Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

General Mass Shooting Thread (originally Las Vegas Strip)


The Sisko

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, twa said:

 

I see you still have trouble with reading comprehension.

And you have trouble with basic thinking, logic, and common sense.

 

More guns equals more gun violence.

That is a fact, undeniable, unspinnable.

You can’t lie it away, obscur it, or hide from it.

You can however ignore it, at least long enough until the bodies pile up at your door.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

2 hours ago, BenningRoadSkin said:

When you attach guns to your manhood, then people lose all rationality.

Totally understandable. Guns are WAY too heavy to be attached to that. I could handle it, but I suspect most couldn’t. ?

 

23 minutes ago, Kilmer17 said:

Maybe not directly.  But I would argue that voting rights carry a bigger responsibility to the great body politic than gun rights. 

Agreed. However I think that’s an argument for restoring voting rights. Not restoring them adds a political motive to the already strong monetary ones to maintain/increase incarceration rates. Besides, whatever happened to the idea of having served one’s debt to society?

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Fresh8686 said:


Well, since I got it back, it would be taking it away, but whatever that's besides the point.

I don't mind having to prove my ability to make informed and healthy choices, in order to vote. As long as an avenue exists where I can do so, that isn't behind some pay wall, but based on merit and consistent good behavior.

In fact, I think more effort should go into tests and standards that protect nuanced decision making from ignorance and extremism during the voting process... but the right way to apply that wish would be tricky of course. Not just equitably and ethically, but doing so in a way that doesn't dramatically depress participation.

Yep.  I agree with that 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It really is humorous watching people flip flop on making exercising a right difficult.  The two sides of the coins have flipped here.  Requiring a valid government issued ID is too onerous a requirement for voting, but it should take more effort to buy a gun than buying a car.

 

Middle ground. That is where we need to get.  Instead, we have solutions of arming teachers or abolishing the 2nd Amendment (and others who thinly veil that goal by stating they want to make it so restrictive to exercise that it might as well be abolished).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, AsburySkinsFan said:

And you have trouble with basic thinking, logic, and common sense.

 

More guns equals more gun violence.

That is a fact, undeniable, unspinnable.

You can’t lie it away, obscur it, or hide from it.

You can however ignore it, at least long enough until the bodies pile up at your door.

 

I hope for more gun violence and firefights at schools when it is directed at at attempted mass murder....I'm not fond of them or non violent.

I also feel bad for the folk ya reduce to just their bodies for shields cause DANGER..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, twa said:

 

ONLY if a greater threat doesn't exist....can you accept that?

Most here are claiming the risk of arming teachers outweighs any benefit, I disagree.

 

I accept the inherent risk of guns because of greater threats, you are free not to.

 

I don't agree that guns are only a threat if a greater threat doesn't exist (but thats not exactly what you said). But I can agree that the benefit of a gun in certain instances does out weigh the risks for sure. Beyond that, my argument is to remove the AR-15 and introduce rigorous background checks. Not that Trump White House ****. If that doesn't make a dent then i would entertain the idea of more government trained professionals with guns in schools. But only if the above is tried and fails. Which you say it will. So there really shouldn't be much argument there. 

 

But I want to converse under a certain frame work of facts that we can both agree on. The first fact I would like to introduce is that 'people are less safe in the presence of a gun then they are without them'. Just that. No caveats. Lets agree to that first, if you do, and then we can move to another set of facts. Whatever you want them to be. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Llevron said:

 

Whats the issue then with making it so people who have committed a violent crime cant buy a gun. Ever. Taking that right away from them (or losing that privilege) 

 

Why not? We already remove their right to vote, get a job, and receive federal benefits. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Popeman38 said:

It really is humorous watching people flip flop on making exercising a right difficult.  The two sides of the coins have flipped here.  Requiring a valid government issued ID is too onerous a requirement for voting, but it should take more effort to buy a gun than buying a car.

 

You don't think it should be more difficult to buy a gun than a car?  Why?  Car gets you to work.  It's the basic mode of transportation that makes the economy possible.  A gun is a toy that's frequently used for mass murder.  I'm not talking about shotguns or hunting rifles, I'm talking about handguns and high capacity semi-automatic rifles.

 

Do you know why Democrats don't like the ID requirements and other forms of restrictions on voting that Republicans passed?  Because the only "problem" that they "fixed" was too many minorities and poor people were voting for Democrats and they wanted to make it harder for them to do.

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Llevron said:

 

I don't agree that guns are only a threat if a greater threat doesn't exist (but thats not exactly what you said). But I can agree that the benefit of a gun in certain instances does out weigh the risks for sure. Beyond that, my argument is to remove the AR-15 and introduce rigorous background checks. Not that Trump White House ****. If that doesn't make a dent then i would entertain the idea of more government trained professionals with guns in schools. But only if the above is tried and fails. Which you say it will. So there really shouldn't be much argument there. 

 

But I want to converse under a certain frame work of facts that we can both agree on. The first fact I would like to introduce is that 'people are less safe in the presence of a gun then they are without them'. Just that. No caveats. Lets agree to that first, if you do, and then we can move to another set of facts. Whatever you want them to be. 

 

I already agreed to that fact, though it and other things I agreed to gets lost in the noise around here. 

those other things being closing background check holes AND banning kids(below 21) from owning semi automatics(which includes AR-15s if you don't know.)

 

Are the posts not visible when I give you what you claim to want???

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would be nice if people would stop pretending that the 2nd Amendment has always been interpreted as an individual right. It wasn't until 2001 federally (and 2008 for the Supreme Court). @Predicto explained the history of this after one of our previous mass shootings. Who knows which one? It's hard to keep track. 

 

Until then, only the collective right had been endorsed by the courts. Essentially what @stevemcqueen1 has been discussing in the thread recently. 

 

People debate this issue passionately while being too lazy to understand even the basic history of it. 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Popeman38 said:

It really is humorous watching people flip flop on making exercising a right difficult.  The two sides of the coins have flipped here.  Requiring a valid government issued ID is too onerous a requirement for voting, but it should take more effort to buy a gun than buying a car.

 

Middle ground. That is where we need to get.  Instead, we have solutions of arming teachers or abolishing the 2nd Amendment (and others who thinly veil that goal by stating they want to make it so restrictive to exercise that it might as well be abolished).

 

 

The hypocrisy is breathtaking, on both sides

 

Usual american politics

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, twa said:

 

I already agreed to that fact, though it and other things I agreed to gets lost in the noise around here. 

those other things being closing background check holes AND banning kids(below 21) from owning semi automatics(which includes AR-15s if you don't know.)

 

Are the posts not visible when I give you what you claim to want???

 

 

 

Look if you want to be honest most of the noise made around here that your **** gets lost in is made by you. Thats part of your problem communicating around here. You say so much useless **** its hard to keep up sometimes. I have never seen a troll complain about not being taken seriously lol. Now that is funny

 

42 minutes ago, Popeman38 said:

It really is humorous watching people flip flop on making exercising a right difficult.  The two sides of the coins have flipped here.  Requiring a valid government issued ID is too onerous a requirement for voting, but it should take more effort to buy a gun than buying a car.

 

Middle ground. That is where we need to get.  Instead, we have solutions of arming teachers or abolishing the 2nd Amendment (and others who thinly veil that goal by stating they want to make it so restrictive to exercise that it might as well be abolished).

 

The ID thing is a really bad way to make your point.

Edited by Llevron
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Llevron said:

 

Look if you want to be honest most of the noise made around here that your **** gets lost in is made by you. Thats part of your problem communicating around here. You say so much useless **** its hard to keep up sometimes. I have never seen a troll complain about not being taken seriously lol. Now that is funny

 

 

 

So you are saying I'm like the gun control crowd and my own worst enemy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Popeman38 said:

It really is humorous watching people flip flop on making exercising a right difficult.  The two sides of the coins have flipped here.  Requiring a valid government issued ID is too onerous a requirement for voting, but it should take more effort to buy a gun than buying a car.

 

Middle ground. That is where we need to get.  Instead, we have solutions of arming teachers or abolishing the 2nd Amendment (and others who thinly veil that goal by stating they want to make it so restrictive to exercise that it might as well be abolished).

 

A government id for voting is addressing a problem that doesn’t exist.

 

Awful analogy.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

You don't think it should be more difficult to buy a gun than a car?  Why?  Car gets you to work.  It's the basic mode of transportation that makes the economy possible.  A gun is a toy that's frequently used for mass murder.  I'm not talking about shotguns or hunting rifles, I'm talking about handguns and high capacity semi-automatic rifles.

 

Do you know why Democrats don't like the ID requirements and other forms of restrictions on voting that Republicans passed?  Because the only "problem" that they "fixed" was too many minorities and poor people were voting for Democrats and they wanted to make it harder for them to do.

It should not be more difficult to exercise a right than it is to enjoy a privilege.  Driving is not a right, and using the car analogy is tired and lazy.  If I say that voting should have the same hurdles as getting licensed to  drive a car, I am called a racist vote suppressor trying to deny people a Constitutionally guaranteed right.  It's funny, I'm too conservative for some on this board because I support voter ID.  I'm labeled too liberal by some on this board for listing common sense gun control I support.  It really is based on whatever pet project one identifies with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...