Jump to content
Sturgeon's House
Donward

Terror Attacks and Active Shooter Events Thread

Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, Jeeps_Guns_Tanks said:

 

That would be epic, but there have already been some republican clowns saying they agree it should be banned, the next thing they are going to talk about is high cap mags.

 

They banned high cap mags out here in Colorado, and in response we held the first ever recall elections of state representatives, and won both. After that we went after a third, but that scumbag resigned before they could be recalled, that way they could appoint their replacement instead of losing control of the house. Re-instituting a national ban of any kind would be suicide for republicans, and the worst part is that I think they would willing do it just so they don't have to have the responsibility of being the majority party.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, i'm getting old so it's hazy, one Bush did extend the ban, I think. 

 

 

All I'm saying is just don't put your faith in politicians not selling out their base, when they can probably convince themselves if they don't know how wrong the media is on this shit, that their constituents have to agree with the ban because all decent people should.   And this is what Kimmel the cunt is preaching, if you don't agree with him assault weapons need to be banned, you're a heartless asshole and should kill yourself.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ulric said:

 

They banned high cap mags out here in Colorado, and in response we held the first ever recall elections of state representatives, and won both. After that we went after a third, but that scumbag resigned before they could be recalled, that way they could appoint their replacement instead of losing control of the house. Re-instituting a national ban of any kind would be suicide for republicans, and the worst part is that I think they would willing do it just so they don't have to have the responsibility of being the majority party.

 

 

YES!

 

And man, California sucks. If you want a perfect example of what democrats can do when giving the keys to run a state unchecked, and California is about to implode on several levels, and being a gun enthusiast here is hard. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

Do you actually think the availability of such devices is a good idea? 

 

I liked your earlier suggestion that those who really want automatic weapons should probably jump through a few hoops, just so the rest of us can feel a little safer, it's not a lot to ask for something which should IMHO be deemed a privilege as much as it is a right.....You are asking your fellows to place a great deal of trust in your good character after all.

 

I'm British, a non-firearm owner but several of my friends have full firearms licences and multiple weapons, so again I have no dog in the fight and I certainly do not mean to offend.....Just putting it out there.

 

The Hughes Amendment is the one that prohibits civilians from owning machineguns that were manufactured after May 19, 1986. Repealing that would simply allow people to purchase newly manufactured ones, it would not change their status as a Title II firearm. You would still have to go through the (at this point) year long process of getting ATF approval and passing an FBI background check, along with complying with all state and federal regulations concerning the transport, storage, and discharge of such firearms. The hoops that you have to jump through wouldn't change, you just wouldn't have to spend tens of thousands of dollars to do it (merely thousands of dollars).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So essentially you are suggesting trading off ready access to dodgy modified semi-automatics for any lunatic who fancies one, for monitored access to the real deal for FBI certified gun enthusiasts?

 

Pick up that fucking ball and RUN!

 

PS - Afterthought.....Do the FBI check up these guys after the initial vetting?  Probably a good idea, fortunes may change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Basically. Ban the dodgy crap that any schmuck can buy, and get rid of the very reason why they exist in the first place! The whole reason why these various "full auto simulation devices" exist is because machine guns are so expensive that very few people can have them, and the supply cannot grow to meet the demand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We already have laws that allow you to own full auto weapons, with an FBI background check, and fees, plus local law enforcement approval. You can also own tanks with working cannons, cause America FUCK yea. Neither of these things has ever been used in a crime. 

 

This guy buying his shit legally makes for a very rare case, and the real truth is the vast majority of American gun owners are good responsible people, who I trust to own anything they want. That's how a free country is supposed to work.  Gun crime is at the lowest it's been in decades and the democrats are using this incident to strip people like most of this boards members of their rights. 

 

Criminals can always get guns. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was never about how people feel. 

 

Over 3000 people die in automobile accidents in this country every day. That's real. There is no lobby for stricter automobile control. No push for better licensing, limiting types of vehicles, etc. 3000 people a day die in objects that are sold based on how "safe" they are. 

 

Meanwhile, guns kill a handful a day. Two thirds are suicides, the rest are usually criminals killing criminals. And they keep the law-abiding safe, as concealed carry deters numerous attacks without ever firing a shot. The presence or presentation of force against a threat is oftentimes enough to deter said threat. 

 

The thing that's meant to kill people keeps a majority of the country safe.

 

Meanwhile, the thing that's meant to keep you safe is the thing most likely to kill you. 

 

Violence and crime are vague, multi-faceted concepts that take years of study to grasp on a large scale. Consider that the United States is the largest and most diverse country on earth in terms of culture and demographics, yet one of the safest relative to our heterogeneous population.  

 

And besides, making laws to dissuade lawbreakers has never worked. 

 

Laws are not meant to protect. They are meant to give a society rules of punishment for when they are inevitably broken. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

But the sheer number of deaths is horrific, something like 1500 mass shootings in 1700 days.....That's insane, it sounds more like battlefield statistics.

 

 

That's straight up democrat propaganda.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The trend in recent years is that there are 10-12k non suicide firearm deaths every year. That includes accidents, justifiable self defense, police shootings, everything but suicides. Only about 300-350 people die every year from being shot with a rifle, handguns are responsible for over 90% of the deaths. The total number of firearm deaths, including suicide, is just under 30,000, and it's been dropping since the mid 1990's (or maybe even earlier) even as the population increases.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

But the sheer number of deaths is horrific, something like 1500 mass shootings in 1700 days.....That's insane, it sounds more like battlefield statistics.

What do you consider a "mass shooting"? Depending on where you get your statistics from, any incident involving 3 or more individuals is labeled as a "mass shooting". 

 

Now, go look at crime statistics for Chicago, IL. You'll find 20 or so homicides every few days. Mostly shootings in lower socioeconomic areas, mostly multiple people involved. That's ticked as a "mass shooting."

And IL has some of the strictest gun control laws in the country. 

Always question the motives. Always ask "Is this value added?" And remember, when someone takes a complicated subject matter and treats a it as primarily single variable dependent, they are trying to sell you something. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My understanding of mass shooting statistics is that the definition used for gathering statistics includes instances of what some wouldn't necessarily consider to be a mass shooting.  There's no one set definition to my knowdledge, and I feel like a lot include people merely wounded.  You could have Jamal shoot but not kill a bunch of fellow hoodrats, yet it would still fall under a mass shooting.  

 

Does it sound like we have a Vegas shooting or a Columbine almost every day?  No.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Oedipus Wreckx-n-Effect said:

What do you consider a "mass shooting"? Depending on where you get your statistics from, any incident involving 3 or more individuals is labeled as a "mass shooting". 

 

The number I was thinking of was four persons (killed - not including the shooter), I believe that's the accepted 'threshold':

 

Quote

The United States' Congressional Research Service acknowledges that there is not a broadly accepted definition, and defines a "public mass shooting"[2] as one in which four or more people selected indiscriminately, not including the perpetrator, are killed, echoing the FBI definition[3][4] of the term "mass murder".

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_shooting

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then @Sgt.Squarehead, spend a few nights in the wards of Chicago or Detroit and you'll see your fair number of mass shootings. There was even a Mass Shooting on my old street. I used to live in Section-8 housing, though it was bought out by a cocaine lord and then again by a development group. As the first white person to move into the area in probably a quarter-century, I got a first hand look. 

 

I'll parrot what @Ulric has stated. Violent crime in the US has been trending downwards since the early 90s. That makes events like this even more prominent. For a country as diverse, there is no way we should be as safe as we are. 

 

And we aren't safe in certain areas. But the Left control those areas, for the most part. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have a better chance of dying due to medical malpractice in the US than you do for gun crime. 

https://www.propublica.org/article/how-many-die-from-medical-mistakes-in-us-hospitals

 

40k people died on the roads in this country last year dwarfing gun deaths.  Hell, I wouldn't bet against backyard pools giving guns a run for their money. 

 

If that site tracked automobile deaths, it would look like a real whoreshow, so yeah, I pissed about the left trying to strip me of one of the few rights that makes American stand out. Gun, and free speech, and the left is going after both now. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Oedipus Wreckx-n-Effect said:

Violent crime in the US has been trending downwards since the early 90s. That makes events like this even more prominent. For a country as diverse, there is no way we should be as safe as we are.

 

I was actually aware of that, it was mentioned in the same article where I found the multiple shootings statistic, but at the same time the deadliness of individual mass shootings is trending upward.....It's really annoying me that I can't find the bloody thing.

 

2 minutes ago, Jeeps_Guns_Tanks said:

You have a better chance of dying due to medical malpractice in the US than you do for gun crime. 

https://www.propublica.org/article/how-many-die-from-medical-mistakes-in-us-hospitals

 

Dude.....I'm British, so you already know how I feel about that! 

 

I actually experienced the unbridled joy of suffering a dental abscess while in the clutches of the US healthcare system.....It was by far the most expensive and least pleasant part of an otherwise rather excellent holiday. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

 

I was actually aware of that, it was mentioned in the same article where I found the multiple shootings statistic, but at the same time the deadliness of individual mass shootings is trending upward.....It's really annoying me that I can't find the bloody thing.

 

Probably because the media treats these events as spectacle. They parade them around for whatever reason or lean. The story gets views, the story gets bills passed, it becomes ammunition for political figures. These individuals know how much of their job is won and lost on emotions, and there's nothing more emotional these days. 

 

The deranged see how much the country looks toward them. Whether they be egotists or what, you can't deny the attention these individuals garner. One day they were no-body, the next the President sheds a tear for them. 

 

And now, with such a high emphasis on "kill count", it's become a damned "High Score" for these people. Not only do you get fame and glory, see who can beat the newest High Score!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Oedipus Wreckx-n-Effect said:

And now, with such a high emphasis on "kill count", it's become a damned "High Score" for these people. Not only do you get fame and glory, see who can beat the newest High Score!

 

That brings us back to the book I linked to earlier, the one I expected to be utter waffle.....Have we desensitized ourselves with Counterstrike in a way that TV never quite could?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Sgt.Squarehead said:

 

That brings us back to the book I linked to earlier, the one I expected to be utter waffle.....Have we desensitized ourselves with Counterstrike in a way that TV never could?

I don't believe so. Functional human beings can tell the difference between reality and fantasy pretty well. Those who can't are usually caught early, and if they are violent they usually have those tendencies with or without violent fantasy inputs like video games. 

 

If anything, our pop-culture has gotten less gory. Go compare PG-13 rated films from the 1980s to those of today. The biggest difference? GORE!

 

The Saw movies shocked audiences across the US. Which is cute, considering some of the special effects of Tom Savini. 

 

Desensitized? I don't know. I think it might be a reflection of 24 hour news channels to find more and more shocking stories to fill the air-time and out-do one another. I'd say the 24-hour news channels (NBC, CBS, Fox, CNN, etc) have done more to desensitize than violent video games could have ever done. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only thing that has desensitized me is the left lying about gun crime to take away the guns that are bar none, the most fun to shoot every time some crazy asshole kills people. I've been into guns all my life, and all my life the left has said, oh we support the second too, while proving they don't every year.  The laws the left pushes do nothing to prevent gun crime. They never talk about the laws that do, because it ends up locking up their voter base in prison longer. See, when you put harsh penalties not on possession of guns, but of use, like use a gun in a crime 5 extra years, fire it, 10, shot someone 20, kill someone life no parole.   But again, this locks up a lot of lefty voters and or their kids. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Oedipus Wreckx-n-Effect said:

Functional human beings can tell the difference between reality and fantasy pretty well.

 

That, I think, is the issue, when people break they tend not to give much advance notice and if they do it's not always noticed in time.....Chuck a few weapons into that mix and things can go wrong fast.

 

I can't comment on gore-fest films, I've always detested them, I'll happily skin a rabbit or whatever but watching that shit at the cinema just never appealed.....Does Alien count?

 

Really appreciate the thoughtful discussion here BTW, I know I've touched on some really sensitive subjects at a particularly raw time.....Respect.

 

3 minutes ago, Jeeps_Guns_Tanks said:

to take away the guns that are bar none, the most fun to shoot every time some crazy asshole kills people.

 

I suppose the crazy assholes like the most fun guns too.....They just don't do 'appropriate targets'.  I seriously feel for the gun enthusiasts caught in the crossfire (if you'll excuse the pun) of all this.

Share this post


Link to post
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

×