN training class. Good on you. Even if you have the enhanced permit and did the 8 hour class you are likely unprepared. Have you done any force on force training? Should it be required? Did you have to prove proficiency weak hand?
You never were able to answer what training should be required other than a hand wavy "some basic training that shows you understand how to operate a handgun" or similar. This could be accomplished with a 10 minute video, but you wouldn't accept that. Why don't you lay out what you think should be required, and be specific. Quit hand waving and using words like "common sense". Those mean nothing.
Training and qualifications are used to ban people. Tell people in HI that cannot get a permit at all how wonderful it is to require training. MD requires a 16 hour course and 25 shots to be able to apply. Tell the people in Baltimore City how well government required training (and denials until recently without a good and substantial reason) keeps people safe.
Again, I should not be REQUIRED to show training or qualification to exercise a fundamental right, a right that is protected federally (really one of the few things the federal government was supposed to take care of and they messed that right up).
I don't need to prove training in law before I can have my right to due process. I don't need to prove I can think critically before I get to speak or redress my government.
Again, and try not to miss this again, people SHOULD get training. It is their lives they may save with understanding the dynamics of a force on force situation. But no one should be compelled to by the government to have any requirement to exercise the right to keep and bear unless they have given that right away through felonious action. And yes, that right should be restorable as well.
I tend to agree with the philosophy contained in Heller, but no one has really tried to set up a law that establishes different classifications for gun ownership.
To my mind pseudo military weapons like the AR-15 and AK-47 would require a different classification for the gun owner.
I know the 2nd amendment zealots will point to the fundamental right, but I think it is pretty apparent that these weapons more closely represent their military counterparts, than their civilian ones.
Even Scallia noted that it was appropriate for guns to be limited in certain places, and we know that all military weapons are not available to civilians. There are limitations on any right.
So classify the gun, limit the magazine, and for everyones sake, limit or ban the hollow point bullets that are used.
The dude is a hero for sure. That being said did the active shooter have an AR? Regardless, the good guy obviously didn’t need a AR to take the bad guy out. So ban the AR. Easy peasy.
I tend to agree with the philosophy contained in Heller, but no one has really tried to set up a law that establishes different classifications for gun ownership.
To my mind pseudo military weapons like the AR-15 and AK-47 would require a different classification for the gun owner.
I know the 2nd amendment zealots will point to the fundamental right, but I think it is pretty apparent that these weapons more closely represent their military counterparts, than their civilian ones.
Even Scallia noted that it was appropriate for guns to be limited in certain places, and we know that all military weapons are not available to civilians. There are limitations on any right.
So classify the gun, limit the magazine, and for everyones sake, limit or ban the hollow point bullets that are used.
How would you define the NFA and Hughes amendments putting machine guns mostly out of reach? These did establish different classifications for ownership.
In regards to hollow points, shootings in condensed areas like urban housing should would much more dangerous with ball ammunition. Hallow points do not penetrate building material like ball ammunition does. Most of these mass shootings use ball ammunition as well.
The dude is a hero for sure. That being said did the active shooter have an AR? Regardless, the good guy obviously didn’t need a AR to take the bad guy out. So ban the AR. Easy peasy.
Dicken put 8 of 10 rounds on target, starting from 50 yards out while directing people to safety and did so in roughly 15 seconds. It was an exceptional bit of shooting, and he seems to have had his grandfather to thank for his "training".
Most firearm experts will tell you that hand guns are close quarters weapons but the best gun to have in a shooting is the one you have, not the one you wish you had.
I'm speculating the first two shots were the ones that missed, given that distance, but holy cow, if he hit on those rounds, adrenaline pumping, from 50 yards out with a handgun...that's pretty impressive, at least for a noob like me.
The reading I have done suggest the first shot hit. A news video I saw suggested he braced against a column in the food court to make the first shot. I wonder if he assumed the first would be the last. Sometimes bad guys need a lot of persuasion to stop moving about.
Man I wish Frank defended the lives of kids as much as he defends the guns used to kill them.
That’s some real brain dead priorities right there.
But as I’ve said before. Conservatives are selfish. They only care about things that directly affect them. If anybody else is suffering, be he’s not, then he clearly doesn’t care.
Honestly I wonder what would make Frank cry more. The death of a child lost in gun violence, or his gun being stolen.
It’s sad that I’m not even joking. I really do wonder. You dudes who go this hard in the paint over a gun already tells me you can’t be trusted by society with the power of said gun.
Slavery could be brought back, and Frank won’t care as long as he has his gun and nobody bothers him.
It looks like there was one in IN and it was stopped by someone legally carrying. I believe IN just went permitless carry recently, that might only be permitless open carry though. I will need to have a look.
Honestly, I think that's wonderful that this guy was able to stop the killing.... Of course, 376 police officers couldn't take one shooter down in Uvalde.....
Man I wish Frank defended the lives of kids as much as he defends the guns used to kill them.
That’s some real brain dead priorities right there.
But as I’ve said before. Conservatives are selfish. They only care about things that directly affect them. If anybody else is suffering, be he’s not, then he clearly doesn’t care.
Honestly I wonder what would make Frank cry more. The death of a child lost in gun violence, or his gun being stolen.
It’s sad that I’m not even joking. I really do wonder. You dudes who go this hard in the paint over a gun already tells me you can’t be trusted by society with the power of said gun.
Slavery could be brought back, and Frank won’t care as long as he has his gun and nobody bothers him.
C'mon bro, at least be intellectually honest. I have never once said I wanted kids (or anyone else) to be killed. That's really a brain dead assertion to make, and lazy to boot.
There is no reason why people's rights to keep and bear arms can't be protected while still protecting everyone (see, it isn't just children that get killed by people using guns).
I go "hard in the paint" over freedoms and rights. Telling me I can't be trusted because I believe in the right to self defense and know that a gun is the best tool for that is crazy. It is the typical "only a nut would want to own a gun and no nuts should own guns" paradox crap.
I am not even sure how you got to slavery (other than a crackpot emotional argument that is complete horse poop), but that is not congruent with personal freedom either. You are aware that slaves were forbidden to touch arms right? You know, to keep them slaves.
You can continue to spout the Bloomberg-Giffords-Brady-MommiesWantingSomeAction propaganda but keep in mind they want you disarmed while surrounding themselves with armed people.
It looks like there was one in IN and it was stopped by someone legally carrying. I believe IN just went permitless carry recently, that might only be permitless open carry though. I will need to have a look.
Honestly, I think that's wonderful that this guy was able to stop the killing.... Of course, 376 police officers couldn't take one shooter down in Uvalde.....
As if one compensates for the other...
A complete lack of leadership and intestinal fortitude. I do not know how any of those officers could stand in that hallway listening to that and not go take care of business. That was one of the most disgusting videos I have ever seen.
you mentioned that you defend freedom and rights, but there's little evidence of that. the only one you come here to defend is the 2nd amendment. so you want me to be intellectually honest while you try to spin your own posting history. you're not being intellectually honest, here. but again, conservatives operated based on rules for thee, but not for me.
so i'll do you a solid. i'll lay off the snark if you start being intellectually honest and admit the only freedoms and rights you seem to care about is the 2nd amendment. every other right seems to be a "yea, but" situation with you.
don't ask me to meet a standard that you refuse to meet.
you mentioned that you defend freedom and rights, but there's little evidence of that. the only one you come here to defend is the 2nd amendment. so you want me to be intellectually honest while you try to spin your own posting history. you're not being intellectually honest, here. but again, conservatives operated based on rules for thee, but not for me.
so i'll do you a solid. i'll lay off the snark if you start being intellectually honest and admit the only freedoms and rights you seem to care about is the 2nd amendment. every other right seems to be a "yea, but" situation with you.
don't ask me to meet a standard that you refuse to meet.
You are not being honest.
I have had 1A, 2A, 5A, 9A, 10A and 14A discussions here. Most of the current noise is either 2A related or abortion related. I have had lengthy posts about that, including the 9A and 14A implications.
I have to keep reminding a certain poster how 1A (specifically free speech works in regards to previous court opinions).
No, every other right is not a "yea, but" Just because I may disagree with someone on where the right IS doesn't mean I have dismissed the right. Abortion is a great example of this. I have posted lengthy posts on how I feel about and how I approach it from a rights stand point. You may not agree with the approach, but that doesn't mean I have been dismissive.
Now, to be fair, I live in a state that is hostile to 2A. We have an AG that said while being a state senator "I think anyone that thinks they should have the right to carry a gun in public is nuts" and then he was elected as AG. He has been actively hostile to our rights, including colluding with other states to shut down cases head to SCOTUS so he doesn't loose his precious "good and substantial" and he can keep people unarmed. All while watching the murder rate in Baltimore creep up every year since they passed the "Firearms Safety Act of 2013". So yes, I am bit more raw about 2A rights, and right now the court has given us a path forward that some states (NY) are trying to ignore and sidestep. This is a fight I have been in for a long time, and will continue to be in until states realize that 2A is not a second class right and the 2A two step is dead.
This isn't to say it is the only right I care about, but it has been in a special place for me for a long time due to the environment.
This isn't to say it is the only right I care about, but it has been in a special place for me for a long time due to the environment.
Originally Posted by Swish
so i'll do you a solid. i'll lay off the snark if you start being intellectually honest and admit the only freedoms and rights you seem to care about is the 2nd amendment. every other right seems to be a "yea, but" situation with you.
Originally Posted by Swish
Man I wish Frank defended the lives of kids as much as he defends the guns used to kill them.
That’s some real brain dead priorities right there.
But as I’ve said before. Conservatives are selfish. They only care about things that directly affect them. If anybody else is suffering, be he’s not, then he clearly doesn’t care.
so again, when you start practicing what you preach, then i'll lay off. when i see you start going hard in the paint for every other right we have as americans, then i'll lay off. when you finally start posting as if you're aware that no one right is more important than the other in order for our society to properly function, then i'll lay off.
til then, you're selfish and only care about the 2nd amendment, regardless if kids die or not. and you haven't proven otherwise.
This isn't to say it is the only right I care about, but it has been in a special place for me for a long time due to the environment.
Originally Posted by Swish
so i'll do you a solid. i'll lay off the snark if you start being intellectually honest and admit the only freedoms and rights you seem to care about is the 2nd amendment. every other right seems to be a "yea, but" situation with you.
Originally Posted by Swish
Man I wish Frank defended the lives of kids as much as he defends the guns used to kill them.
That’s some real brain dead priorities right there.
But as I’ve said before. Conservatives are selfish. They only care about things that directly affect them. If anybody else is suffering, be he’s not, then he clearly doesn’t care.
so again, when you start practicing what you preach, then i'll lay off. when i see you start going hard in the paint for every other right we have as americans, then i'll lay off. when you finally start posting as if you're aware that no one right is more important than the other in order for our society to properly function, then i'll lay off.
til then, you're selfish and only care about the 2nd amendment, regardless if kids die or not. and you haven't proven otherwise.
Yet you seem to have this belief that 2A is less important that other rights.
You can do your own searches to find discussions of other rights I have had, or not I could care less.
I don't want to see people die. You focus on kids, maybe you should focus on people and not just kids. Everyone has a right to live. That does not mean we need to ban guns you don't like. You continue to confuse you not agreeing with me with me not caring about <insert whatever it is this minute>.
I have clearly been an advocate of other rights, though to be honest there's really been two main discussions rights wise lately, guns and abortion. If you see a 3A discussion point me towards it, I have some good ideas there too.
no, i dont believe the 2nd amendment is more important than any other right.
you're the one propping up the 2a as if it's the be all, end all. so of course from that horribly flawed perspective, someone like me will always appear to value the 2a less than other rights.
that's what happens to people who aren't intellectually honest with themselves, nevermind others.
You are hilarious and desperate at this juncture. You are reaching, as you would say, moving the goal posts and creating situations I have never so much as suggested. As I said, the constitution plainly states "well regulated". I know it frustrates you as it's obvious to read by your posts that I keep pointing that out to you. Nothing you, a court or anyone else claims or says takes that out of the constitution.
And we both know that by "any yahoo" I meant anyone even with zero experience in handling or firing a gun can strap one in their belt and carry it in public. I mean unless you have zero comprehension skills you should have known it. I never mentioned anything like you mentioned in your off the rails rant. Just basic training of how to handle and fire your weapon. A very low minimum standard to help keep the public safer.
I know that is too much for you. I know you don't care if people that have no idea what they're doing are walking around carrying guns. So you keep on ranting, moving the goal posts and showing your outrage. I'm a registered gun owner that owns several firearms of different kinds. I'm a second amendment advocate. As such I think a certain amount of responsibility goes along with owning weapons that can kill several people in a matter of a few seconds. Knowing how to handle and fire that weapon safely if you're going to carry it around in public is the minimum threshold for that.
You continue to advocate careless and wreckless behavior that endangers others. So be it.
It seems the right he cares most about is people who know nothing about how to handle or discharge a firearm having the right to carry such a weapon around in public. Seems like a strange hill to stand on doesn't it? It's not about the 2nd amendment. Having training to carry a weapon doesn't stop anyone from buying, owning or carrying a weapon. It only requires a minimum threshold of responsibility for the safety of everyone around you. As they would say, it's a false flag.
no, i dont believe the 2nd amendment is more important than any other right.
you're the one propping up the 2a as if it's the be all, end all. so of course from that horribly flawed perspective, someone like me will always appear to value the 2a less than other rights.
that's what happens to people who aren't intellectually honest with themselves, nevermind others.
You obviously do not believe in the importance of 2A.
You also, erroneously, believe giving up 2A is the way to make people "safe". I don't believe that, at all.
You continue to be dishonest as you, still, have not even acknowledged other discussions I have had on other rights. You are completely focused on this discussion and then use it to tell me what I do and don't believe. Enjoy your life, I don't need to justify my beliefs to the likes of you.
You are hilarious and desperate at this juncture. You are reaching, as you would say, moving the goal posts and creating situations I have never so much as suggested. As I said, the constitution plainly states "well regulated". I know it frustrates you as it's obvious to read by your posts that I keep pointing that out to you. Nothing you, a court or anyone else claims or says takes that out of the constitution.
And we both know that by "any yahoo" I meant anyone even with zero experience in handling or firing a gun can strap one in their belt and carry it in public. I mean unless you have zero comprehension skills you should have known it. I never mentioned anything like you mentioned in your off the rails rant. Just basic training of how to handle and fire your weapon. A very low minimum standard to help keep the public safer.
I know that is too much for you. I know you don't care if people that have no idea what they're doing are walking around carrying guns. So you keep on ranting, moving the goal posts and showing your outrage. I'm a registered gun owner that owns several firearms of different kinds. I'm a second amendment advocate. As such I think a certain amount of responsibility goes along with owning weapons that can kill several people in a matter of a few seconds. Knowing how to handle and fire that weapon safely if you're going to carry it around in public is the minimum threshold for that.
You continue to advocate careless and wreckless behavior that endangers others. So be it.
I am nowhere near desperate. You can usually tell where the desperation is, it is the one that needs to call other people desperate and can't even have the courage of conviction.
You continue to tell me the 2A is about militias and muskets. If you aren't in a milita and don't own just muskets you are a hypocrite, or you are an elitist who thinks they are better than everybody else. I know which one, when you refer to other people as "yahoos" to make yourself feel better about yourself you are nothing more than another elitist that needs to tell everyone how to live their lives. Please take your nonsense and sit on it.
I won't have another debate with you on this, you are only here to fight and call other people names.
no, i dont believe the 2nd amendment is more important than any other right.
you're the one propping up the 2a as if it's the be all, end all. so of course from that horribly flawed perspective, someone like me will always appear to value the 2a less than other rights.
that's what happens to people who aren't intellectually honest with themselves, nevermind others.
You obviously do not believe in the importance of 2A.
You also, erroneously, believe giving up 2A is the way to make people "safe". I don't believe that, at all.
You continue to be dishonest as you, still, have not even acknowledged other discussions I have had on other rights. You are completely focused on this discussion and then use it to tell me what I do and don't believe. Enjoy your life, I don't need to justify my beliefs to the likes of you.
you just proved you haven't read anything i've posted about the 2a recently. i'm for the 2a and i've made that clear since i've posted here. you also forgot we already had that discussion with each other as to why i'm pro 2a.
the fact that you feel the need to justify, yet fail every time, seems as though you do care enough.
but you're clearly in the crowd that has created an identity around gun ownership. that's the difference between you and i: i view it as a right, you view it as an identity. again, i'm not the one being dishonest here lol
Bottom line. You advocate that people with zero experience have the right to walk around in public that may have no idea how to handle or fire a weapon. You make excuses why the public should be put in danger that way. I advocate for a minimum level of training that insures a basic level of competency for those carrying weapons in public. There it is in plain English. You claim that's an infringement of the second amendment while it in no way prevents anyone who can legally purchase a firearm from buying or carrying a gun.
Everything else is just a deflection on your part.
no, i dont believe the 2nd amendment is more important than any other right.
you're the one propping up the 2a as if it's the be all, end all. so of course from that horribly flawed perspective, someone like me will always appear to value the 2a less than other rights.
that's what happens to people who aren't intellectually honest with themselves, nevermind others.
You obviously do not believe in the importance of 2A.
You also, erroneously, believe giving up 2A is the way to make people "safe". I don't believe that, at all.
You continue to be dishonest as you, still, have not even acknowledged other discussions I have had on other rights. You are completely focused on this discussion and then use it to tell me what I do and don't believe. Enjoy your life, I don't need to justify my beliefs to the likes of you.
you just proved you haven't read anything i've posted about the 2a recently. i'm for the 2a and i've made that clear since i've posted here. you also forgot we already had that discussion with each other as to why i'm pro 2a.
the fact that you feel the need to justify, yet fail every time, seems as though you do care enough.
but you're clearly in the crowd that has created an identity around gun ownership. that's the difference between you and i: i view it as a right, you view it as an identity. again, i'm not the one being dishonest here lol
You weren't trying to tell me we need to regulate "assault weapons" to save kids?
no, i dont believe the 2nd amendment is more important than any other right.
you're the one propping up the 2a as if it's the be all, end all. so of course from that horribly flawed perspective, someone like me will always appear to value the 2a less than other rights.
that's what happens to people who aren't intellectually honest with themselves, nevermind others.
You obviously do not believe in the importance of 2A.
You also, erroneously, believe giving up 2A is the way to make people "safe". I don't believe that, at all.
You continue to be dishonest as you, still, have not even acknowledged other discussions I have had on other rights. You are completely focused on this discussion and then use it to tell me what I do and don't believe. Enjoy your life, I don't need to justify my beliefs to the likes of you.
you just proved you haven't read anything i've posted about the 2a recently. i'm for the 2a and i've made that clear since i've posted here. you also forgot we already had that discussion with each other as to why i'm pro 2a.
the fact that you feel the need to justify, yet fail every time, seems as though you do care enough.
but you're clearly in the crowd that has created an identity around gun ownership. that's the difference between you and i: i view it as a right, you view it as an identity. again, i'm not the one being dishonest here lol
You weren't trying to tell me we need to regulate "assault weapons" to save kids?
you mean when i called them military style weapons based on psychology and identity based off the appearance around the rifle? cause THATS what i said. but of course you try to rewrite that discussion as well. you also forgot that i'm very skillful with firearms.
no, i dont believe the 2nd amendment is more important than any other right.
you're the one propping up the 2a as if it's the be all, end all. so of course from that horribly flawed perspective, someone like me will always appear to value the 2a less than other rights.
that's what happens to people who aren't intellectually honest with themselves, nevermind others.
You obviously do not believe in the importance of 2A.
You also, erroneously, believe giving up 2A is the way to make people "safe". I don't believe that, at all.
You continue to be dishonest as you, still, have not even acknowledged other discussions I have had on other rights. You are completely focused on this discussion and then use it to tell me what I do and don't believe. Enjoy your life, I don't need to justify my beliefs to the likes of you.
you just proved you haven't read anything i've posted about the 2a recently. i'm for the 2a and i've made that clear since i've posted here. you also forgot we already had that discussion with each other as to why i'm pro 2a.
the fact that you feel the need to justify, yet fail every time, seems as though you do care enough.
but you're clearly in the crowd that has created an identity around gun ownership. that's the difference between you and i: i view it as a right, you view it as an identity. again, i'm not the one being dishonest here lol
You weren't trying to tell me we need to regulate "assault weapons" to save kids?
you mean when i called them military style weapons based on psychology and identity based off the appearance around the rifle? cause THATS what i said. but of course you try to rewrite that discussion as well. you also forgot that i'm very skillful with firearms.
So you weren't saying people shouldn't be able to own them? Or was it the barret you were concerned about?
you mean the caliber of bullets, because people don't have a right to every type of round?
you mean i wasn't talking about how the toxic gun identity you're apart of has glorified the military style weapons, and that's where the psychology around the rifles comes from?
So you were saying that people shouldn't own Barrets? Was that a shouldn't own because it is silly to do so or shouldn't own because the government should say no?
It was a while ago and the memory is vague at his point.
So you were saying that people shouldn't own Barrets? Was that a shouldn't own because it is silly to do so or shouldn't own because the government should say no?
It was a while ago and the memory is vague at his point.
So you were saying that people shouldn't own Barrets? Was that a shouldn't own because it is silly to do so or shouldn't own because the government should say no?
It was a while ago and the memory is vague at his point.
I tried to have a good faith argument and you start your "oh you're sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo deserate!" nonsense.
Do you mean this?
Originally Posted by FrankZ
Do you understand you are the "yahoo" you are referring to? Maybe you do and that scares you. You are not special. You are not exceptional. You are just some average yahoo.
Yeah, that sounds like a good faith argument. This is what it looks like when someone throws out the opening jabs and blames their opponent for starting a fight. Once again you are deflecting on who really needs the help here.
C'mon bro, at least be intellectually honest. I have never once said I wanted kids (or anyone else) to be killed.
I don't believe i've ever read where you've wanted kids killed...On that we agree..
I don't wanna look, but you should look up the Stats from when during the Clinton Admin, guns like the AR15 were banned.. Look at how mass shootings declined...Then look at the Stats after that law was allowed to expire. You won't like it.
You can "Go hard in the paint" all you want, but until we have a major drop in mass shootings, your freedoms don't mean anything if it means the death of innocents.
You're the one who spends hours here stalking me every day while claiming you're climbing up the corporate ladder. It must be one helluva short ladder.
Yet here you are. It won't be long until your corporate employers see that one of the rungs are missing from their ladder. Or maybe they won't miss you at all.
Yet here you are. It won't be long until your corporate employers see that one of the rungs are missing from their ladder. Or maybe they won't miss you at all.
This is what I said:
Quote
I work for a Fortune 50 company. I have all the upwards mobility I want, but I have to be the agent of that. They won't just move me up, I have to go earn it. So far it's been a pretty good ride, though I have only been here since 2016.
You imply I said something different then fight about it.
that's freaking tragic. so many things to question here. one of them of course being: who was the law abiding gun owner who allowed their weapon to be easily accessible to minors?
It really hit home. As bad as I feel about Jan 6th and trump. Nothing compares to school shootings. For people like SB and others that support sick people like Alex Jones. It is more than disturbing.
I have two grandsons that I live with one 10 the other 16. When Uvalde happened I could hardly look at them. I could not watch the profiles of those kids from Uvalde. Could not watch the coverage on tv. Did not want to see the parents. I felt useless and really like a failure. I feel a responsibility.
How has this country allowed this to happen? How have we gotten to this place where a gun is the answer? Why should we feel if you are out in a public place you may be at risk?
In all my years I never would have thought Jan 6th possible. The president for over three hours while the capitol is attacked by militia types carrying guns sits and watches tv allowing it to continue? And people support that goon.
What is wrong with us? I have lost a lot of faith in this country. If I was not in the situation I am in age wise and circumstances. I would leave and move to Canada.
School starts Monday here. And i am nauseous about my grandsons going into 4th grade and 10th grade. It should not be that way. But I can not forget we live in the United States. A place where sick people can get guns as easy as buying bubble gum.
His Free Speech company is filing for bankruptcy per Yahoo. Not totally unsurprising. I imagine he’s going to have things structured in such a way to avoid giving out any substantial payments to the victims’ families to the maximum extent.
I'm not criticizing, but I gotta ask............would this news be better served in one of the cuckoo threads rather than mass shooting. I get there is a connection to a mass shooting, but I think the topic is much broader than to isolate a single case. JMO.
He so wants to be a ref on this board that he acts like he's one anyway. He can't help himself. It's an obvious control issue. He thinks this is his class room.
No amount of money is enough unless they took every cent he has. Lies for profit are real. Super Brown and people like him will continue to support him.
He will continue and to ask his followers for money and sell more lies.
If there was real justice he would be in a prison till he died there.
I can only hope that the publicity will damge his abilities to continue his lies.
Just like the scumbag TRUMP- the right wing Republicans will NEVER give their guns away. If the law of the land stated turn in AR-15s and all such guns, JMHO they'd all be criminals before giving the guns up.
Just like the scumbag TRUMP- the right wing Republicans will NEVER give their guns away. If the law of the land stated turn in AR-15s and all such guns, JMHO they'd all be criminals before giving the guns up.
For some reason, Pink Floyd's "Sheep" comes to mind.
Just like the scumbag TRUMP- the right wing Republicans will NEVER give their guns away. If the law of the land stated turn in AR-15s and all such guns, JMHO they'd all be criminals before giving the guns up.
I agree with that. I myself would be one of them. I don't own a AR-15, but would seek to own one if there was a real push for that. It would have to go through a lot of court hearing before it actually happened.
I trust government. I don't trust big brother.
Of the people, by the people, and for the people. It seems the "of" and "by" are less and less and it is more about "for" that has me concerned. A government that is about "what is good for you" isn't the government we want.
Just like the scumbag TRUMP- the right wing Republicans will NEVER give their guns away. If the law of the land stated turn in AR-15s and all such guns, JMHO they'd all be criminals before giving the guns up.
I'm not really sure what this has to do with Alex Jones? He was found to have committed defamation by lying and saying that Sandly Hook was staged. I know people always talk about free speech and I agree. But there are limits. Like slander and defamation. That's the case here and none of that has anything to do with taking anyone's guns.
If you really think it does, maybe you should be going after Alex Jones. I mean let's face it, him trying to be some spokesman for "they're trying to take your guns" while lying and using a crazy conspiracy theory and trying to accuse the families of children slain at a mass school shooting of helping stage the event as his victims isn't a good look nor good for people wanting to uphold their gun rights. Which I happen to be one of.
The Ohio Bureau of Criminal Investigations has seized more than 1,000 firearms and 140,000 rounds of ammunition from the property of two brothers who were fatally shot by law enforcement during a nine-hour standoff Saturday.
The Knox County Sheriff's Office said the brothers, identified as Randy Wilhelm, 56, and Bradley Wilhelm, 53, fired guns at law enforcement vehicles and planned to detonate a propane tank as a bomb rather than face capture before they were fatally shot confronting law enforcement officers.
The state Attorney General’s Office's Ohio Bureau of Criminal Investigations later seized more than 1,000 firearms and more than 140,000 rounds of ammunition from the family's property, located in Monroe Township in Knox County.
The firearms seized are primarily sporting shotguns and hunting caliber rifles and most of the ammunition is target ammunition for trapshooting, according to the Ohio Attorney General's office, which oversees BCI.
The confrontation began around 11:30 p.m. Friday when Knox County Sheriff's office deputies responded to a shots fired call on Gilchrist Road near the village of Howard in Monroe Township, about 50 miles northeast of Columbus.
The sheriff's office said a bail bondsman called law enforcement and reported that his vehicle had been shot multiple times by a suspect. The bondsman was attempting to apprehend Randy Wilhelm, who had failed to appear in Knox County Common Pleas Court on a $100,000 bond, authorities said.
Wilhelm has been under indictment since 2020 for charges including intimidation, menacing by stalking, bribery, felonious assault and domestic violence. On Aug. 2, he failed to appear in court for his jury trial and a warrant was issued for his arrest.
Knox County Sheriff's deputies initially obtained a search warrant issued by the Mount Vernon Municipal Court to search for and seize Randy Wilhelm and all firearms present on the property. During the ongoing investigation involving Wilhelm, detectives had received multiple tips that he had a stockpile of firearms and ammunition, that he had made threats that he would not be arrested and had the skills as a well-known trap shooter and proficient marksman to defend himself, authorities said.
Deputies requested assistance from outside agencies while responding to the scene, including BCI, the Ohio Highway Patrol, Mount Vernon police, Richland and Delaware county sheriff's offices, and Marysville police Special Response Team. Armored vehicles were provided for entering the property, and three of the vehicles were struck by gunfire from the two brothers, according to authorities.
During the standoff, authorities said a bulk propane truck was moved next to one of the houses on the property. They said Randy Wilhelm had previously threatened to use the propane tanker as a bomb if law enforcement attempted to apprehend him.
Ohio Highway Patrol spokesman Sgt. Brice Nihiser said Sunday the suspects shot at an agency helicopter, but did not strike it. The brothers are believed to have fired multiple shots during the standoff, but investigators were still trying to determine how many Monday.
“Any time we’re shot at, that definitely escalates things,” Nihiser said.
Around 9:20 a.m. Saturday, the brothers were riding side by side in a utility ATV toward officers who were outside of an armored vehicle when they were fatally shot by law enforcement officers, authorities said.
“When law enforcement attempted to stop the suspects, an officer-involved shooting occurred,” Knox County Sheriff's Capt. Jay Sheffer said at a news conference Saturday.
At the request of Knox County Prosecutor Chip McConville, BCI continued the firearms search and their investigation is ongoing.
To date, the BCI has been requested to investigate 40 officer-involved shootings in Ohio in 2022. In 2021, the BCI investigated 69 officer-involved shootings; in 2020, 50, in 2019, 26 and in 2018 they investigated 20 officer-involved shootings, an attorney general spokesperson said.
_______
here's my favorite part:
Quote
Knox County Sheriff's deputies initially obtained a search warrant issued by the Mount Vernon Municipal Court to search for and seize Randy Wilhelm and all firearms present on the property. During the ongoing investigation involving Wilhelm, detectives had received multiple tips that he had a stockpile of firearms and ammunition, that he had made threats that he would not be arrested and had the skills as a well-known trap shooter and proficient marksman to defend himself, authorities said.
if these are the kind of clowns who would be participating in the civil war, we have nothing to worry about. all that ammo and "skills", yet couldn't do crap with it. as i've repeatedly said, i would wreck these 2A gun nuts in a gunfight. people swear they bad asses until they face somebody who actually shoots back.
14-year-old boy dies after quintuple shooting outside Roxborough High School, police say
PHILADELPHIA (CBS) -- A 14-year-old boy has died after a quintuple shooting outside of Roxborough High School on Tuesday. The Philadelphia Police Department says the shooting happened shortly before 4:45 p.m. on the 300 block of Fairway Terrace.
Investigators say all five victims were football players. They were shot after walking off the field following a scrimmage involving Roxborough High School, Northeast High School and Boys Latin Charter School.
According to police, a green Ford Explorer drove up and fired multiple shots at the victims and then fled the scene. Police say there were at least two shooters.
"The biggest piece of this is that there is a 14-year-old that is doing again what students do, have football games at the end of the day," Philadelphia First Deputy Commissioner John Stanford said. "One of the things we encourage our kids to do. And for him not to make it home so there's a family today -- again not taking anything away from the other families -- but there's one family that their son won't make it home today and that is the big part of this."
A 14-year-old boy was shot once in the left side and later died at the hospital.
Another 14-year-old boy was shot once in his left thigh. Police say he's stable at Einstein Medical center.
A 17-year-old boy was shot once in his right arm and three times in his left leg. He is stable at Temple University Hospital.
The condition of the fourth victim is unknown at this time, police say.
The fifth victim was treated on scene for a graze wound.
Stanford's message to parents is to talk to their kids about the finality of gun violence.
"Have a conversation about what this means. Death is final," Stanford said. "I know a lot of kids see things, they see TV, they hear things, but I don't know how many of them understand this is final. Death is final. You don't come back from that."
The Sandy Hook shooter was given life rather than the death penalty after being found guilty. I know many people aren't fond of the death penalty, but if this isn't a case where the death penalty should have been used, what is?
The Sandy Hook shooter was given life rather than the death penalty after being found guilty. I know many people aren't fond of the death penalty, but if this isn't a case where the death penalty should have been used, what is?
Yes, my mistake. You seem to feel exactly as I do. I'm one who thinks the death penalty should be used sparingly. But in this case I see no reason this man shouldn't be sentenced to death.
Yes, my mistake. You seem to feel exactly as I do. I'm one who thinks the death penalty should be used sparingly. But in this case I see no reason this man shouldn't be sentenced to death.
I think we should have a higher standard of "beyond a reasonable" doubt for capital punishment. I don't think there is any question in anyone's mind that Cruz did what he was convicted over. I am all for allowing an appeal in capital cases, but this one should have been a death penalty, the appeal should be quick and and the final execution of the sentence done without delay.
Frankly I'd be happy to see him tossed into a wood chipper feet first.
5 dead, including off-duty officer in Raleigh mass shooting; 15-year-old suspect in custody
RALEIGH, N.C. (WTVD) -- Raleigh Police Department said a 15-year-old was responsible for the mass shooting that killed 5 people and injured 2 others Thursday night.
The shooting started around 5 p.m. in the Hedingham neighborhood near Osprey Cove Drive and Bay Harbor Drive.
Raleigh Police Chief Estella Patterson said Friday morning that the crime scene spanned around 2 miles across the neighborhood.
The suspect first shot two people in the streets of the neighborhood before running toward the Neuse River Greenway Trail, where he opened fire, killing three more people and wounding two others, according to Patterson.
Witnesses said the suspect was armed with a long gun, but investigators have not released any confirmation or specifics about the weapon.
Still, terror spread through the city for hours as the suspect remained at large for hours with police calling it an active shooter situation.
Shortly after 9:30 p.m., the teen was taken into custody at Old Milburnie Road and McConnel Oliver Drive. He had life-threatening injuries when he was brought in -- by Friday morning, investigators said he was in critical condition at WakeMed.
Investigators have not said if the suspect injured himself or was injured by officers taking him into custody. His identity has also not been released.
Another thing that remains unknown at this point is the shooters motive. RPD said officers continue to investigate and will release a 5-day report as is customary for incidents like this.
"Today we're sad, we're angry and we want to know the answers to all the questions," Gov. Roy Cooper said Friday. "I think we all know the core truth - no neighborhood, no parent, no child, no grandparent, no one should feel this fear in their communities - no one."
According to the Associated Press, this event wast he 25th mass killing in 2022 in which the victims were fatally shot. A mass killing is defined as when four or more people are killed (not including the perpetrator).
In North Carolina, this marks the 123 mass shooting event since 2013. In total, that violence has resulted in 128 deaths and 463 injuries.
Five people died in the shooting, including an off-duty police officer.
Two other people were injured in the shooting -- one of them remains in the hospital with critical injures; the other, who has been released from the hospital, is an officer.
Reaction to shooting
"My heart is heavy because we don't have answers as to why this tragedy occurred," Patterson said Friday morning during a press conference. "But what I can tell you is that the Raleigh Police Department and the Raleigh community is resilient and we stand strong and we will heal."
Many people are still just trying to process what all unfolded in that neighborhood.
"There are several families in our community waking up this morning without their loved ones," Raleigh Mayor Mary-Ann Baldwin said. "No one can imagine what they're all going through."
ABC11 spoke with one neighbor who can't believe what happened.
"Right now I'm just confused, you know? Quiet neighborhood. I ain't seen so much violence like this in a minute, man. Just shocking, man, you know?" Lavarius Thompson said.
Another resident who spoke to ABC11 said the neighborhood was in shock.
"A lot of police activity, honestly I was actually in the house with my child, my oldest child, and we were hearing a lot of sirens and it was like, kind of alarming because it was more than a couple," Victoria McGraw said. "The most alarming part had to be my youngest daughter, she was with her dad, and he just kept calling me, like what was going on, and he was seeing a flood of police officers coming in and that's when I looked outside and there were police officers up and down the street."
Governor Roy Cooper addressed the city Friday in the press conference with the police chief.
"Today we're sad, we're angry and we want to know the answer to all the questions," Gov. Cooper said. Flags are also at half-staff to mourn the victims.
Law enforcement response
It took a big effort from multiple agencies to arrest the suspect.
Several agencies, along with the Raleigh Police Department responded and were on the ground engaging in the manhunt until the suspect was in custody.
Texas Is Giving Parents DNA Kits So Kids Can Be ID’d After Shootings
The program goes into effect less than a year after the Uvalde massacre, when parents had to provide samples to identify their deceased children
TEXAS PUBLIC SCHOOLS are set to begin providing parents with DNA and fingerprinting kits to aid in identifying their children in the event of an “emergency.” The program, which was set in motion following the 2013 Santa Fe High School shooting, is coming into implementation less than a year after one of the deadliest mass shootings in U.S. history took place at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas.
According to local news station KTRK, 3.8 million optional kits are expected to be distributed to parents of children attending kindergarten through 8th grade as part of the program. The kits will allow parents to keep a description, saliva sample, and fingerprints on file for their child that can then be turned over to authorities should they need to be identified.
Following the killing of 19 children and two teachers at an elementary school in Uvalde, Texas, reports emerged that the bodies of some children had been so disfigured by the shooter that DNA was required to establish their identity. Providing parents with DNA kits to preempt a similar situation was not well received by some Texas parents. “It’s like wiping your ass before you take a [censored],” Brett Cross, who’s son Uziyah Garcia was killed in Uvalde, wrote on Twitter. “Let’s identify kids after they’ve been murdered instead of fixing issues that could ultimately prevent them from being murdered.”
The Lone Star State has had a decade punctuated by devastating mass shootings, Texas leaders have received widespread criticism for implementing stop-gap measures, like requiring students in some school districts to use clear backpacks, all while rolling back restrictions on firearms sales and possession. Despite reports that the Uvalde shooter purchased the two AR-15-style rifles he used to carry out the shooting days after turning 18, and carried out the massacre within days of the purchase, Texas Governor Gregg Abbott refused to entertain the notion of raising the age minimum, or implement other protective restrictions on firearm sales.
As reported by Rolling Stone, in the aftermath of Uvalde, lawmakers and GOP strategists directed pundits and lawmakers to pivot away from talk of gun control at any cost. “Ignore guns, talk inflation,” read one prep memo created for a GOP senate candidate.
The moment is not over for the families of mass shootings, and it’s not over for the parents who are sending their children to school fearing that on any given day they may not come home. In Texas, many of those parents will now be keeping their child’s DNA sample alongside birth certificates and medical records.
Yeah, you're 100% correct. Once again it's far more of a false narrative than an actuality. The timing may have been poor but it's not what the media is presenting it as.
That's true. The only option at that point would be to cancel the ad campaign. Ads are produced well in advance and space is booked well in advance as well. I'm sure Walker has millions in ads booked over the next couple weeks. Nobody in that campaign was going to dig through the ad schedule and pull that. And if they did, they weren't going to convert anybody that was outraged anyway.
And in this case there's really nothing close to what they claim the ad does to be outraged about. I support the LGBTQ community but come on man. Some of these people competing in women's sports have a huge physical advantage. That's just the truth. I guess they gave up on fighting for the rights of women and exchanged that for supporting the LGBTQ community. Because if you support some of these people playing sports with women you certainly aren't supporting equality for women. There's nothing equal about any of that.
There are BY FAR more Warnok ads than Walker ads on tv here. Like 50 to 1. Walker isnt doing much to help himself. I was walking my dog a little while ago and there was a lady going door to door handng out flyers for early voting and to vote for Warnock. GOP doing nothing to help themselves. Typical.
Just posted that tweet. I don't care that it's "mild" it's still an attack on the trans community. And I agree the sports thing needs to be sorted, but the day after the LGBTQ mass shooting was classless. These people have a right to exist, GOPers don't want them to have that.
Just posted that tweet. I don't care that it's "mild" it's still an attack on the trans community. And I agree the sports thing needs to be sorted, but the day after the LGBTQ mass shooting was classless.
Yeah, let’s just keep the conversation leaning toward something stupid a media outlet does or a thoughtless politician says. That’s how we never get to the real reasons behind these massacres, that’s how we forget about the absolute hate the people in this country have for one another.
I gave up trying to have these conversations on the board a while ago. There were times when we could get beyond politics with a slight majority and ignore the extremes. I don’t see that much here right now.
The promotion and peddling of hatred of other human beings is a sick strategy from our leaders and their followers. And everyone ignores it and follows the distractions like dogs chasing squirrels.
Oh, I'm sorry, that wasn't meant as an insult, just a helpful suggestion so you can understand like a thinking person. Read it again slowly, GET-A-BRAIN.
Yeah, let’s just keep the conversation leaning toward something stupid a media outlet does or a thoughtless politician says. That’s how we never get to the real reasons behind these massacres, that’s how we forget about the absolute hate the people in this country have for one another.
I gave up trying to have these conversations on the board a while ago. There were times when we could get beyond politics with a slight majority and ignore the extremes. I don’t see that much here right now.
The promotion and peddling of hatred of other human beings is a sick strategy from our leaders and their followers. And everyone ignores it and follows the distractions like dogs chasing squirrels.
A huge part of the problem we have these days is the tribalism. If "my guy" says something it has to be true, no matter what and if the "other guy" says something it has to be false no matter what. Couple that with headline readers and you get things like this tweet that is not an attack but the seed was planted.
I don't care that it's "mild" it's still an attack on the trans community.
I see the ad as standing up for the equality of women. If you support superior athletes competing against women because they "identify as a woman" then you are saying that the trans community is more valuable than equality for women. Plain and simple. I think you need to stop accusing everyone else of having handlers when it seems at least in this instance somebody has you trained to react without looking at the substance.
I don't care that it's "mild" it's still an attack on the trans community.
I see the ad as standing up for the equality of women. If you support superior athletes competing against women because they "identify as a woman" then you are saying that the trans community is more valuable than equality for women. Plain and simple. I think you need to stop accusing everyone else of having handlers when it seems at least in this instance somebody has you trained to react without looking at the substance.
I don't care that it's "mild" it's still an attack on the trans community.
I see the ad as standing up for the equality of women. If you support superior athletes competing against women because they "identify as a woman" then you are saying that the trans community is more valuable than equality for women. Plain and simple. I think you need to stop accusing everyone else of having handlers when it seems at least in this instance somebody has you trained to react without looking at the substance.
Walmart manager opens fire in break room, killing 6
CHESAPEAKE, Va. (AP) — A Walmart manager opened fire on fellow employees in the break room of a Virginia store, killing six people in the country’s second high-profile mass shooting in four days, police and witnesses said Wednesday.
The gunman, who apparently shot himself, was dead when officers found him, police said. There was no clear motive for the shooting, which also left at least six people wounded, including one critically.
The store in Chesapeake, Virginia’s second-largest city, was busy just before the attack Tuesday night as people stocked up ahead of the Thanksgiving holiday, a shopper told a local TV station.
Employee Briana Tyler said the overnight stocking team of 15 to 20 people had just gathered in the break room to go over the morning plan. She said the meeting was about to start, and a team leader said: “All right guys, we have a light night ahead of us,” when another team leader, who was identified by Walmart as Andre Bing, turned around and opened fire on the staff.
“It is by the grace of God that a bullet missed me,” Tyler said. “I saw the smoke leaving the gun, and I literally watched bodies drop. It was crazy.”
Officials said on the city’s Twitter account that three of the dead, including the gunman, were found in the break room. One of the slain victims was found near the front of the store. Three others were taken to hospitals where they died of their wounds.
Walmart said in a statement that Bing was an overnight team leader and had been with the company since 2010.
At first, Tyler didn’t think the shooting was real. “It was all happening so fast. I thought it was like a test type of thing. Like, if you do have an active shooter, this is how you respond.”
Tyler, who worked with Bing just the night before, said he did not aim at anyone specific.
“He was just shooting all throughout the room. It didn’t matter who he hit. He didn’t say anything. He didn’t look at anybody in any specific type of way.”
Tyler, who started at Walmart two months ago, said she never had a negative encounter with Bing, but others told her that he was “the manager to look out for.” She said Bing had a history of writing people up for no reason.
“He just liked to pick, honestly. I think he just looked for little things to go about, because he had the authority. That’s just the type of person that he was. That’s what a lot of people said about him,” she said.
A neighbor, Alicia McDuffie, said police “swarmed the whole street” in the middle of the night and forced their way into Bing’s house. Her mother, Vera McDuffie, saw officers approach Bing’s front door with a battering ram.
Chesapeake Police Chief Mark G. Solesky said Bing used a pistol. He could not confirm whether the victims were all employees.
Employee Jessie Wilczewski told Norfolk television station WAVY that she hid under the table, and Bing looked and pointed his gun at her. He told her to go home, and she left.
“It didn’t even look real until you could feel the ... ‘pow-pow-pow,’ you can feel it,” Wilczewski said. “I couldn’t hear it at first because I guess it was so loud, I could feel it.”
The attack was the second time in a little more than a week that Virginia has experienced a major shooting. Three University of Virginia football players were fatally shot on a charter bus as they returned to campus from a field trip on Nov. 13. Two other students were wounded.
The assault at the Walmart came three days after a person opened fire at a gay nightclub in Colorado, killing five people and wounding 17. Last spring, the country was shaken by the deaths of 21 when a gunman stormed an elementary school in Uvalde, Texas.
Tuesday night’s shooting also brought back memories of another at a Walmart in 2019, when a gunmanwhotargeted Mexicans opened fire at a store in El Paso, Texas, and killed 22 people.
A database run by The Associated Press, USA Today and Northeastern University that tracks every mass killing in America going back to 2006 shows the number of mass killings this year has been about average, despite recent shootings that have captured public attention.
The U.S. has now had 40 mass killings so far in 2022, compared with 45 for all of 2019. The database defines a mass killing as at least four people killed, not including the killer.
According to the database, more than a quarter of the mass killings have occurred since Oct. 21, spanning eight states and claiming 51 lives. Nine of those 11 incidents were shootings.
Notably, the database does not include the recent shooting at the University of Virginia because that attack did not meet the threshold of four dead, not including the shooter.
Chesapeake Mayor Rick W. West expressed gratitude for first responders’ quick actions and said he was “devastated by the senseless act of violence.”
“Chesapeake is a tight-knit community, and we are all shaken by this news,” West said in a statement on Twitter.
President Joe Biden tweeted that he and the first lady were grieving for the victims’ families. “We mourn for those who will have empty seats at their Thanksgiving table because of these tragic events – we must take greater action.”
A 911 call about the shooting came in just after 10 p.m. Solesky did not know how many shoppers were inside, whether the gunman was working or whether a security guard was present.
One man was seen wailing at a hospital after learning that his brother was dead, and others shrieked as they left a conference center set up as a family reunification center, The Virginian-Pilot reported.
Walmart said in a statement that it was working with law enforcement and “focused on doing everything we can to support our associates and their families.”
In the aftermath of the El Paso shooting, the company made a decision in September 2019 to discontinue sales of certain kinds of ammunition and asked that customers no longer openly carry firearms in its stores.
It stopped selling handgun ammunition as well as short-barrel rifle ammunition, such as the .223 caliber and 5.56 caliber used in military style weapons. Walmart also discontinued handgun sales in Alaska.
The company stopped selling handguns in the mid-1990s in every state but Alaska. The latest move marked its complete exit from that business and allowed it to focus on hunting rifles and related ammunition only.
Many of its stores are in rural areas where hunters depend on Walmart to get their equipment.
Tyler’s grandfather, Richard Tate, said he dropped his granddaughter off for her 10 p.m. shift, then parked the car and went in to buy some dish soap.
When he first heard the shots, he thought it could be balloons popping. But he soon saw other customers and employees fleeing, and he ran too.
Tate reached his car and called his granddaughter.
“I could tell that she was upset,” he said. “But I could also tell that she was alive.”
I don't care that it's "mild" it's still an attack on the trans community.
I see the ad as standing up for the equality of women. If you support superior athletes competing against women because they "identify as a woman" then you are saying that the trans community is more valuable than equality for women. Plain and simple. I think you need to stop accusing everyone else of having handlers when it seems at least in this instance somebody has you trained to react without looking at the substance.
Just posted that tweet. I don't care that it's "mild" it's still an attack on the trans community. And I agree the sports thing needs to be sorted, but the day after the LGBTQ mass shooting was classless. These people have a right to exist, GOPers don't want them to have that.
I agree that the timing was poor... but I support his ad 100%..... I'm a GOPer who supports the LGTB in general.... I don't care what two adults do... I support gay marriage... I don't really care about transgender adults.... I disagree with a transsexual female being able to compete in an athletic event against biological females... I also disagree with the drag show story times with kids and some of the trans education that has happened at some schools... I think the shooter in Colorado should be prosecuted to the fullest possible...
I don't care that it's "mild" it's still an attack on the trans community.
I see the ad as standing up for the equality of women. If you support superior athletes competing against women because they "identify as a woman" then you are saying that the trans community is more valuable than equality for women. Plain and simple. I think you need to stop accusing everyone else of having handlers when it seems at least in this instance somebody has you trained to react without looking at the substance.
And in a new twist out of NY. NY is trying to push 18 hours of mandatory training for someone to get a carry license. They are also decertifying trainers so there is no one to do the training. At least they aren't trying to use mandatory training as a barrier to the exercise of a right and it's just "common sense". Even a heavily biased idiot could see the end game on that one.
They are setting up barriers. That's exactly what the SCOTUS was talking about. Each state has different standards. Some use it as a barrier and some are common sense. Anyone can use an extreme example and try to paint this issue with a broad brush.
They are setting up barriers. That's exactly what the SCOTUS was talking about. Each state has different standards. Some use it as a barrier and some are common sense. Anyone can use an extreme example and try to paint this issue with a broad brush.
No no, don't back track now. You believe in "common sense" restrictions on a right. Don't act like you think this isn't ideal. it doesn't affect you anyway (you made that point before) since you are not in NY.
Why do you continue to lie? I said that "basic CCW training" is common sense. I also made it clear that I didn't support anything beyond that and now you just make up lies. Are you related to trump?
Why do you continue to lie? I said that "basic CCW training" is common sense. I also made it clear that I didn't support anything beyond that and now you just make up lies. Are you related to trump?
I don't lie.
You said you didn't care about other states because you don't live there.
You never answered about your own training. Did you take the TN course or do you carry because TN has permitless carry?
Permitless carry in Tennessee did not become law until 2021. So yes of course I took the training course when I moved here. And no, you're lying again. If I said I didn't care about other states show where I said that. Let me guess, you can't and now you'll just make up excuses why you can't. You just make crap up or have a very flawed sense of imagination. No actually you just make BS up to fight.
Permitless carry in Tennessee did not become law until 2021. So yes of course I took the training course when I moved here. And no, you're lying again. If I said I didn't care about other states show where I said that. Let me guess, you can't and now you'll just make up excuses why you can't. You just make crap up or have a very flawed sense of imagination. No actually you just make BS up to fight.
At least you finally admit to having taken the training.
You stated previously that other states were not your concern. You said, own it. I am not using the horrible search here to find it. It would not matter as you would ignore it and spin it.
There is an unambiguous command in the second amendment. Your mental gymnastics and feelz don't change that.
As I predicted, you have no proof only repeating the same lie. You claim the 2nd amendment should prevent any form of gun training, but it hasn't. It appears many don't see it as an infringement the way you do. Things you claim are open and shut aren't open and shut.
I don't care that it's "mild" it's still an attack on the trans community.
I see the ad as standing up for the equality of women. If you support superior athletes competing against women because they "identify as a woman" then you are saying that the trans community is more valuable than equality for women. Plain and simple. I think you need to stop accusing everyone else of having handlers when it seems at least in this instance somebody has you trained to react without looking at the substance.
I agree as well. Although that has never been the GOP agenda standing up for women’s equalities. The GOP agenda is to take away constitutional freedoms and rights from women, and the lgbt community. To raise taxes on the middle class and reduce taxes for the rich. The add is an emotional fake cry out for votes, and was in poor taste and poor timing. Another GOPer fail. Lol. They make it so easy.
They obviously don't work and aren't intended to reduce crime. They are intended to disarm the American public.
We can only speculate on why the state wants that.
Lol ….as you are speculating carry laws don’t work.
Nothing works right? So do nothing? Right? Nothing is everything to GOPers. Keeps the status quo right? Mass shootings makes money, sells more guns right?
Mass shootings- gun rights, 2nd Amendment. I want to mention something that bothers me.....mass shootings for sure, we are the world leader, sad- easy gun access and nuts....equal mass shootings. Here is what bothers me. Live in Fla, like lots of US states, easy carry conceal laws- we had a guy locally who decided he didn't like a black family parking in handicap spot- black guy with child in Seven 11 getting an ice cream- white guy gives wife and kids in car the business for park in handicap- black male come out, not happy with white guy talking stuff to his woman/wife....pushes/ and knocks white guy down...you got it, white guy on ground pulls out his Glock and shoots black man for shoving him/ and parking in handicap spot.....goes to court....pleads self defense and GETS OFF. Because he thought his life was in danger. Bottomline, US gun culture- stand your ground.....very sad, VERY WRONG, everyone- including me things they know best= but a black family or any family loses a father over a shove and a handicap parking spot.....THAT STINKS. And it bothers me a bunch. World ain't fair. Sure wish folks could let small stuff slide, cuss you NEVER know what could cost you your life.
I've had complete idiots pull a gun on me three times in public. Once, just outside a bar on a late weekend night, when my buddy got jumped, a guy about half my size come from behind and put his 380 just behind my temple and said, "stay out of this." I slowly turned my head to see him, only to realize how small he was and that he was shaking! His friend put him up to it because I was fresh out of boot camp wearing a uniform, and he didn't want to fight me. My best friend's big brother was there though and knew this guy. He walk right up to him, talking calmly, and reached out, putting his thumb between the hammer and the firing pin and just took his gun, probably saving my life. The whole episode lasted two minutes tops, but it was a terrifying two minutes for me.
The second time was in the parking lot of Westland Mall in my early thirties. I was trying to turn left into a parking spot another guy was backing out of when a punk ass kid, 20-ish, comes the other way and stole the spot. I had my signal on waiting and couldn't believe he just did it. I look at him and said, "you're an fn a-hole," but using the actual words. So he pulls a big desert-eagle-looking gold-tone gun and points it at me, and asks, "how bad you want it?" I pulled away saying "to that ad,' and I was shook, couldn't believe a kid pulled a gun on me over a parking spot.
The third time I was walking to a friend's car with him to go on a sales call from an office building on James Rd. My friend is 6'3" and about 290 lbs at this time. We get to his car and go to get in when two black guys came up behind us without us knowing and pulled a gun to rob us. They both looked to be about 19-20 years. They got him for like 5 bucks cash and some lottery scratch-offs. The second guy come to me and saw I had no wallet on me and then bolted. My wallet was inside my suit jacket, luckily. We were scared at the time due to the gun, but after a day or two we were more upset we let it happen. We both knew better and were more aware, but were caught up in conversation and distracted.
I've been shot at as well, or at least I thought I was being shot at. My older cousin and I were night fishing, and some kids wanted to scare us. At first, they were sneaking up on us in the woods, and my cousin started talking crap out loud. I thought it was an animal, but it was people, so he yelled at me to bring him the pistol from the tackle box (we didn't have a gun). This scared them off though, but they came back later and fired a rifle in the air five or six times in a half-minute span. We were ducking and diving all over the place when the laughter started roaring out of the woods. It was kids that knew him from school. I was only around 13 and thought we were going to die that night. Never fished with him again.
I've been in many scrapes over the years with battle scars to prove it, but I was never dumb enough to fight an idiot with a gun. And in my opinion, there are about 20% more idiots today. Soft-ass men who would never throw a fist but will draw a gun on somebody are the most dangerous fools in the world. Most would never want to kill you, but being nervous, scared, and stupid or suddenly under a threat of their own doing, they man up and pull out their equalizers... This usually goes bad.
You also have the same or similar type of idiot that get napoleon complex when they get a gun. The gun makes them FEEL tough. Personally I think we need gun better and more rezsterictive laws, but what we need MUCH MORE than that is less idiots.
They obviously don't work and aren't intended to reduce crime. They are intended to disarm the American public.
We can only speculate on why the state wants that.
Lol ….as you are speculating carry laws don’t work.
Nothing works right? So do nothing? Right? Nothing is everything to GOPers. Keeps the status quo right? Mass shootings makes money, sells more guns right?
Current laws don't do much to prevent murder. I am not sure why you and others seem to think more laws is the answer. The availability of a gun isn't what makes a person go out and shoot people. If people followed existing laws, we wouldn't have any crime, right?
Mass shootings- the media/press sell ads- make money with clicks--bigger problem by far is SUICIDE by gun. We hold ourselves, US citizens as smartest, best, etc- yet gun wise, CANADA- similar to us culturally, seems WAY smarter on guns. Strict laws, guns for hunting and "fun at range"- NOT for self protection. Check the death numbers- WAY different. Gun owners/advocates PREACH people kill folks, not guns----BUT, availability and "crisis situations"/ mental illness/personal problems sure lead to LOTS of innocent dead.
Our fellow human beings to south- Mexico, South American- they real sweet with guns/ they kill each other lot more than we do- they buy, smuggle guns/ more gangs, drugs, than US- so don't think we are the only nation with the "Wild West"- guns rule/ not law.
I'm for the Canadian model- a law abiding citizen has NO access to assault weapons- has hunting and "fun guns", but military and cops only ones with most types of guns.
Lastly, Americans don't trust government, thus- I'm free and I will keep my freedom with MY guns. How many times has the government attacked "the people". Which police departments have ordered marshall law/ took control of city, when has our military ATTACKED our cities/ states and taken over. Do the roads get fixed/mostly, do kids get educated/mostly, who's REALLY afraid of US government....JMHO, that is complete BS. NRA, gun manufactures, other special interests- they are a HUGE piece of why we keep kill ourselves. MONEY and stupidity= why we will always kill each other with guns forever. We, Americans, have 65% of ALL world's guns....why? Safety, right.
This is about the truth of it. We're completely desensitized to this at colleges now. It's ongoing, and I couldn't find a single station carrying it/reporting. CNN did write about it and Tweet. But that's the only major outlet I've seen. Eve's post is a good example of this.
It's been a couple years since I posted my well-worn catch phrase, reserved for times like this. I suppose it's appropriate to drag it out again... since hundreds of mass shootings have taken place since then. This time? Oh yeah- another school. We don't discriminate. We make sure that colleges, high schools and K-8 get equal doses of lead poisoning.
I can see no workable solution to this "problem." The genie is already out of the bottle. There are now officially more lethal firearms in America than there are Americans (120.5 guns/100 people).
I placed the word 'problem' in quotes, because I personally don't see it as a problem at all. Instead, I see it as a natural consequence of our 2A, as currently interpreted/expressed.
................
Freedom is not now, never will be, and has never been free.
Each and every one of our freedoms comes at a price. Our freedom to drive from Long Island, NY to Long Beach, CA comes at the price of abiding traffic laws, acquiring driver's licenses/reg's, insurance and perhaps even making car payments. Our freedom to do so while impaired comes at the price of civil lawsuits/jail time, should something untoward happen due to our irresponsibility. Those are examples of personal freedoms/costs we individual Americans take for granted, as 'EveryDay's Price of Admission.' Our societal freedoms come at a price, as well. This law is universal. People? Societies? No difference. Every right/freedom we 'enjoy' exacts a price from us.
Our societal freedom to own lethal weapons comes at the price of wet holes in human flesh. Direct correlation. Cause/effect.
There is no escaping this fact.
The 'evolution' of the internet since its advent has truly opened my eyes to one major revelation: mental health issues in our community are deeper and more pervasive than I ever imagined- by at least an order of magnitude. And now, we are all armed to the teeth with devices that that can end another's life in less than 2 seconds.
We should all just skip the pretense and performative hand-wringing. We should all dispense with the hollow, insulting "thoughts/prayers" cliché... and become adults about this whole thing. We should accept our reality: America has wet streets and 3 ft. caskets because this is the America we've created.
A more expansive and thoughtful version of my opinion that anyone and everyone who is an advocate for gun rights and who is unwilling to explore any form of reform or government regulation - is 100% happy to accept these mass shootings and people of all ages - young and old - being slaughtered. Because that's just the way it will always remain without some effort to change. Even with change it will probably continue because there is no miracle solution - but at least to attempt change is to attempt to stop or reduce these deaths instead of accepting them.
Wish I knew the answer to mass shootings. I do not know of a way to eliminate them entirely.. Doubt there is really a way to do it.
People that are nutty enough to shoot a bunch of folks like this are going to find a gun somewhere. That ship has sailed. So getting rid of guns or outlawing them simply won't do the job.
I have one thought on the matter and it requires the NRA and other gun related organizations to come out in favor of gun safety and control and not just mouthing the words... They gotta quit saying everyone needs a gun.. we all know that there are unstable folks out there that most of us don't want to see carrying a gun of any kind.
We all know the NRA won't do that. We know they are supported by Gun makers. The NRA helps them increase sales.
I saw a photo of a guy carrying a semi auto rifle into a Dunkin Donuts store.. Can someone explain why he felt the need to do that. I mean was he afraid he'd be attacked by a donut?
My take… this country needs a psychiatric evaluation. We’re a mentally unhealthy bunch. Mental health hospitals need reopened and funded. We need to start real dialog about mental health from an early age. We need to not ostracize those that seek help. We need to encourage more youth mental health councilors in our schools, starting at a young age. Insurances need to cover more extensive mental health visits. (Many insurances only have a small set number of yearly visits allowed.) Patients that have doctors writing scripts for mood altering drugs should also have a script for seeing a psychiatrist… period. Next we need to, by whatever means, get the wage gap under control. We have a bunch among us that have essentially given up. They know that things such as home ownership, raising a family, or saving for retirement is out of reach while making $12-20hr in many places around the country. (And the “just move” crowd can stifle it. It’s expensive to move and not everyone wants to uproot from their family tree.) People that feel purposeless give up. When we combine ‘nothing to live for’ with underlying unresolved mental health issues… sprinkle in far too many guns… Murika.
We also need an ad campaign to show people that the influencers and reality TV lifestyles are not the norm, and many are not even real.
We have a culture that is often thinking others are somehow way better off than the rest of us, and don't understand that most of it is smoke and mirrors, and that most people are in the same simple life as them.
The guy driving the fancy Audi 8, is probably up to his eyeballs in debt. The family living in the big house on the corner, spend every penny earned paying for and maintaining that house, while putting all their other expenses and vacation on credit.
Do you honestly believe that is the main motivation for mass shootings?
Mass shootings are motivated by different things but what you posted is pretty low on the list. You have everything from mental health issues which this nation broke down the mental health system at one time and hasn't adequately built back up. You have mass shootings motivated by hatred for people that are not like themselves. The hatred of people that don't think and share the same views as themselves. You have mass shootings because people become isolated, alone and desperate. Hell, you even have mass shootings because young guys can't get laid. The list is a long one. But I highly doubt "they're rich and famous while I'm broke and unknown" scartches the surface here.
Good points about mental health- PEW research- gun shootings- up 25% last decade- progress. Multiple gun owners, guns the answer- makes it easier for suicides and accidental home shootings- how many owners really use gun safes vs. just in a drawer. In Florida, a black man shot dead because he pushed wrong guy to ground...and, yes, he and his family parked in a handicap spot illegally which got the white guy's attention- dead for parking wrong- not good. Black lives matter- only when any cop causes a death. Black lives don't matter when the thousands killed by their "brothers" do the killing- check the stats and prisons. We got lots of problems- JMHO, more guns are not the answer. Peace.
One of the things that concerns me is why there isn't more laws that hold people to account over being responsible with their guns. I mean a six year old shot a teacher at his school for God's sake! We see cases all the time where a small children shoot another child or someone else. Does the gun owner and parent have no legal responsibility for that? And while I know because there seems to be no common sense involved in such discussions, why do people that have guns stolen out of their unlocked cars hold no responsibility for those guns being used in future crimes? Oh I already know the replies because I've seen them before on here.
"Leaving a gun in your car isn't a crime but stealing that gun is a crime. Why punish the one who didn't commit a crime?" So I guess we can just ignore punishing people who don't live up to their responsibility as a firearm owners. All of the freedoms with none of the responsibility. Wonderful.
Do you honestly believe that is the main motivation for mass shootings?
Mass shootings are motivated by different things but what you posted is pretty low on the list. You have everything from mental health issues which this nation broke down the mental health system at one time and hasn't adequately built back up. You have mass shootings motivated by hatred for people that are not like themselves. The hatred of people that don't think and share the same views as themselves. You have mass shootings because people become isolated, alone and desperate. Hell, you even have mass shootings because young guys can't get laid. The list is a long one. But I highly doubt "they're rich and famous while I'm broke and unknown" scartches the surface here.
Not directly to mass shootings, but I believe it's related the mental health/depression we see. People are constantly fed an unrealistic portrayal of life. Add in the social media trolling and personal attacks, and I can see how someone falls into a deep hole of self loathing, that can lead to unimaginable events.
My post was more a reply to Portlands post about needing mental evaluation availability, and how social media's role in that.
I really don't disagree with you about online bullying bringing on and complicating mental issues and depression that contribute to some of these shootings. As far as things such as reality TV and things like online influencers creating a false sense of reality contributing we'll just have to agree to disagree.
Every Dunkin has one. He shoots the holes in the donuts, bro!
Amazing, you can find the humor in that but can't find or offer a solution....
You want me to offer a solution to a dude taking a gun into a Dunkin??
You're rather easily amazed. It was a joke, it would be funny to some -- obviously not to you. Your joke "was he afraid he may be attacked by a donut?" was fine though, because you offered a solution... Make the NRA quit telling people they need a gun as a way to stop mass shootings.
Every Dunkin has one. He shoots the holes in the donuts, bro!
Amazing, you can find the humor in that but can't find or offer a solution....
You want me to offer a solution to a dude taking a gun into a Dunkin??
You're rather easily amazed. It was a joke, it would be funny to some -- obviously not to you. Your joke "was he afraid he may be attacked by a donut?" was fine though, because you offered a solution... Make the NRA quit telling people they need a gun as a way to stop mass shootings.
No, I want you to take it seriously which clearly you do not. I want you to explain why he carried a gun in to a donut shop.. I want you to explain the need to carry a gun like as if it was the Wild Wild West!
Are Americans wanting a Gunfight at the OK corral?
Are gun toting Americans thinking this is the only way they can protect themselves from the liberal elite that want to come and eat your children is to carry weapons used in WAR?
What's next, M1A1 Abrahams tanks on main street USA to protect against pedophiles that want to run a brothel in the basement of a pizza shop in DC and then take over the world?
This is NOT a laughing matter.. But clearly some folks just don't get it. Ask the families that have lost children....
We have people that fight abortion just so kids can be born only to be shot dead in High School. Tell me how much sense that makes!
Every Dunkin has one. He shoots the holes in the donuts, bro!
Amazing, you can find the humor in that but can't find or offer a solution....
You want me to offer a solution to a dude taking a gun into a Dunkin??
You're rather easily amazed. It was a joke, it would be funny to some -- obviously not to you. Your joke "was he afraid he may be attacked by a donut?" was fine though, because you offered a solution... Make the NRA quit telling people they need a gun as a way to stop mass shootings.
No, I want you to take it seriously which clearly you do not. I want you to explain why he carried a gun in to a donut shop.. I want you to explain the need to carry a gun like as if it was the Wild Wild West!
Are Americans wanting a Gunfight at the OK corral?
Are gun toting Americans thinking this is the only way they can protect themselves from the liberal elite that want to come and eat your children is to carry weapons used in WAR?
What's next, M1A1 Abrahams tanks on main street USA to protect against pedophiles that want to run a brothel in the basement of a pizza shop in DC and then take over the world?
This is NOT a laughing matter.. But clearly some folks just don't get it. Ask the families that have lost children....
We have people that fight abortion just so kids can be born only to be shot dead in High School. Tell me how much sense that makes!
Why did he carry a gun into a donut shop?
My guess would be because he could, and he wanted to get a rise out of people. The problem is that it is people like him that project a bad image on the typical gun owner who would never consider doing such a thing.
Sadly, that is what we typically see, is that the worst of a group, becomes the identity for the whole group in the eyes of many.
I think it's the reality of all the victims that paints that identity. Corpses have a way of doing that. I don't actually disagree with you about how the average gun owner is certainly not represented by the extreme that commits these terrible acts. But with children being shot down in our schools, people being shot in stores, at their offices and almost anywhere you can think of, I don't think it's unrealistic for people to be concerned and outraged about it. While these victims too do not paint the a large percentage of people as a whole, just like these people committing mass shootings do not represent the average gun owner, with more mass shootings in 2023 than we've had days in this year, the reason for the portrayal and the outrage in society for me is understandable.
I think the total unwillingness of the far right extreme to oppose and fight against any reasonable gun legislation helps fuel these perceptions by the public. It's much like the debate we've had on this board many times. As a gun owner of several firearms myself, I think it's reasonable that in order for a person be able to legally carry a firearm in public, they should be required to complete a gun safety course. But as we've seen in many states, they keep passing laws for open carry with no required standard to confirm you are safe with a gun.
Sometimes I think it's those who fight any and all common sense gun regulations such as this that provide ammunition for those who oppose guns. I don't see the fault lying with either side in what the perception has become. As per usual I see it as a combination of both.
I think part of that problem is the people in charge. Too often everything is the extreme. "Don't take our guns", " We want a full Ban" When the truth is in the middle somewhere but we can't seem to get the emotions under control enough to have mature conversations on the topic.
I don't disagree with you in principal when it comes to the extremes of both sides. But as I addressed above, even when a common sense middle ground like a gun safety course to carry a gun in public becomes something that not only does one extreme oppose, but the elected officials in state after state does away with, the public at large, as well as myself, see that as one extreme is now dictating that anything that resembles common sense be thrown out the window. So while you may call that the extreme, it seems far more like the mantra of Republican governors and legislatures across the country. Which certainly helps paint the picture that it's not just the extreme who is unwilling to meet in the middle, but mainstream Republicans.
I don't disagree with you in principal when it comes to the extremes of both sides. But as I addressed above, even when a common sense middle ground like a gun safety course to carry a gun in public becomes something that not only does one extreme oppose, but the elected officials in state after state does away with, the public at large, as well as myself, see that as one extreme is now dictating that anything that resembles common sense be thrown out the window. So while you may call that the extreme, it seems far more like the mantra of Republican governors and legislatures across the country. Which certainly helps paint the picture that it's not just the extreme who is unwilling to meet in the middle, but mainstream Republicans.
That is kind of my point. But it's not just a Rep problem. Dem cities have all out bans, yet they still have issues. And we will always have issues until everyone is willing to really listen to each other and work towards a resolution that is good for both sides of the argument, but we can't get there if people are going to hold their grudges, and claim everything is an all or nothing proposition, and figuratively put their fingers in their ears and sing la la la while the other side is talking.
I think gun bans are a ridiculous solution. Even strict state gun laws fall into that category. I mean how difficult is t to cross state lines or go outside your city to purchase a firearm? But to me that's more of a political talking point than anything. "Look how strict their gun laws are and they still have a high murder rate. So strict gun laws do nothing." Well of course they don't. Because their actions were also political. It's not complicated to understand you can just leave the city or cross state lines to purchase a firearm. So to that end I think we agree. Both sides use it as a political tool in a lot of situations.
On a national level I have seen what I consider common sense gun control legislation presented that has been denied. So to me it runs deeper than just a state or local problem.
Every Dunkin has one. He shoots the holes in the donuts, bro!
Amazing, you can find the humor in that but can't find or offer a solution....
You want me to offer a solution to a dude taking a gun into a Dunkin??
You're rather easily amazed. It was a joke, it would be funny to some -- obviously not to you. Your joke "was he afraid he may be attacked by a donut?" was fine though, because you offered a solution... Make the NRA quit telling people they need a gun as a way to stop mass shootings.
No, I want you to take it seriously which clearly you do not. I want you to explain why he carried a gun in to a donut shop.. I want you to explain the need to carry a gun like as if it was the Wild Wild West!
Are Americans wanting a Gunfight at the OK corral?
Are gun toting Americans thinking this is the only way they can protect themselves from the liberal elite that want to come and eat your children is to carry weapons used in WAR?
What's next, M1A1 Abrahams tanks on main street USA to protect against pedophiles that want to run a brothel in the basement of a pizza shop in DC and then take over the world?
This is NOT a laughing matter.. But clearly some folks just don't get it. Ask the families that have lost children....
We have people that fight abortion just so kids can be born only to be shot dead in High School. Tell me how much sense that makes!
Why did he carry a gun into a donut shop?
My guess would be because he could, and he wanted to get a rise out of people. The problem is that it is people like him that project a bad image on the typical gun owner who would never consider doing such a thing.
Sadly, that is what we typically see, is that the worst of a group, becomes the identity for the whole group in the eyes of many.
I have no doubt it's for show.. But this something the NRA CAN do. They can teach their membership that just because something is legal, doesn't make it smart or even close to being right.
There are tons of good honest citizens that are responsible gun owners. One of them is a friend of mine. He's always got a gun on him.. ALWAYS..... but never flaunts it. Never would he ever walk into a donut shop or grocery store etc with his gun hanging over his shoulder. He's aware that it gives gun owners a bad name...
We never talk about the good guys that own guns...(or rarely anyway) They pay their NRA dues, stay out of the news, don't go shooting up a bar or nightclub or grocery store or public school or university campus. They'd never do that. But they get lumped in with the trash and unstable folks that would.
I would love to see a faction of the NRA that is made up of those responsible gun owners stand up and move the organization to do something to curb these senseless shootings. I'm sure they don't want the black eye they keep getting from those that oppose them.
First off I could not find a single city in the US that has an all out ban on having guns. Maybe selling? IDK.
Anyways the facts show…… A study published in January by a leading non-profit organization that focuses on gun violence prevention found that there is a direct correlation in states with weaker gun laws and higher rates of gun deaths, including homicides, suicides and accidental killings.
The study by Everytown for Gun Safety determined that California had the strongest gun laws in the country. Hawaii topped the list with the lowest rate of gun deaths in the country while Mississippi led the country with both the weakest gun laws and highest rate of gun deaths.
“What this project does, is show what we’ve been saying for years: Gun laws save lives,” said Nick Suplina, senior vice president of law and policy at Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund. “We think this is going to be a really important tool for lawmakers, reporters and advocates that have been looking for the kind of visual tool that can make that case clearly.”
I looked at your link and excuse me if I disagree w/the conclusions you typed out.
From the link.......Cities w/the Strictest Gun Laws: New York, San Fran, Philly, Baltimore, Chicago, and Las Vegas. I'm not sure about Vegas, but I wouldn't refer to any of the other cities as safe or doing a great job of saving lives.
First off I could not find a single city in the US that has an all out ban on having guns. Maybe selling? IDK.
Anyways the facts show…… A study published in January by a leading non-profit organization that focuses on gun violence prevention found that there is a direct correlation in states with weaker gun laws and higher rates of gun deaths, including homicides, suicides and accidental killings.
The study by Everytown for Gun Safety determined that California had the strongest gun laws in the country. Hawaii topped the list with the lowest rate of gun deaths in the country while Mississippi led the country with both the weakest gun laws and highest rate of gun deaths.
“What this project does, is show what we’ve been saying for years: Gun laws save lives,” said Nick Suplina, senior vice president of law and policy at Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund. “We think this is going to be a really important tool for lawmakers, reporters and advocates that have been looking for the kind of visual tool that can make that case clearly.”
My use of the term "all out Ban" was incorrect, but I think you got the point. Bans aren't making cities any safer, we will never put all the guns back in the box, so we need to find an alternate solution. But that won't happen as long as the politician can use it as a tool to control thing, people and votes. Too many people want to stand in the middle the argument rather than step outside and look at what is truly happening, or better yet, not happening.
Do you really think the politicians really give a damn about gun control? Maybe a little, but it is more about a tool, like the environment, like wages, like social programs. They are tools to keep the people in check by pushing the pendulum one way or another depending on the times.
Maybe I am just becoming very cynical in my later years, but in all my time on this earth these arguments have been going back and forth with no solutions. So much like the Browns no matter who they put on the field, I don't believe they are a contender until they start to show it.
They can try to use that info but all you'll get out of the NRA and those that simply stonewall gun safety is that it's a study by a left week elite and of course they'd say these things LOL Sorry,, I just have no faith in the Right
I looked at your link and excuse me if I disagree w/the conclusions you typed out.
From the link.......Cities w/the Strictest Gun Laws: New York, San Fran, Philly, Baltimore, Chicago, and Las Vegas. I'm not sure about Vegas, but I wouldn't refer to any of the other cities as safe or doing a great job of saving lives.
Maybe stick to the political cartoons?
Cherry picking big cities with huge gun violence issues and using them to debate the impact of gun regulations seems rather skewed.
There are plenty of reports and studies online if someone wants to spend some time looking and reading. Some of the reports are very partisan and skewed. Many are very neutral and simple. Bottom line the impact of gun regulations doesn't have to have a significant impact to make a big difference to people's lives. A 1% reduction in homicide rates means 2500-2600 more Americans alive each year. potentially something like 2300 less suicides.
I have no doubt it's for show.. But this something the NRA CAN do. They can teach their membership that just because something is legal, doesn't make it smart or even close to being right.
Originally Posted by Damanshot
They can try to use that info but all you'll get out of the NRA and those that simply stonewall gun safety is that it's a study by a left week elite and of course they'd say these things LOL Sorry,, I just have no faith in the Right
Just an FYI for facts.
When I got my concealed carry license, I did not do the gun show classes, since my wife and son where also getting licenses, I signed us up for an NRA approved instructor, NRA class. There were multiple times in the 3 day class that he expressed, "Just because you can legally, doesn't mean you should" in reference to exposing weapons. Repeatedly expressed the basic rules of safety.
1. Always Keep the weapon pointed in a safe direction. 2. Keep your finger off the trigger until ready to shoot 3. Always keep the weapon unloaded until ready to use (More geared toward home storage)
Along with many other common sense safety precautions.
So to say the NRA doesn't teach these things is incorrect. But currently there is no law that states that one MUST take a safety course to own a firearm, which is a different argument.
I have no doubt it's for show.. But this something the NRA CAN do. They can teach their membership that just because something is legal, doesn't make it smart or even close to being right.
Originally Posted by Damanshot
They can try to use that info but all you'll get out of the NRA and those that simply stonewall gun safety is that it's a study by a left week elite and of course they'd say these things LOL Sorry,, I just have no faith in the Right
Just an FYI for facts.
When I got my concealed carry license, I did not do the gun show classes, since my wife and son where also getting licenses, I signed us up for an NRA approved instructor, NRA class. There were multiple times in the 3 day class that he expressed, "Just because you can legally, doesn't mean you should" in reference to exposing weapons. Repeatedly expressed the basic rules of safety.
1. Always Keep the weapon pointed in a safe direction. 2. Keep your finger off the trigger until ready to shoot 3. Always keep the weapon unloaded until ready to use (More geared toward home storage)
Along with many other common sense safety precautions.
So to say the NRA doesn't teach these things is incorrect. But currently there is no law that states that one MUST take a safety course to own a firearm, which is a different argument.
that's wonderful, however you aren't the problem...Do you take your gun for a walk to dunkin donuts? Probably not. Gun safety and usage is one thing. Using some common sense is another thing all together. If the NRA is teaching and Preaching that, they failed.
I did not cherry pick anything. I clicked on the link Perfect provided and that was the topic.
Btw-------I am not going to debate this topic w/you guys because you all are unreasonable and preach division. I just thought it was funny that Perfect posted information that completely opposed what he was trying to say.
I was an NRA member for many years. Their safety courses are great! What turned me off is when they seemed to move more towards being a political group.
I was an NRA member for many years. Their safety courses are great! What turned me off is when they seemed to move more towards being a political group.
I have no doubt it's for show.. But this something the NRA CAN do. They can teach their membership that just because something is legal, doesn't make it smart or even close to being right.
Originally Posted by Damanshot
They can try to use that info but all you'll get out of the NRA and those that simply stonewall gun safety is that it's a study by a left week elite and of course they'd say these things LOL Sorry,, I just have no faith in the Right
Just an FYI for facts.
When I got my concealed carry license, I did not do the gun show classes, since my wife and son where also getting licenses, I signed us up for an NRA approved instructor, NRA class. There were multiple times in the 3 day class that he expressed, "Just because you can legally, doesn't mean you should" in reference to exposing weapons. Repeatedly expressed the basic rules of safety.
1. Always Keep the weapon pointed in a safe direction. 2. Keep your finger off the trigger until ready to shoot 3. Always keep the weapon unloaded until ready to use (More geared toward home storage)
Along with many other common sense safety precautions.
So to say the NRA doesn't teach these things is incorrect. But currently there is no law that states that one MUST take a safety course to own a firearm, which is a different argument.
that's wonderful, however you aren't the problem...Do you take your gun for a walk to dunkin donuts? Probably not. Gun safety and usage is one thing. Using some common sense is another thing all together. If the NRA is teaching and Preaching that, they failed.
No I am not the problem, and neither is a huge majority of gun owners, who you seem to think are somehow responsible for this one idiots actions.
What kind of answer do you want? One guy did something you find wrong, even though he was within his legal rights to do so. What is it you want from us on this message board?
I won't go as far as to say that many gun owners are responsible for some of these acts. But I certainly see a lot of them being a contributing factor. I'll give you just a couple of examples. Things I think should be covered in what I see as sensible gun control.
Guns stolen from locked as well as unlocked vehicles. Here in Tennessee it has become a huge issue. And it's surprising not only that people feel guns need to be left in their vehicles, but many of these vehicles are left unlocked. To me this is very irresponsible handling of a firearm. I've seen estimates as high as 70% of all stolen guns were taken from vehicles. A law was passed that makes your vehicle "an extension of your house" which a lot of people consider a contributing factor.
Children as young as six years old that I've seen shooting people with guns they managed to get their hands on. Sometimes it happens within the home with a small child shooting a sibling, parent, neighbor or relative. Just a very short time ago a six year old managed to take a loaded gun to school and actually shoot one of his teachers. I understand that you can have an older child who can manage to steal your keys or work around it even if you have your guns secured. But in many cases that's not what we see happening.
I understand perfectly the right to bear arms. I'm all for that in fact. But I also believe with great freedoms comes great responsibilities. And what I've seen is far too much cojoling about the freedom part and not nearly enough emphasis on the responsibility part.
I don't know that having laws that punish such irresponsible acts would "fix that" per say. What I do know is that we have laws against many things and they don't "fix that". What such laws do is provide a deterrent for such actions. Just like I mentioned with leaving guns in your vehicle. Tennessee actually passed a law that made your vehicle an extension of your home. It actually tells people that "it's your right to keep a gun in your vehicle". So in essence it helps protect and promote stupidity rather than punish it. There are lots of cases where people are being irresponsible with guns we don't hear about too.
And that's where the impasse seems to be. The thing that people keep hearing. 'Well it won't fix it so why bother trying to do anything?" We could use that same reasoning to do away with every law on the books.
I'm not saying we shouldn't try to fix it, I'm seriously not sure how, since they obviously won't have people walking around checking unlocked cars for gun violations. I don't know how else you would identify "irresponsible", until it becomes self evident.
Where the firearm is allowed to be if the vehicle is unoccupied but must be in a locked compartment? This is clearly an allowance for "no gun signs" having force of law in TN. The statue does not make it "an extension of your home" you must have read a headline again and there you go believing what you are told.
Did you fail to read the statue? I know the answer.
Read the thread. I addressed firearms being stolen from both locked and unlocked vehicles. Nobody needs to be leaving their firearms in their vehicles especially overnight when many such guns are being stolen.
Read the thread. I addressed firearms being stolen from both locked and unlocked vehicles. Nobody needs to be leaving their firearms in their vehicles especially overnight when many such guns are being stolen.
Obviously you didn't answer the question you were asked, you dissembled again.
See, guns being STOLEN is the problem. From cars (I struggle to believe people don't lock their cars though), or from a home. Crime was committed by the stealing of them. Yet you want to blame the victims of crime?
I looked at your link and excuse me if I disagree w/the conclusions you typed out.
From the link.......Cities w/the Strictest Gun Laws: New York, San Fran, Philly, Baltimore, Chicago, and Las Vegas. I'm not sure about Vegas, but I wouldn't refer to any of the other cities as safe or doing a great job of saving lives.
Maybe stick to the political cartoons?
Go away you smug little troll. I didn’t type out any of my conclusions here. They came from the link you pretended to read. Geez.
I looked at your link and excuse me if I disagree w/the conclusions you typed out.
From the link.......Cities w/the Strictest Gun Laws: New York, San Fran, Philly, Baltimore, Chicago, and Las Vegas. I'm not sure about Vegas, but I wouldn't refer to any of the other cities as safe or doing a great job of saving lives.
Maybe stick to the political cartoons?
Go away you smug little troll. I didn’t type out any of my conclusions here. They came from the link you pretended to read. Geez.
I'm not going to stick around, but here is the text from the link you provided:
Quote
Cities with Strictest Gun Laws
by phil The USA allows local ordinances for gun laws. This means that cities, counties, and municipalities can be in charge of gun control. Many cities have strict gun laws, some even stricter than the state laws.
Some of the cities with strict gun laws in the USA include the following:
New York New York is one of the most restrictive cities with respect to firearms and the 2md amendment in the US. The largest city in the country has an assault weapons ban. This ban prohibits semi-automatic rifles with detachable magazines, pistol grips, folding stocks, muzzle brakes, etc,. New York City law drags many modern and some not so modern semi-automatic sporting rifles into the penumbra of assault weapons.
The city also has magazine limits. Semi-automatic rifles and handguns were previously limited to ten rounds or fewer. However, a new law was passed where the magazine capacities were further reduced to a maximum of seven rounds.
Also, high-capacity magazines will have to either sell their magazines out of the city or surrender them with respect to ammunition under laws. All sales of ammunition will subject the buyer to a background check through NICS. This means that there are no internet or mail-order sales in New York. New York gun laws allow the scrutinization of the sale of large quantities of ammunition.
Another provision of New York gun law changes the doctor-patient confidentiality rules. So if a mental health professional reasonably believes that a patient poses a danger to either himself, herself, or a third party, that mental health professional is now required to turn that information over to the state. With the information, the city will be able to use its discretion in either suspending or revoking such an individual’s gun permit. In most cases, they will also seize the citizen’s weapons.
Any assault weapon owner in New York must register each and every weapon with the state.
Philadelphia You can only carry a firearm in Philadelphia if you have a permit to carry. It is the only place in the commonwealth of Pennsylvania that requires it. Pennsylvania is otherwise an open-carry state meaning that you can have a firearm on display on your hip.
You can carry a rifle on the back of your truck anywhere else in Pennsylvania other than Philadelphia. In Philadelphia, people may get pulled over or arrested for what is called FUFA violations of the uniform firearm act which is codified under 61.05 6105-6106.
The legislature has intended that they do not want people carrying guns in Philadelphia. So in Philadelphia, in order to carry a gun, you have to conceal it. However, in the state of Pennsylvania, you cannot carry a concealed weapon, only an open weapon.
The way the law works, in order to carry a gun in Philadelphia you must have a concealed weapons permit. Additionally, that weapon has to be concealed at all times on the streets.
Baltimore In Baltimore, if you want to get a concealed permit you are going to need 16 hours of training. You must pass the shooting portion with a 70 percent proficiency rate. The city also has requirements for people that can use a firearm, and you have to fall into this group.
Furthermore, you must have a good and substantial reason to carry a firearm in the city. You also have to get through an interview conducted by an investigator or a trooper, then wait about 90 days for the result.
Upon getting your gun permit, the city also requires that you put a little article in the newspaper about you being a permit holder.
NB: Have it in mind that you will spend a lot of money on the training.
Chicago Chicago’s gun laws are some of the strictest in the country. There are still no legal gun shops or shooting ranges within city limits. A University of Chicago study said more than fifteen hundred guns traced to crimes in Chicago in the previous five years came from shucks far more than any other local dealer.
Although gun advocates dispute the study. They claim that authorities should focus on illegal gun supply not penalizing lawful gun sellers.
A lot of people on the gun control side would say that the problem Chicago and Nevada are facing is that there are more guns on the streets. Automatically, more guns equal more violence.
However, second amendment fanatics claim that the gun control the city imposes on a law-abiding citizen does nothing to stop the violence.
The city of Chicago has laws that could be used federally to prosecute anyone that is a felon. However, the Second Amendment cause is being taken up by a younger and more diverse demographic in the city. This turning-point conference is getting young conservatives together to discuss what matters to them.
There are those that believe that Chicago’s problems are not going to be fixed for the tightening or loosening of gun laws. To them, the issues go much deeper than that. They believe the problems are not going to be solved by the politicians but by the hard work and dedication of the people.
Las Vegas Las Vegas has a relatively robust set of laws protecting gun ownership. Before, no state permit is required to buy or own a gun. And there is a ban on assault weapons or high-capacity magazines. Also, no age restrictions on owning a long gun in the state.
However, these laws were repealed in 2015, and city residents require the registration of firearms with police. Also, nearly all private gun sales or transfers first undergo a background check. These checks were typically run by a federally licensed firearms dealer. Some exemptions do apply including transfers between close family members for antique guns, transfer between law enforcement, and in cases of immediate danger.
Failure to comply with the law results in a gross misdemeanor with repeat offenses. This is punishable by a category C felony charge. The bill is an attempt to move forward with a stall valve initiative approved by voters of Nevada state in 2016. But was never implemented amid the FBI’s refusal to process the background checks.
However, the new law took effect on January 2nd, 2020, and required the state to process the checks. The delay to the law was because any bill amended or approved by voters will remain untouched for at least three years.
Background checks for guns purchased from federally licensed sellers have already been in place since 1998. A typical check can take anywhere between five to fifteen minutes and is processed by the state Department of Public Safety.
For NICS, the DPS checks the state and federal criminal records as well as mental health records.
People not allowed to purchase a gun in Las Vegas include:
Those who have served a year-plus prison sentence People not legally in the country and People with a misdemeanor or domestic violence conviction An attempted buyer whose background check is denied can request more information about why their application was denied.
Las Vegas prohibits guns from being carried to schools or colleges, a private childcare facility, government buildings, or libraries that prohibit firearms. The City only allows people over the age of 21 to obtain a license to carry a concealed weapon, as long as they meet the necessary requirements.
Applicants must complete an 8-hour permit course and submit an application to the county sheriff. The Sheriff on the other hand is required to issue the license within 120 days or deny it for lawful reasons.
Open carry and concealed firearms are prohibited in federal buildings. This includes national parks, military bases, airports, public schools, childcare facilities, or in a public building with a no-gun sign or metal detector.
As with the law of Nevada state, Las Vegas will recognize concealed carry weapon permits from about two dozen other states.
San Francisco The state of San Francisco has some of the strictest gun laws in the country. Concealed carry permits are difficult to get. Some semi-automatic weapons are illegal. And since July 2019, buying ammo will require background checks
The gun law in the city classifies some semi-automatic guns as “assault weapons” and ban magazines with the capacity that hold more than 10 rounds. San Francisco was one of the cities to first implement this law in the US, even before the federal government banned assault weapons.
Also, a center-fire rifle with a forward pistol grip and a detachable magazine is illegal in the city. However, building guns for personal use is not illegal in the city. But owners have to get a serial number from the state and etch it into the firearm.
San Francisco being in California means that their strict gun control is not going away anytime soon because the state government is investing a lot of money into their control laws. This means more money to seize guns from ineligible residents, enforce gun sales laws, and support the Firearms Violence Research Center.
From cars (I struggle to believe people don't lock their cars though), or from a home. Crime was committed by the stealing of them. Yet you want to blame the victims of crime?
I want people to use their brains.
Guns Stolen From Unlocked Cars Does Nothing But Hurt Us
I just read a headline out of Nashville, Tennessee that said 20 guns were stolen from cars between July 7 — July 13. Eight of those firearms were stolen from unlocked cars. That isn't quite half, but pretty close.
Generally speaking, people who steal guns don't usually plan to turn them into decorative pieces. Rather, crime is usually the intended outcome from guns that're stolen.
After all, they're stolen by criminals. Meaning that your gun could be used to hurt an innocent person. Your gun could be used to kill someone. Think about that next time you want to leave your gun in your unlocked car.
Breaking it down even further, it seems that another percentage of those unlocked cars even had the keys left inside them, or easily available.
This means that even if the gun is “locked in my trunk” they can get to it if you leave your keys in the ignition, glove box, or sun visor.
If you have a truck/car gun, make sure it is secured properly so it's not stolen and used for crime. In fact, everything you can do to make a criminal's job harder, the better off you'll be. Studies have shown that the harder a target is, the easier it is for the criminal to walk away and look for an easier target.
This means locking the car and taking the keys with you. If you must leave a gun in your car when you're not in it, at least lock it up in a safe designed to make it harder to get. If your car is equipped with an alarm, turn it on.
Every single thing you can do to make their lives harder, the better off you'll be in the long run because you won't be one of those statistics. Anything is better than leaving your gun in an unlocked car. Even if you think you live in a safe neighborhood, nothing is guaranteed.
You can't know who is coming through your town, looking for cars to burglarize. It's better to be safe than sorry. Leave your thoughts in the comments below.
More than 70% of all guns stolen in 2022 taken from vehicles, Nashville police say
Of the 1,952 guns reported stolen last year, 1,378 were taken out of vehicles, according to the Metro Nashville Police Department. That accounts for more than 70% of all guns reported stolen in 2022. Violent crime in Nashville up 4.7% in 2022, preliminary report finds
Many of those crimes also went “hand in hand” with vehicle theft, police said.
A review of last year’s stolen vehicle reports in Nashville revealed 74% of the 3,622 vehicles taken in 2022 were easy targets because the keys were left inside or made available to thieves.
Police said both stolen guns and vehicles are routinely involved in criminal activities such as carjackings and robberies.
The MNPD strongly encourages Nashvillians to lock their automobile doors, secure any valuables —especially guns— and remove the keys.
Your answer- every adult should be packing---saving themselves and others. Another interesting site- https://everytownresearch.org/issue/child-teen-safety/- biggest safety issue for teens and small children- guns in society and AT HOME. Lastly, please ignore huge problem of SUICIDE in US. Guns ruin millions of families and you highlight your agenda which might save a couple hundred. Always- who,what,where,when,why, how- agendas. Peace.
Your answer- every adult should be packing---saving themselves and others. Another interesting site- https://everytownresearch.org/issue/child-teen-safety/- biggest safety issue for teens and small children- guns in society and AT HOME. Lastly, please ignore huge problem of SUICIDE in US. Guns ruin millions of families and you highlight your agenda which might save a couple hundred. Always- who,what,where,when,why, how- agendas. Peace.
I never said"every adult should be packing".
Everytown is not an interesting site, it is a biased gun control site. Anything they produce is suspect and done to fit a specific agenda.
Suicide is a problem, but it is a people problem not a tool problem.
Your answer- every adult should be packing---saving themselves and others. Another interesting site- https://everytownresearch.org/issue/child-teen-safety/- biggest safety issue for teens and small children- guns in society and AT HOME. Lastly, please ignore huge problem of SUICIDE in US. Guns ruin millions of families and you highlight your agenda which might save a couple hundred. Always- who,what,where,when,why, how- agendas. Peace.
I don't think you can link guns and suicide. That is a completely different subject, the gun is just the method, if it wasn't there, they would use another method. Having a gun doesn't encourage the suicide decision.
Guns and homes/kids. This is one of the main reason I do support gun education before ownership. Owning a firearm does not mean one understands how to properly use, store, fire a firearm, or the consequences of using one.
Many people like to talk tough that "I would just shoot the guy if he blah blah blah". Even when justified, using your firearm comes with a lot of legal hassle, and even sometimes consequences. What one may think is justified, could be argued that it wasn't, and clearing your name is expensive and time consuming. Firearm ownership comes with a lot of responsibility, but politicians would rather argue hard lines guns/no funs, rather than compromise on education programs and responsible ownership. It's better for their political careers to not actually make decisions. "We're still working on that, but the other side refuses to budge" works every election cycle, to excuse their own inability to accomplish anything of substance.
Your answer- every adult should be packing---saving themselves and others. Another interesting site- https://everytownresearch.org/issue/child-teen-safety/- biggest safety issue for teens and small children- guns in society and AT HOME. Lastly, please ignore huge problem of SUICIDE in US. Guns ruin millions of families and you highlight your agenda which might save a couple hundred. Always- who,what,where,when,why, how- agendas. Peace.
I don't think you can link guns and suicide. That is a completely different subject, the gun is just the method, if it wasn't there, they would use another method. Having a gun doesn't encourage the suicide decision.
Guns and homes/kids. This is one of the main reason I do support gun education before ownership. Owning a firearm does not mean one understands how to properly use, store, fire a firearm, or the consequences of using one.
Many people like to talk tough that "I would just shoot the guy if he blah blah blah". Even when justified, using your firearm comes with a lot of legal hassle, and even sometimes consequences. What one may think is justified, could be argued that it wasn't, and clearing your name is expensive and time consuming. Firearm ownership comes with a lot of responsibility, but politicians would rather argue hard lines guns/no funs, rather than compromise on education programs and responsible ownership. It's better for their political careers to not actually make decisions. "We're still working on that, but the other side refuses to budge" works every election cycle, to excuse their own inability to accomplish anything of substance.
Every round that leaves your gun has a lawyer attached. Even in a good shoot one round can change everything. When the situation becomes you care less about the attached lawyer and more about surviving then you are in a better place for a good shoot.
I will never believe in forced education, though I do believe people should take initiative to understand what they are dealing with. Unfortunately when you have govermandated trying it becomes a barrier to ownership and carry. It is also another avenue for anti-gun propaganda.
I don't think a 1 hour gun safety course is any more forced education than taking a driving test to get a license. We're not talking a semester worth of courses, but a simple course to explain the basics that "dad" would teach.
Heck even with my CCL, it takes almost an hour to finish a purchase at a store, you could easily get a basics course in that time.
It's only a barrier for those who do not demand at least a minimum amount of responsibility be attached to owning a firearm. For everyone else it's a common sense measure. With great rights comes great responsibility.
The huge problem of mass murder and suicide will never be improved in a country who views the two issues as a political issue to fight over rather than a social issue to solve.
I don't think a 1 hour gun safety course is any more forced education than taking a driving test to get a license. We're not talking a semester worth of courses, but a simple course to explain the basics that "dad" would teach.
Heck even with my CCL, it takes almost an hour to finish a purchase at a store, you could easily get a basics course in that time.
In MD it is an 8 hour class for a purchase license and 16 hour class for for carry. The GA is looking at expanding that. My carry class was about $400.
Back prior to 2013 there was no class requirement for carry. None. Then it looked like good and substantial would be struck down (it was for 100 days) and the MGA implemented 16 hours of training. They did not require training when you had to politically connected to get a carry license. Now with Bruen striking good and substantial for their barrier list they want to increase the time even more, and raise the fees. Because the common peasant may be able to carry arms, and the nobility doesn't like it. Mandated training is a barrier to the exercise of a right, and no other enumberate right requires it.
It's only a barrier for those who do not demand at least a minimum amount of responsibility be attached to owning a firearm. For everyone else it's a common sense measure. With great rights comes great responsibility.
No it is a barrier to people who can't just drop $400 on a training class.
Actual responsibility isn't being forced into doing something, but you wouldn't understand that.
I"m much more happy about this subject being discussed than worrying about Drag Shows. Was thinking about it and I don't ever remember a high school getting shot up over a drag show.
I was talking more in line with that "right" to bear arms. If there was no license required, if there were no major hoops to jump through. Would you really want any Tom, Dick or Sally to walk in a buy a firearm with absolutely no knowledge or basic safety speech? Not talking about $400 classes and such, but a simple "Don't point it at people." type simple class, cause I know some folks who have owned guns their entire life who still act as if it can never go off and will show it to people cocked and loaded with no discretion of barrel direction. Over confidence if sometimes more dangerous than ignorance.
Seven people were killed during a mass shooting on Thursday at a Jehovah’s Witnesses Kingdom Hall in the German city of Hamburg in what the country’s leader denounced a “brutal act of violence.”
The city’s police said in their latest statement: ”Eight people are dead – including the alleged perpetrator.
The Jehovah’s Witnesses in Germany said in a statement: “The religious community is deeply saddened by the horrific attack on its members at the Kingdom Hall in Hamburg after a religious service.”
The slayings in the northern German city occurred around 9 p.m. local time (3 p.m. ET), with police initially unsure how many shooters might be involved.
But later updates from the city’s police force suggested there was just one attacker, who is believed to have died at the scene.
“At present, we believe there is one perpetrator,” Hamburg police said in their latest update on their Twitter account, hours after armed officers scoured the scene for evidence and suspects.
“All police measures in the vicinity are being successively discontinued. The investigation into the circumstances of the crime continues.”
Chancellor Scholz led politicians in denouncing the murder spree in the northern German city.
“Several members of a Jehovah community fell victim to a brutal act of violence last night. My thoughts are with them and their loved ones,” he wrote on Twitter.
I was talking more in line with that "right" to bear arms. If there was no license required, if there were no major hoops to jump through. Would you really want any Tom, Dick or Sally to walk in a buy a firearm with absolutely no knowledge or basic safety speech? Not talking about $400 classes and such, but a simple "Don't point it at people." type simple class, cause I know some folks who have owned guns their entire life who still act as if it can never go off and will show it to people cocked and loaded with no discretion of barrel direction. Over confidence if sometimes more dangerous than ignorance.
I really want people to get training. I've never said otherwise. It has been shown that states will use training as a way of delaying or becoming a to barrier ownership and carry.
I am fine with people having the freedom to exercise their rights, even Tom, Dick, and Sally. Freedom can be messy, but I prefer it to state rule.
It's only a barrier for those who do not demand at least a minimum amount of responsibility be attached to owning a firearm. For everyone else it's a common sense measure. With great rights comes great responsibility.
No it is a barrier to people who can't just drop $400 on a training class.
Actual responsibility isn't being forced into doing something, but you wouldn't understand that.
Oh I understand. People want others to be walking around in public carrying weapons without any training in firearms. And they'll use any excuse in the book for it. They expect all of the freedom with none of the responsibility. But you refuse to understand that.
It's only a barrier for those who do not demand at least a minimum amount of responsibility be attached to owning a firearm. For everyone else it's a common sense measure. With great rights comes great responsibility.
No it is a barrier to people who can't just drop $400 on a training class.
Actual responsibility isn't being forced into doing something, but you wouldn't understand that.
Oh I understand. People want others to be walking around in public carrying weapons without any training in firearms. And they'll use any excuse in the book for it. They expect all of the freedom with none of the responsibility. But you refuse to understand that.
I expect adults to be responsible. But you again lie when you state what I understand and do not understand.
But we all know that a large portion of adults aren't responsible. If they were we wouldn't need laws at all. And no, your post shows you clearly don't understand with freedoms comes responsibility. Your "expectations" will never be met. Not even close. You either don't understand that or are ignoring that. Take your pick.
But we all know that a large portion of adults aren't responsible. If they were we wouldn't need laws at all. And no, your post shows you clearly don't understand with freedoms comes responsibility. Your "expectations" will never be met. Not even close. You either don't understand that or are ignoring that. Take your pick.
I don't know that "large portions of adults are not responsible" as I don't know a large portion of adults. You use this logical fallacy a lot, it has been point out that it is a fallacy but you continue.
Because i don't agree with your flawed logic does not mean I don't understand it, it means I don't agree with it.
When you have shown nothing such as you have, yes it's a lie. You do realize people can read where you posted that you posted that officers are outgunned, right? Yet all you can do is act like a third grader in your denial.
When you have shown nothing such as you have, yes it's a lie. You do realize people can read where you posted that you posted that officers are outgunned, right? Yet all you can do is act like a third grader in your denial.
"Nuh uh, you're a liar."
It's right on this board for everyone to read.
You continue to not take responsibility for your own words, this is not shocking. I posted what I said and what you said I said. THey are not the same, they are not congruent. You lied.
And once again, all you have is name calling. Your claim is you expect people to be responsible. Yet statistics plainly show a large portion of people are not responsible. You either don't understand that or are in denial about that. Take your pick.
And once again, all you have is name calling. Your claim is you expect people to be responsible. Yet statistics plainly show a large portion of people are not responsible. You either don't understand that or are in denial about that. Take your pick.
Continuing to deflect and not take responsibility for your words has nothing to do with me. When you lie about things it isn't name calling to get called a liar.
![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/fcAAXWZ.jpg)
![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/r97mWZO.jpg)
