Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

General Mass Shooting Thread (originally Las Vegas Strip)

The Sisko

By The Sisko
in The Tailgate

 Share

Recommended Posts

AsburySkinsFan

AsburySkinsFan

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, twa said:

 

Would you prefer the security guy not be armed?

 

 

Oh are we going to play the “Bull**** Hypothetical Situation Game”?!?!

I’ll take Strawman for $1000 Alex!

 

While we’re at it, lets play, would you rather the angry partron not be armed?

Because guess what? There ARE ways to do that.

 

Oh and @twa your whole BS about “oh there are risks” won’t fly either, YOU and the loonies on the Right and in the NRA have openly said that more people with guns makes us safer.....SAFER.

It doesn’t...in fact it’s the EXACT opposite.

Edited by AsburySkinsFan
Link to comment
Share on other sites
tshile

tshile

Posted
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, AsburySkinsFan said:

?????

Ok bubba.

 

It really is. 

 

The risk of having a gun when the police show up is that they will shoot you. It’s been discussed and acknowledged by everyone. 

 

In fact its  one of the pro control peoples favorite little quips - playing Rambo and getting shot when the cops show up. 

 

Now it’s happened and the people that have been for arming people say yeah, it’s a risk, even for a security guard, and you’re in here with your foaming at the mouth bull****. 

 

And no one is surprised. 

 

 

1 hour ago, Chew said:



Brother TWA, if YOU were Jemel Roberson, and you had just chased down somebody that just shot at patrons of a bar you work security for....would you just put a knee in his back to detain him?  Or would you hold a gun to his head/back?

 

Id stand about 15 feet away. I’m not getting near them. I’m not trained how to properly arrest someone like that and I’ve got no cuffs. Zero chance I’m getting close to them. 

 

I dont know what you’re supposed to do if you’re a security guard though. 

Edited by tshile
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
AsburySkinsFan

AsburySkinsFan

Posted
Posted
22 minutes ago, tshile said:

 

It really is. 

 

The risk of having a gun when the police show up is that they will shoot you. It’s been discussed and acknowledged by everyone. 

 

In fact its  one of the pro control peoples favorite little quips - playing Rambo and getting shot when the cops show up. 

 

Now it’s happened and the people that have been for arming people say yeah, it’s a risk, even for a security guard, and you’re in here with your foaming at the mouth bull****. 

 

And no one is surprised. 

 

You’re right about one thing....no one is surprised.

Only the Rightwing gun cultists accept the status quo as the price others must pay for their freedoms, while the rest of us get pissed every single time another innocent is gunned down when NOTHING is being done to stop gun violence and the sermonizing from the Right is that the solution is more guns make us safer.

So yeah, I’ll come back here again and again frothing at the mouth every time until this ****ing country gets it throuugh it’s collective consciousness that reducing gun violence means reducing guns.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
twa

twa

Posted
Posted
49 minutes ago, AsburySkinsFan said:

 

 

Oh and @twa your whole BS about “oh there are risks” won’t fly either, YOU and the loonies on the Right and in the NRA have openly said that more people with guns makes us safer.....SAFER.

It doesn’t...in fact it’s the EXACT opposite.

 

More good people with guns IF the need exists.

 

Good luck with laws stopping them, but obviously laws didn't stop the shootings you complain about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tshile

tshile

Posted
Posted
26 minutes ago, Mr. Sinister said:

Nah, foam at the mouth. Be upset. Keep calling this **** out, keep voting, from the lowest to highest levels.

 

The more people vote, and the less time they spend trying to make themselves feel special, the more things will change.

 

Seems to be working to date.

 

rational discussion doesn’t work anymore or something. 

 

Make sure you include lots of allcaps

33 minutes ago, AsburySkinsFan said:

You’re right about one thing....no one is surprised.

Only the Rightwing gun cultists accept the status quo as the price others must pay for their freedoms, while the rest of us get pissed every single time another innocent is gunned down when NOTHING is being done to stop gun violence and the sermonizing from the Right is that the solution is more guns make us safer.

So yeah, I’ll come back here again and again frothing at the mouth every time until this ****ing country gets it throuugh it’s collective consciousness that reducing gun violence means reducing guns.

 

Youre going to be doing that for a very long time. 

 

Enjoy

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Spaceman Spiff

Spaceman Spiff

Posted
Posted
36 minutes ago, Mr. Sinister said:

Nah, foam at the mouth. Be upset. Keep calling this **** out, keep voting, from the lowest to highest levels.

 

The more people vote, and the less time they spend trying to make themselves feel special, the more things will change.

 

I'd like to agree.  Heart says yes, mind says no.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AsburySkinsFan

AsburySkinsFan

Posted
Posted
31 minutes ago, twa said:

 

More good people with guns IF the need exists.

 

Good luck with laws stopping them, but obviously laws didn't stop the shootings you complain about.

This literally only happens here in America...with the exceedingly rare exceptions internationally.

It can be fixed, but you don't think the price of saving lives is worth the cost of your freedom to have the ability to easily destroy lives.

19 minutes ago, tshile said:

 

Seems to be working to date.

 

rational discussion doesn’t work anymore or something. 

 

Make sure you include lots of allcaps

 

Youre going to be doing that for a very long time. 

 

Enjoy

Rational discussion ONLY works when the other side is interested in finding a solution...the gun lobby and their cultists aren't interested in that. They have accepted that the loss of innocent life through gun violence is an acceptable price to pay for their guns. Truly the blood of the innocence are being shed to water their tree of liberty.

I may well be at it a very long time, but I will not become a silent victim from the malicious malfeasance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tshile

tshile

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, AsburySkinsFan said:

This literally only happens here in America...with the exceedingly rare exceptions internationally.

It can be fixed, but you don't think the price of saving lives is worth the cost of your freedom to have the ability to easily destroy lives.

 

It could have been fixed

 

until trump won in 2016 and replaced two justices.

 

youre not getting any meaningful gun control laws passed until the makeup of scotus shifts again

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AsburySkinsFan

AsburySkinsFan

Posted
Posted
Just now, tshile said:

 

It could have been fixed

 

until trump won in 2016 and replaced two justices.

 

youre not getting any meaningful gun control laws passed until the makeup of scotus shifts again

Doesn't mean we stop shouting until we get what we want.

Trust me, the moment we stop screaming about this is the moment the NRA and the cultists win and we are forever locked into their death cult.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tshile

tshile

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Mr. Sinister said:

@tshile

 

What is it that you want out of all of this? Just curious.

 

What is your ultimate stance on this issue

 

You mean you take shots without knowing who you’re shooting at? 

 

Ive posted about it in this thread over the course of months. Maybe even years. 

6 minutes ago, AsburySkinsFan said:

Doesn't mean we stop shouting until we get what we want.

Trust me, the moment we stop screaming about this is the moment the NRA and the cultists win and we are forever locked into their death cult.

 

They already won. 

 

Youre fighting a fight that’s over until scotus changes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. Sinister

Mr. Sinister

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, tshile said:

 

You mean you take shots without knowing who you’re shooting at? 

 

I mean the issue overall. Like, Do you believe in arming civilians, Do you believe in things like protocol when confronting an armed suspect. Do you believe less armed/less well armed citizens makes for a safer overall environment. Do you believe that, in the obvious realization that these will never stop, and not everyone can be saved, that 3 dead people vs 20-30 dead people is a necessary sacrifice..... Those kinds of things 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kilmer17

Kilmer17

Posted
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, AsburySkinsFan said:

You do realize that change can happen that doesn't start with SCOTUS right?

Let me ask a question with a big preface.

 

After Newtown, why didnt Obama do anything about gun violence?  And I dont mean this as an attack on Obama.  Because I think the reason is that he knew he couldnt accomplish anything AND (this is the important part) even trying was going to put too many Dem politicians in bad election spots if he forced them on it.  (I still think he should have fwiw)

 

So what do you think a Dem POTUS can accomplish?

Edited by Kilmer17
Link to comment
Share on other sites
tshile

tshile

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, AsburySkinsFan said:

You do realize that change can happen that doesn't start with SCOTUS right?

 

Um 

you realize nothing starts with scotus right?

 

i don’t know how anyone paying attention to gun laws/rights over the last 10 years can fail to understand the importance scotus plays in this and how the current makeup will make something that was previously very difficult now virtually impossible 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AsburySkinsFan

AsburySkinsFan

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Kilmer17 said:

Let me ask a question with a big preface.

 

After Newtown, Obama cried.  But why didnt he do anything about gun violence?  And I dont mean this as an attack on Obama.  Because I think the reason is that he knew he couldnt accomplish anything AND (this is the important part) even trying was going to put too many Dem politicians in bad election spots if he forced them on it.  (I still think he should have fwiw)

 

So what do you think a Dem POTUS can accomplish?

I'll ask you to provide a single piece of information then I'll be more than happy to answer all of your questions.

1) What year did the Republicans take control of both Houses of Congress during the Obama Presidency?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. Sinister

Mr. Sinister

Posted
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, TryTheBeal! said:

 

To foster despair and apathy in progressives under the guise of being a thoughtful moderate.

 

 

 

Nah, I truly want a chance to finally hear him out on this (because to be brutally honest, @tshile, I ignore a lot of your posts lately).

 

But all of his takes seem very confusing, so I have some questions I would like addressed, just so I can get to the actual questions I would like to ask

Edited by Mr. Sinister
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kilmer17

Kilmer17

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, AsburySkinsFan said:

I'll ask you to provide a single piece of information then I'll be more than happy to answer all of your questions.

1) What year did the Republicans take control of both Houses of Congress during the Obama Presidency?

2010.  He had a filibuster proof Senate and full House control when he was elected.  

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
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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