This has to be some of the most retarded sentiment I've ever read. I'm too busy counting my blessings between car trips and every other little thing I do.
This has to be some of the most retarded sentiment I've ever read. I'm too busy counting my blessings between car trips and every other little thing I do.This is America. You have one option and one option only. Count your blessings between shooting after shooting that you or your family are not a victim.
Reportedly there were more than 20 guns found in the hotel room, which include fully automatic rifles. It is nearly impossible to believe this person is a "lone wolf." How do you go about acquiring that many firearms without some help? I am inclined to believe there is a "support group" of sort that enabled this man.
Assuming he did this, that is. I cannot rule out a possibility of him being a victim himself to a real perpetrator who staged a cover-up, considering the magnitude of violence involved here.
American exceptionalism?And the law enforcement calls this guy a LONE WOLF.
Note to America.... We have a hell of a lot of so called LONE WOLFS.
Reportedly there were more than 20 guns found in the hotel room, which include fully automatic rifles. It is nearly impossible to believe this person is a "lone wolf." How do you go about acquiring that many firearms without some help?
While i don't own a single gun and i don't plan on owning any, i can definitely understand the appeal to having a large gun collection.pretty sure we got a few members on this board with > 20 firearms.
Buy my point is guns are being held to a different standard than other more deadly things that do even less good for society. And no politician is running on a more tobacco regulations platform, but there are plenty of anti-gun politicians. If it was really about saving lives and not a propaganda-driven imitative, I'd expect to see more clamoring for further alcohol and tobacco restriction. But it simply does not happen anywhere near the scale as it does with guns.
Buy my point is guns are being held to a different standard than other more deadly things that do even less good for society. And no politician is running on a more tobacco regulations platform, but there are plenty of anti-gun politicians. If it was really about saving lives and not a propaganda-driven imitative, I'd expect to see more clamoring for further alcohol and tobacco restriction. But it simply does not happen anywhere near the scale as it does with guns.
True. Guns are being held to a much lower standard than everything you mentioned.
The "illness" manifests itself once again.
http://www.foxnews.com/entertainmen...athy-for-vegas-vics-probably-republicans.html
I'm not a "right-winger" but a compelling argument for me is this. Every person has a right to defend their lives. Now who should decide what weapons/methods they should use to do so, the government or them? To me the right to self-defense is natural and inherent. The 2A didn't give people the right to use arms for defense, it specifically said the government couldn't prevent it. I have seen one video of a home invasion where a 10 round mag wouldn't do and I'm sure there are many others. Again who should decide what somebody needs for defense? But I grant you this is a tough debate.Is there even a middle ground to find? What is the right number of guns? What is the right criteria for owning one? What is an acceptable screening process to demarcate a "sane" gun owner from one that is a danger to snap and shoot 500 people? What is a workable plan to attack the issue of illegal guns and get them off the street?
Let me preface this by saying that I'm a gun owner, but I'm not a right-wing fucktard about it. I'd happily give up mine if the government could prove that I didn't need it to defend myself. That doesn't seem likely to happen though. But can somebody father right than me explain why we can't outlaw guns like Ar-15, Ak-47, high cap 17 shot pistols, etc without invoking the slippery slope argument? High power, high capacity semi-automatic weapons have no real sporting purpose. You can hunt just fine with single shot bolt action rifles and over/under shotguns. You can conceal carry a 6 shot revolver without feeling like you're defenseless. You can protect your home with a 6 shot mag pump shotgun and plink targets to kingdom come with a low capacity rifle or pistol. Why can't we at least agree that any gun that holds 30 rounds and any gun that can be converted to fully automatic fire serves no real purpose and is just a problem waiting to happen. I defy anyone to come up with a plausible explanation as to why they need to own a military rifle with a 30 round mag. Other than the obvious that they're hung like a mosquito and need to compensate for it. It sounds workable at least. No guns over 6 shot capacity, period. No guns that can be converted to automatic fire, period. No exceptions, no excuses. Hunters can still have effective guns, home owners can still have effective protection, concealed carry can still have effective deterrent weapons, everyones 2nd amendment rights could be protected and we could get a SHITLOAD of guns off the streets. It would not be a perfect solution, but it would be a hell of a lot better than what we have now.
I just got around to watching/listening to the shooting as it happened, yeah that was legit full auto. Clearly faster than a bump fire device, at least one rifle was anyway.
No offense intended, but I kinda hope this was just a case of a nutjob popping a fuse. I hope it doesn't turn out he was an American Brevik, trying to address gun control in his own demented way, using perceived opponents on the issue as fodder for the news. That will just make this heart breaking loss even uglier.
About times someone got some balls and did something that would make a difference.
New gun laws.
Ban all guns except registered pistols and real hunting rifles. No large clips for pistols or rifles. One type of gun per person. Limit amount of ammunition you can purchase per month. Buy back programs for them, after 2 years it would be a felony to own unless you have a special permit (rare.) No open carry at all period! No concealed carry unless you have a damn good reason. No immediate gun purchases, Complete background check, 10 day waiting list. If you purchase a gun you first have to take a firearm safety class.
Fuck you if you don't like them.
Reportedly there were more than 20 guns found in the hotel room, which include fully automatic rifles. It is nearly impossible to believe this person is a "lone wolf." How do you go about acquiring that many firearms without some help? I am inclined to believe there is a "support group" of sort that enabled this man.
Assuming he did this, that is. I cannot rule out a possibility of him being a victim himself to a real perpetrator who staged a cover-up, considering the magnitude of violence involved here.
I've never herd that before. Could you define "significant" please.Said one person. Meanwhile, a significant amount of rightwingers still think Sandy Hook was staged by the government to take away your guns and everyone involved was just an 'actor'.
Ok lol just heard from a conspiracy theory guy I know that someone in the trump admin hired this guy to get Puerto Rico off the news.
And another on the opposite side. Of course well know it was country music and who likes country music? Trump fans!
You broadly missed the point I was making in an overzealous effort to demonize guns. The point was that people that want to commit these types of acts have the element of surprise on their side and can use any number of things to inflict huge numbers of causalities. Whether a gun or something else doesn't matter for these kinds of attacks.
It should be pretty damn easy to figure out exactly who was in the room with surveilance footage. There are cameras everywhere in Vegas hotels. They know exactly who went in and out of the rooms.Reportedly there were more than 20 guns found in the hotel room, which include fully automatic rifles. It is nearly impossible to believe this person is a "lone wolf." How do you go about acquiring that many firearms without some help? I am inclined to believe there is a "support group" of sort that enabled this man.
Assuming he did this, that is. I cannot rule out a possibility of him being a victim himself to a real perpetrator who staged a cover-up, considering the magnitude of violence involved here.
I've never herd that before. Could you define "significant" please.
Is there even a middle ground to find? What is the right number of guns? What is the right criteria for owning one? What is an acceptable screening process to demarcate a "sane" gun owner from one that is a danger to snap and shoot 500 people? What is a workable plan to attack the issue of illegal guns and get them off the street?
Let me preface this by saying that I'm a gun owner, but I'm not a right-wing fucktard about it. I'd happily give up mine if the government could prove that I didn't need it to defend myself. That doesn't seem likely to happen though. But can somebody father right than me explain why we can't outlaw guns like Ar-15, Ak-47, high cap 17 shot pistols, etc without invoking the slippery slope argument? High power, high capacity semi-automatic weapons have no real sporting purpose. You can hunt just fine with single shot bolt action rifles and over/under shotguns. You can conceal carry a 6 shot revolver without feeling like you're defenseless. You can protect your home with a 6 shot mag pump shotgun and plink targets to kingdom come with a low capacity rifle or pistol. Why can't we at least agree that any gun that holds 30 rounds and any gun that can be converted to fully automatic fire serves no real purpose and is just a problem waiting to happen. I defy anyone to come up with a plausible explanation as to why they need to own a military rifle with a 30 round mag. Other than the obvious that they're hung like a mosquito and need to compensate for it. It sounds workable at least. No guns over 6 shot capacity, period. No guns that can be converted to automatic fire, period. No exceptions, no excuses. Hunters can still have effective guns, home owners can still have effective protection, concealed carry can still have effective deterrent weapons, everyones 2nd amendment rights could be protected and we could get a SHITLOAD of guns off the streets. It would not be a perfect solution, but it would be a hell of a lot better than what we have now.
Simple: the 2nd amendment wasn't written just for those things. It wasn't created for hunting, for personal protection, nor for plinking. The 2nd amendment was created to put arms in the citizens' hands that would prevent another tyrannical government. So, yes, according to the writers of the Bill of Rights, we NEED to own these firearms to prevent the government from usurping too many of our other rights. We need to have arms that are commensurate with what the government has. No, this doesn't extend to nuclear weapons, tanks, nor jets; those are not arms kept by civilians. If the government becomes tyrannical, they will have to deal with an armed populace and go door-to-door to disarm them. Our right to bear arms is not "given" to us by the Constitution, it is an inalienable right, given by nature/God, that the government is specifically barred from taking away.