19 Children and 2 Adults Killed In Texas Elementary School Mass Shooting.

[autigeremt 6,569]

32 minutes ago, icanthearyou said:

Are you content for this kind of statement to represent you level of thinking?

Appears your level may be in question. 

[autigeremt 6,569]

35 minutes ago, icanthearyou said:

Everything has an extreme.  The difference is the distribution curve.

Illogical 

[CoffeeTiger 5,084]

11 hours ago, autigeremt said:

It’s never the fault of the individual who pulls the trigger is it? 

It is, but when you have many different individuals using the same exact tools over and over and over and over and over and over and over..etc to commit mass murders then a common sense society that values human lives would try to limit the capability and ease of access to those tools. 

 

But as we and the world around us sees, the United State has neither common sense nor does it truly value human lives. Guns are the religion of the United States and all are subject to be sacrificed at the alter of that religion. 

 

 

Edited June 10, 2022 by CoffeeTiger

[AUDub 11,131]

59 minutes ago, CoffeeTiger said:

Guns are the religion of the United States and all are subject to be sacrificed at the alter of that religion. 

Blood for the blood god, skulls for his skull throne

[CoffeeTiger 5,084]

17 minutes ago, AUDub said:

Blood for the blood god, skulls for his skull throne

Khorne would be pleased. 

[GoAU 1,599]

6 hours ago, CoffeeTiger said:

It is, but when you have many different individuals using the same exact tools over and over and over and over and over and over and over..etc to commit mass murders then a common sense society that values human lives would try to limit the capability and ease of access to those tools. 

 

But as we and the world around us sees, the United State has neither common sense nor does it truly value human lives. Guns are the religion of the United States and all are subject to be sacrificed at the alter of that religion. 

 

 

Mass shootings, and in particular school shootings are absolutely horrible.   However, statistics show they are a significant outlier, as are killing by any rifle, much less an “assault” rifle.  We have not made any significant attempt to harden or defend our schools, and instead continue to try and either take or surrender (depending on your stance on the issue) a SIGNIFICANT constitutional right.  So significant in fact that the founding fathers listed it second only to freedom of speach and used the words “shall not  be infringed “ - not ambiguous language at all.  
 

Stripping of Constitutional rights, especially without exhausting every other alternative should raise concerns to anyone who values freedom. 
 

As Ben Franklin said: 

Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.

[CoffeeTiger 5,084]

2 hours ago, GoAU said:

Mass shootings, and in particular school shootings are absolutely horrible.   However, statistics show they are a significant outlier, as are killing by any rifle, much less an “assault” rifle.  We have not made any significant attempt to harden or defend our schools, and instead continue to try and either take or surrender (depending on your stance on the issue) a SIGNIFICANT constitutional right.  So significant in fact that the founding fathers listed it second only to freedom of speach and used the words “shall not  be infringed “ - not ambiguous language at all.  
 

Stripping of Constitutional rights, especially without exhausting every other alternative should raise concerns to anyone who values freedom. 
 

As Ben Franklin said: 

Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.

the 3rd Amendment is about soldiers not being able to demand you house them. I don’t know many people who consider that anywhere near the 3rd most important constitutional amendment. These things weren’t necessarily done by order of national importance. 
 

and I don’t know man. I’m just tired of all the shootings, deaths, needless slaughter that only happens in the US and war zones. 
 

im just having trouble caring about all the “but it’s rare” “ but my guns…you can’t take my guns!” “I have a constitutional right to ARs” 

 

like, I don’t know. I acknowledge you believe largely unrestricted  gun ownership rights are important, but frankly I don’t believe that they are and our children will continue to die till our politicians decide that they aren’t either. Hope in my lifetime to see a constitutional amendment that will amend the 2nd to make it more sane and help us become a more civilized, less dangerous society. 

[GoAU 1,599]

I get it.  I have the same frustrations, and as a father of 6 children have many of the same concerns.   If safety is your primary concern, we share that and just disagree on the path to get there.  

Doesn't it seem odd to you however, that actions like funding school security, that Republicans would easily get behind and keep kids safer instantly are being ignored or killed by Democrats so they can push for stripping / ending constitutional rights?  It certainly isn't an issue with spending.  It's almost like there's another agenda at play....

[icanthearyou 4,462]

1 hour ago, GoAU said:

I get it.  I have the same frustrations, and as a father of 6 children have many of the same concerns.   If safety is your primary concern, we share that and just disagree on the path to get there.  

Doesn't it seem odd to you however, that actions like funding school security, that Republicans would easily get behind and keep kids safer instantly are being ignored or killed by Democrats so they can push for stripping / ending constitutional rights?  It certainly isn't an issue with spending.  It's almost like there's another agenda at play....

No one wants your guns.  Common sense gun regulations are common sense.

Stop pretending to be patriot, a caring human being.  Today's NRA is a scam.

[GoAU 1,599]

1 hour ago, icanthearyou said:

No one wants your guns.  Common sense gun regulations are common sense.

Stop pretending to be patriot, a caring human being.  Today's NRA is a scam.

Hmmm - Beto, Biden and a bunch of other Dems disagree, and have said so on numerous occasions.  
 

“Pretending” - your ignorance continues to astound.    Although I am a member of the NRA, I’m not a huge fan of the organization.   Too many shady spending issues with WLP, but I do love the amount of safety / outreach they do.  GOA is even better - no compromise.  

[homersapien 11,353]

On 5/25/2022 at 9:11 AM, autigeremt said:

WE HAVE GUN CONTROL! Even in situations where the GOVERNMENT has RED FLAG laws in place the perp was STILL ALLOWED to purchase a firearm because GOVERNEMNT FAILED THE PEOPLE! THEY ARE INCOMPOTENT! 

 

I'm sorry but this isn't a gun problem. IT'S A PEOPLE PROBLEM. Pass all the laws you want. Come get my home protection....it won't change a thing. 

Allowing a 18 year-old to walk into a store and walk out with two assault rifles and hundreds of rounds of ammunition is hardly gun control.

But you are right about government failing the people.  Republicans in the senate are ignoring the will of the people regarding (serious) background checks.

Expect more of the same.

[homersapien 11,353]

On 5/25/2022 at 11:19 AM, autigeremt said:

No we should be “resigned” to attacking the root cause of the problem and not a symptom. Once again the left is lazy as hell and the right is beholden. It’s not Gun Control we should be after it’s people control. 
 

pass your laws…..government has proven it can’t control that either 

Is not instituting a serious, universal background check an direct effort to address the "people" part of this problem??

Edited June 11, 2022 by homersapien

[DKW 86 7,410]

On 6/10/2022 at 8:30 AM, CoffeeTiger said:

It is, but when you have many different individuals using the same exact tools over and over and over and over and over and over and over..etc to commit mass murders then a common sense society that values human lives would try to limit the capability and ease of access to those tools. 

 

But as we and the world around us sees, the United State has neither common sense nor does it truly value human lives. Guns are the religion of the United States and all are subject to be sacrificed at the alter of that religion. 

I agree with every common sense proposal out there. Got a question though. We have had guns in the public's hands for 240 years. We had almost no issues until Columbine. We used to teach Gun Safety in Schools. Every high school had dozens, maybe even a 100 weapons in the parking lot and in the lockers everyday for decades. No school shootings. What do you think happened?

[GoAU 1,599]

22 hours ago, homersapien said:

Is not instituting a serious, universal background check an direct effort to address the "people" part of this problem??

Is the current background check process not “serious”?  What changes would you make to it?  
 

Assuming the only changes are applying it across individual to individual sales, how would you enforce that?   
 

What about within a family, or loaning a firearm to a friend?  Before you jump to hard at the “loaning” bait, understand the guy that stopped the shooter in Uvalde used a borrowed firearm.  Taking a friend hunting could very well use a loaned firearm.  Having a friend that may have a reason to fears for her / his life could be a case to loan someone a firearm. 
 

[homersapien 11,353]

2 hours ago, GoAU said:

Is the current background check process not “serious”?  What changes would you make to it?  
 

Assuming the only changes are applying it across individual to individual sales, how would you enforce that?   
 

What about within a family, or loaning a firearm to a friend?  Before you jump to hard at the “loaning” bait, understand the guy that stopped the shooter in Uvalde used a borrowed firearm.  Taking a friend hunting could very well use a loaned firearm.  Having a friend that may have a reason to fears for her / his life could be a case to loan someone a firearm. 
 

My understanding is that a background "check" consists of checking a box that you've never been convicted of a crime.  I'd like to see some sort of verification against official records.

It would have to be a national law with national enforcement.

I am talking about purchasing.  But if the loanee commits a crime, the loaner would be liable for aiding, abetting or collaborating in that crime.

[AUFightingSoldiers 685]

1 minute ago, homersapien said:

My understanding is that a background "check" consists of checking a box that you've never been convicted of a crime.  I'd like to see some sort of verification against official records.

It would have to be a national law with national enforcement.

I am talking about purchasing.  But if the loanee commits a crime, the loaner would be liable for aiding, abetting or collaborating in that crime.

Just sitting back and watching this thread unfold, but the current background check is not just checking a box and carrying on. I have a friend that sales guns for a living and has turned down a ton of people because they have been convicted of felonies. The paperwork and ID have to be run and matched with an actual database in the same way someone unknown to a bank would need to be run through OFAC to make sure they're not linked to terrorist organizations. So yes, the background check is required for every single gun purchase (I've sat through 3 myself, understandably) and the info is processed and a yes or no comes back. There are also times where a person has had to wait to make that firearm purchase due to past mistakes. I've seen a  DUI and a stay in rehab lead to a 3 day wait and process.

For the record, this is in Auburn so it's not in a state with super strict gun laws already on the books. 

[homersapien 11,353]

6 minutes ago, AUFightingSoldiers said:

Just sitting back and watching this thread unfold, but the current background check is not just checking a box and carrying on. I have a friend that sales guns for a living and has turned down a ton of people because they have been convicted of felonies. The paperwork and ID have to be run and matched with an actual database in the same way someone unknown to a bank would need to be run through OFAC to make sure they're not linked to terrorist organizations. So yes, the background check is required for every single gun purchase (I've sat through 3 myself, understandably) and the info is processed and a yes or no comes back. There are also times where a person has had to wait to make that firearm purchase due to past mistakes. I've seen a  DUI and a stay in rehab lead to a 3 day wait and process.

For the record, this is in Auburn so it's not in a state with super strict gun laws already on the books. 

Many times it is either non-existent or superficial, depending on the seller. I also know this from first hand experience.

But good for your friend.  Apparently he is committed to more serious check.  (I wonder just how comprehensive that data base is?)

Edited June 12, 2022 by homersapien

[GoAU 1,599]

1 hour ago, homersapien said:

My understanding is that a background "check" consists of checking a box that you've never been convicted of a crime.  I'd like to see some sort of verification against official records.

It would have to be a national law with national enforcement.

I am talking about purchasing.  But if the loanee commits a crime, the loaner would be liable for aiding, abetting or collaborating in that crime.

You are seriously mistaken.  I suggest you take a deeper look at the NICS system and how existing background checks work before professing the system is broken.  Criticizing something you know nothing about would be pure ignorance.  

1 hour ago, homersapien said:

Many times it is either non-existent or superficial, depending on the seller. I also know this from first hand experience.

But good for your friend.  Apparently he is committed to more serious check.  (I wonder just how comprehensive that data base is?)

You doubled down on the ignorance.   

[DKW 86 7,410]

On 6/10/2022 at 8:30 AM, CoffeeTiger said:

Guns AND ABORTION are the religion of the United States and all are subject to be sacrificed at the alter of that religion. 

These two subjects are sacrosanct for both parties and they represent the sick deal the parties made with their constituents. Both are illogical. 

No thinking person needs an AR15 with a large clip on it. NO ONE.
People that are too ******* stupid TO USE or FIGURE OUT HOW TO USE BIRTH CONTROL should not be allowed to practice the vaginal sex act.

[GoAU 1,599]

36 minutes ago, DKW 86 said:

No thinking person needs an AR15 with a large clip on it. NO ONE.
 

I completely disagree.  First, I assume you omitted the military, although it’s not specifically mentioned.  
 

Is it safe to assume your interpretation of the 2A is that it was intended for hunting?   If so, I suggest you do some more research.  
 

The size of a magazine (not a “clip”) is a red herring.  In your opinion what is a good amount - 20,  10, 5 rounds?   Is it all semi automatic rifles?   
 

you are advocating theban of the most popular rifle in the nation,, which is used in less than 3% of the homicides in the US.  Suggest you “think” about the rationale of that.  

Edited June 14, 2022 by GoAU

[homersapien 11,353]

2 hours ago, GoAU said:

I completely disagree.  First, I assume you omitted the military, although it’s not specifically mentioned.  
 

Is it safe to assume your interpretation of the 2A is that it was intended for hunting?   If so, I suggest you do some more research.  
 

The size of a magazine (not a “clip”) is a red herring.  In your opinion what is a good amount - 20,  10, 5 rounds?   Is it all semi automatic rifles?   
 

you are advocating theban of the most popular rifle in the nation,, which is used in less than 3% of the homicides in the US.  Suggest you “think” about the rationale of that.  

If the premise is the 2nd amendment as intended is to protect the country (government) - or to protect us from the government - why should it be limited to mere rifles and pistols?

Shouldn't we allow people to bear RPG's or carry grenades (for example)?

 

 

Edited June 14, 2022 by homersapien

[CoffeeTiger 5,084]

6 minutes ago, homersapien said:

If the premise is the 2nd amendment as intended to protect the country (government) - or to protect us from the government - why should it be limited to mere rifles and pistols?

Shouldn't we allow people to bear RPG's or carry grenades (for example)?

 

 

Don't give him ideas. 

 

[GoAU 1,599]

1 hour ago, homersapien said:

If the premise is the 2nd amendment as intended to protect the country (government) - or to protect us from the government - why should it be limited to mere rifles and pistols?

Shouldn't we allow people to bear RPG's or carry grenades (for example)?

 

 

Yes - both.  
 

Contrary to popular belief, I do support some levels of control for types of weapons.  I just happen to think it is where it currently is.  Semi automatic firearms and magazines are not the problem.  
 

 

[homersapien 11,353]

1 hour ago, GoAU said:

Yes - both.  
 

Contrary to popular belief, I do support some levels of control for types of weapons.  I just happen to think it is where it currently is.  Semi automatic firearms and magazines are not the problem.  
 

 

So, you think RPGs and grenades are OK. 

Where is your limit?

Edited June 14, 2022 by homersapien

[wdefromtx 3,159]

5 hours ago, homersapien said:

If the premise is the 2nd amendment as intended is to protect the country (government) - or to protect us from the government - why should it be limited to mere rifles and pistols?

Shouldn't we allow people to bear RPG's or carry grenades (for example)?

 

 

You do realize that they are legal at the federal level?