General Mass Shooting Thread (originally Las Vegas Strip)

[Simmsy]

4 hours ago, Fergasun said:

We don't even care enough to bump these threads and argue. 

 

Time to build a monument to the responsible gunphile whose fetish we can thank for enabling mass shootings.  I truly hope that while you enjoy your hunting, self protection, target shooting, and other legal 2nd amendment activity you thank the most recent three young victims and their families whose sacrifice and pain have enabled your gun ownership.  Sure. 99.8% of you are  "responsible", so why not roll the die with the remaining 0.2%... most likely it won't be someone you love who gets murdered.

 

We can also thank the parents of the shooter if it is true one of them purchased the firearm used less than a week ago.

They don't care and I don't care anymore. These people refuse to do ANYTHING to protect their own children or be helpful to society in any way. I no longer have time or pity for these people, you reap what you sow.

[TheGreatBuzz]

7 hours ago, Fergasun said:

We don't even care enough to bump these threads and argue. 

 

Time to build a monument to the responsible gunphile whose fetish we can thank for enabling mass shootings.  I truly hope that while you enjoy your hunting, self protection, target shooting, and other legal 2nd amendment activity you thank the most recent three young victims and their families whose sacrifice and pain have enabled your gun ownership.  Sure. 99.8% of you are  "responsible", so why not roll the die with the remaining 0.2%... most likely it won't be someone you love who gets murdered.

 

We can also thank the parents of the shooter if it is true one of them purchased the firearm used less than a week ago.

If only people had disdain for drunk drivers with the same zeal as they do for gun rights activists.  

[Ball Security]

16 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

If only people had disdain for drunk drivers with the same zeal as they do for gun rights activists.  

What I can’t stand about the drunk driver’s lobby is that every time there is a drunk driving tragedy, their first response is that it’s too soon to blame mixing alcohol and driving.  And that the tragedy could be prevented if we let more people drive drunk.  And that if we explore and implement common sense laws to curb drunk driving that it’s a slippery slope and all cars and booze will be confiscated.

[Larry]

16 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

If only people had disdain for drunk drivers with the same zeal as they do for gun rights activists.  

Pretty sure most people do. Speaking only for myself, I'm willing to stand here and watch you try to argue they should be treated the same. 
 

 

 

See, the reason we don't have a thread for saying bad things about drunk drivers isn't because of a vast left wing movement to try to defend drunk driving. 
 

It's because we don't have a powerful movement working tirelessly to protect drunk drivers, because they fear that drunk driving laws are a threat to their own drinking. 

[Hersh]

37 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

If only people had disdain for drunk drivers with the same zeal as they do for gun rights activists.  

 

Do you know people that say nice things about drunk drivers? 

[Jabbyrwock]

20 minutes ago, Larry said:

It's because we don't have a powerful movement working tirelessly to protect drunk drivers, because they fear that drunk driving laws are a threat to their own drinking. 

[TradeTheBeal!]

56 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

If only people had disdain for drunk drivers with the same zeal as they do for gun rights activists.  

With takes like this, I can guarantee that I would turn you to dust in Jeopardy.

[CousinsCowgirl84]

2 hours ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

If only people had disdain for drunk drivers with the same zeal as they do for gun rights activists.  

Nice satire!? This has the beginnings of an awesome snl script.

 

I think what you want is “beverage manufacturers and bars” instead of “drunk drivers”?

That would be a more apt comparison. The drunk driver is the mass shooter in your comparison. 

Edited December 1, 2021 by CousinsCowgirl84

[TheGreatBuzz]

My point is that, when comparing statistics, the numbers killed by drunk drivers and gun homicides are pretty close.  So where is the big push to do something about it?  Why are we not lobbying for a blow and go in every car?  Just because there isn’t and “drunk drivers lobby” doesn’t mean we aren’t doing everything we can.  At least gun rights are mentioned in the constitution (yes I know there is room for interpretation). People are crying for “reasonable” restrictions on gun access to bring down the number of gun deaths.  But we could probably save a similar number of people by some simple steps.  But people don’t care as much.  How about we make the rules to buy a gun or buy alcohol the same?  Because guns trigger emotions more even though the statistics show they are quite similar.

[Captain Wiggles]

2 hours ago, Hersh said:

 

Do you know people that say nice things about drunk drivers? 

 

Exactly. I don't know anyone that's championing driving drunk.

 

You know why after a traffic accident nobody says it could have been prevented if only a good drunk driver had been there to stop it? Because that mentality as a grown adult would be ****ing stupid. 🖖

[Ball Security]

12 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

My point is that, when comparing statistics, the numbers killed by drunk drivers and gun homicides are pretty close.  So where is the big push to do something about it?  Why are we not lobbying for a blow and go in every car?  Just because there isn’t and “drunk drivers lobby” doesn’t mean we aren’t doing everything we can.  At least gun rights are mentioned in the constitution (yes I know there is room for interpretation). People are crying for “reasonable” restrictions on gun access to bring down the number of gun deaths.  But we could probably save a similar number of people by some simple steps.  But people don’t care as much.  How about we make the rules to buy a gun or buy alcohol the same?  Because guns trigger emotions more even though the statistics show they are quite similar.

So you want to raise the age to buy firearms to 21?  I can get behind that.

[Dan T.]

6 minutes ago, Ball Security said:

So you want to raise the age to buy firearms to 21?  I can get behind that.

 

And require in-class and on-the-range training, and a written and operating test to obtain a license to own a gun?  I could get behind that, too.

[Corcaigh]

2 minutes ago, Dan T. said:

 

And require in-class and on-the-range training, and a written and operating test to obtain a license to own a gun?  

 

You mean "well regulated"? That would require a constitutional amendment, or something.

[Dan T.]

1 minute ago, Corcaigh said:

 

You mean "well regulated"? That would require a constitutional amendment, or something.

 

You know, the Supreme Court seems poised to overturn the 50-year precedent of Roe v. Wade.  

 

Maybe it's time to revisit rulings, including DC v. Heller, that ****ized the Second Amendment to mistakenly interpret it to mean there is an unfettered individual right to own firearms.  The NRA has been happy with that wrong interpretation.  After all, what's a few million innocent lives as long as those AR-15s can continue to appear under the Christmas trees of gun-fetishing Americans...

[Llevron]

42 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

My point is that, when comparing statistics, the numbers killed by drunk drivers and gun homicides are pretty close.  So where is the big push to do something about it?  

 

So basically you are saying people that want something done about the gun issue are hypocrites because they aren't as vocal about drunk drivers? 

 

Just want to make sure I have a fair representation of your opinion. 

[Corcaigh]

7 minutes ago, Dan T. said:

 

You know, the Supreme Court seems poised to overturn the 50-year precedent of Roe v. Wade.  

 

Maybe it's time to revisit rulings, including DC v. Heller, that ****ized the Second Amendment to mistakenly interpret it to mean there is an unfettered individual right to own firearms.  The NRA has been happy with that wrong interpretation.  After all, what's a few million innocent lives as long as those AR-15s can continue to appear under the Christmas trees of gun-fetishing Americans...

 

I believe that I posted a comment after Sandy Hook in response to someone who talked about the importance of gun rights and freedom ... "the tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of five year olds."

 

Because that is what comes as a consequence of our current approach to guns in this country.

[Hersh]

41 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

My point is that, when comparing statistics, the numbers killed by drunk drivers and gun homicides are pretty close.  So where is the big push to do something about it?  Why are we not lobbying for a blow and go in every car?  Just because there isn’t and “drunk drivers lobby” doesn’t mean we aren’t doing everything we can.  At least gun rights are mentioned in the constitution (yes I know there is room for interpretation). People are crying for “reasonable” restrictions on gun access to bring down the number of gun deaths.  But we could probably save a similar number of people by some simple steps.  But people don’t care as much.  How about we make the rules to buy a gun or buy alcohol the same?  Because guns trigger emotions more even though the statistics show they are quite similar.

 

https://www.engadget.com/congress-mandate-anti-drunk-driving-technology-cars-201820120.html

 

It's literally in the infrastructure bill just passed.

[Corcaigh]

Just now, Hersh said:

 

https://www.engadget.com/congress-mandate-anti-drunk-driving-technology-cars-201820120.html

 

It's literally in the infrastructure bill just passed.

 

Damn it. There goes that argument.

[Captain Wiggles]

1 minute ago, Corcaigh said:

 

Damn it. There goes that argument.

 

Well that and 4x as many people die each year from gun violence as opposed to drunk driving. 🤷‍♀️

 

Stats are difficult. 🤭

[Fan since a Fetus]

I just laughed all the way down this page. Thanks, I needed that, even though this isn't really a laughing situation. But, I laugh a lot at things I find very troublesome.

Edited December 1, 2021 by Fan since a Fetus

[Hersh]

I watched a video from the michigan hs of the kids in the classroom and maybe the shooter knocked on their door claiming to be the police. It ****ed me up for a good hour. Humans suck. 

[Ball Security]

48 minutes ago, Hersh said:

I watched a video from the michigan hs of the kids in the classroom and maybe the shooter knocked on their door claiming to be the police. It ****ed me up for a good hour. Humans suck. 

Yeah, after identifying himself as a sheriff he said “it’s safe to come out, bro.”  A kid said a sheriff wouldn’t say “bro” and they found a window to escape.

 

Dad bought the weapon that the killer used on Black Friday.

Edited December 1, 2021 by Ball Security

[Dan T.]

2 minutes ago, Hersh said:

I watched a video from the michigan hs of the kids in the classroom and maybe the shooter knocked on their door claiming to be the police. It ****ed me up for a good hour. Humans suck. 

 

 

Saw that.  Kudos to the kid with the presence of mind who, listening to the person in the hallway trying to convince the teacher he was an officer and open the door, interjected  "He said 'bro'. Red flag!" which convinced the class to escape out the window.   

 

The link below includes the video Hersh mentions.  It is not graphic, but it is harrowing.

 

Video of Oxford shooting: Students escape classroom through window (usatoday.com)

[Dan T.]

1 minute ago, Ball Security said:

Dad bought the killer his weapon on a Black Friday deal.

 

I read that the father had just purchased the gun, but I didn't see that it was bought specifically for his son. Is that the case?  I guess I assumed the kid just got a hold of dad's gun.

[Ball Security]

11 minutes ago, Dan T. said:

 

I read that the father had just purchased the gun, but I didn't see that it was bought specifically for his son. Is that the case?  I guess I assumed the kid just got a hold of dad's gun.

My wording wasn’t exact and I don’t want to mislead.  What I read was that the father bought the gun that was used on Black Friday. Didn’t read anything about whether or not it was intended for the son’s use.