Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

General Mass Shooting Thread (originally Las Vegas Strip)


The Sisko

Recommended Posts

Quote

The Uvalde Police Department and the Uvalde Independent School District police force are no longer cooperating with the Texas Department of Public Safety's investigation into the massacre at Robb Elementary School and the state's review of the law enforcement response, multiple law enforcement sources tell ABC News.

 

The Uvalde police chief and a spokesperson for the Uvalde Independent School District did not immediately respond to requests for comment from ABC News.

 

https://abcnews.go.com/US/uvalde-police-school-district-longer-cooperating-texas-probe/story?id=85093405
 

Why won’t police talk to police?  Don’t they always tell us that if you have nothing to hide there’s nothing to worry about?  

  • Like 2
  • Thumb up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, 88Comrade2000 said:

Hey, he asked the families first.  Sucks, he has to do this but it's a nice jesture to the families who will be burying their loved ones.


Oh I didn’t mean him or what he did. Just the sight of caskets with designs that I know my youngest nephew would think are cool makes me sick to my stomach a bit when you consider why it’s a thing. I didn’t even read into why he’s doing it….but I know why he has the opportunity and it really really sucks that he does. I have no issue with him specifically 

34 minutes ago, Destino said:

https://abcnews.go.com/US/uvalde-police-school-district-longer-cooperating-texas-probe/story?id=85093405
 

Why won’t police talk to police?  Don’t they always tell us that if you have nothing to hide there’s nothing to worry about?  


Its cause they know police are liars and will do anything to spin a situation in their own favor to the point where they literally get away with murder if they want. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Dan T. said:

FUHaQPMWIAAIDhA?format=jpg&name=small

 

Admires the effort by people to try to argue that "They really meant 'the right of the militia'", by claiming that other people don't understand the difference between what it says, and what they want it to say.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

Admires the effort by people to try to argue that "They really meant 'the right of the militia'", by claiming that other people don't understand the difference between what it says, and what they want it to say.   

 

Any "originalist" who claims the Second Amendment was intended to give individuals the unalienable, unfettered right to own firearms is either lying, ignorant of history, or compromised by the gun lobby.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Dan T. said:

 

Any "originalist" who claims the Second Amendment was intended to give individuals the unalienable, unfettered right to own firearms is either lying, ignorant of history, or compromised by the gun lobby.

 

Only a Sith speaks in absolutes.  

 

---

 

Me, I was simply commenting on the difference between what something says, and people's attempts to give opinions on what they want it to say.  

 

And said people trying to wrap themselves in "everybody else is trying to impose their opinion".  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

Admires the effort by people to try to argue that "They really meant 'the right of the militia'", by claiming that other people don't understand the difference between what it says, and what they want it to say.   

 

What it says is a well regulated militia, though. And the point of the meme is that it literally says well regulated militia and the 18 y/o who shot up a bunch of 4th graders in their classroom doesn't fit that at all so either there is room for interpretation, and thus change. Or there isn't and that guy shouldn't have had that gun based on those words alone. Its not hard. 

 

If you are arguing what it means then we are having a different conversation (and one that doesn't belong in this thread I guess) that gets fun. To say the least. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Llevron said:

What it says is a well regulated militia

 

What it says is "well regulated militia" and "the people".  

 

It contains both phrases.  

 

38 minutes ago, Llevron said:

And the point of the meme is that it literally says well regulated militia and the 18 y/o who shot up a bunch of 4th graders in their classroom doesn't fit that at all so either there is room for interpretation

 

And funny.  The meme says nothing about "room for interpretation".  It divides the world onto people who agree with the writer, and people who can't understand the difference between what the Constitution says, and what they want it to say.  

Edited by Larry
Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

What it says is "well regulated militia" and "the people".  

 

It contains both phrases.  

 

 

And funny.  The meme says nothing about "room for interpretation".  It divides the world onto people who agree with the writer, and people who can't understand the difference between what the Constitution says, and what they want it to say.  

 

You know what -- I'ma be direct for once. I know you can, and will be happy to, argue this all day -- cause why not. But I'm really not interested. I liked the meme and i disliked your nod to the hypocrisy of the meme that I like lol. That's all this is. I know when to fold 'em. I'm not about to sit here and argue over a sentence that is 250 y/o 🙃

 

I'm right though. About what? Doesn't matter. 

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
  • Super Duper Ain't No Party Pooper Two Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Larry said:

 

Well, I think it's pretty much guaranteed that The Right (And especially Abbot). Is going to make this about the police response, and Blame The Cops.  To divert attention from how Abbot, and Texas, and the NRA are knowingly complicit in this.   

 

And it's possible that the police should be criticized.  

 

In addition to Abbott.  

 

 

Oh yeah I'm sure they're definitely going to cue up that line of attack. Can see it coming from a mile away, though it could be a thorny issue for the right since they're the ones who are always talking about supporting police.

 

But we also already know that that belief goes out the window as soon as it's inconvenient for them (aka when trying to storm the Capitol building in an effort to disrupt the democratic process and overthrow election results)

  • Thumb up 1
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...