independent and unofficial
Prince fan community site
Fri 6th Dec 2019 2:03am
Welcome! Sign up or enter username and password to remember me
Forum jump
Forums > Politics & Religion > Another School Shooting
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Page 11 of 11 « First<234567891011
Reply   New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
Reply #300 posted 12/02/19 6:37am

poppys

cborgman said:

Pokeno4Money said:


Told ya stuff always happens when I'm there. When I gassed up at the Exxon on Elysian Fields this morning somebody gave me the 411 on what went down. All I'll say, glad I don't live there.


Glad youre okay


Pokeno bragged and took credit for causing the Hard Rock Hotel collapse. Posted a big photo like it was a joke. There are still 2 bodies in there. So he can go to hell - speaking of sociopaths...

politics: the art or science of government.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #301 posted 12/02/19 8:47am

IanRG

RodeoSchro said:

cborgman said:

seriously, what the hell is wrong with you?

in your last post you whine about strawmen, and then here you are doing it again. i never said he was targeting individuals from 1100 feet away, i said he hit targets (ie the fuel tank) from 1100.

god, you are so pathetic.

also, the fact that you think we are exploiting murdered people by trying to keep other people from being murdered, and yet are more interested in calling what kind of gun accessory the murderer used and the pride it makes you feel than you are in keeping murderers from being able to do so easily speaks absolute volumes about you as a person.

seriously, take a look at your souls well being. you care more about blindly identifying the accessory that made it easier for the mass murderer than you care about stopping hundreds from being hurt and dozens from being murdered.

.

[Edited 12/1/19 10:18am]



You might as well end this and ask him where the line should be drawn as to what should or should not be owned by civilians.

He'll say, "I don't know" and then you all can move on with your lives.

.

Exactly, it is a tactic used by people who put guns before people, the rights to shoot people over the deaths they cause by making the discussion about the minutiae - the technical nuances between different devices so as to prevent any reduction in guns and, therefore any reduction in death and injury from gun violence.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #302 posted 12/02/19 10:21am

cborgman

avatar

RodeoSchro said:

cborgman said:

seriously, what the hell is wrong with you?

in your last post you whine about strawmen, and then here you are doing it again. i never said he was targeting individuals from 1100 feet away, i said he hit targets (ie the fuel tank) from 1100.

god, you are so pathetic.

also, the fact that you think we are exploiting murdered people by trying to keep other people from being murdered, and yet are more interested in calling what kind of gun accessory the murderer used and the pride it makes you feel than you are in keeping murderers from being able to do so easily speaks absolute volumes about you as a person.

seriously, take a look at your souls well being. you care more about blindly identifying the accessory that made it easier for the mass murderer than you care about stopping hundreds from being hurt and dozens from being murdered.

.

[Edited 12/1/19 10:18am]



You might as well end this and ask him where the line should be drawn as to what should or should not be owned by civilians.

He'll say, "I don't know" and then you all can move on with your lives.

oh, believe me i know what an exercise in futility, waffling, and nonsense a conversation attempt with only is.


but its always fun to catch him in a few more lies to add to the hall of fame. his nonsense often comes back to haunt him, when he inevitably changes sides of the fence and claims he never said something and is never wrong.

.

[Edited 12/2/19 10:40am]

Out-foxing fox-bots for almost 20 years on the org.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #303 posted 12/02/19 11:42am

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

IanRG said:

.

Exactly, it is a tactic used by people who put guns before people, the rights to shoot people over the deaths they cause by making the discussion about the minutiae - the technical nuances between different devices so as to prevent any reduction in guns and, therefore any reduction in death and injury from gun violence.

I do not put guns before people... that is just something some seem to miss.

and the technical nuances are vital... 100% vital. As we see people making up reasons to ban "assault rifles" for reasons that would also ban many other kinds of guns.


like do you want any currenrly legal pistols banned?


and we people foolishly talk about the clinton bans they have no idea what was banned and how the bans were mostly cosmetic and some make them less safe... all they do is parrot what someone told them and them claim victory. it is okay I get it guns trigger and scare some people.

No one is coming for your abortion: they just want common-sense abortion regulations: background checks, waiting periods, lifetime limits, take a class, and a small tax.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #304 posted 12/02/19 11:45am

Pokeno4Money

avatar

poppys said:

cborgman said:

Pokeno4Money said:
Glad youre okay


Pokeno bragged and took credit for causing the Hard Rock Hotel collapse. Posted a big photo like it was a joke. There are still 2 bodies in there. So he can go to hell - speaking of sociopaths...


Credit? So now you've resorted to blaming me for things that I obviously have no control over?

I facetiously commented about how weird stuff happens whenever I'm around, obviously. Like the "mayhem" insurance company commercials.

But you just can't get along and play nice with others, can you? And when others can and do, it pisses you off.

Sad.

"Jussie Smollett wanted to become the Rosa Parks of Gay Black Men, but instead he became the Rosie Ruiz."

https://nypost.com/2019/0...a-is-long/
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #305 posted 12/02/19 11:54am

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

poppys said:


Pokeno bragged and took credit for causing the Hard Rock Hotel collapse. Posted a big photo like it was a joke. There are still 2 bodies in there. So he can go to hell - speaking of sociopaths...

follow the rules please

No one is coming for your abortion: they just want common-sense abortion regulations: background checks, waiting periods, lifetime limits, take a class, and a small tax.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #306 posted 12/02/19 12:59pm

cborgman

avatar

OnlyNDaUsa said:

and we people foolishly talk about the clinton bans they have no idea what was banned and how the bans were mostly cosmetic and some make them less safe... all they do is parrot what someone told them and them claim victory. it is okay I get it guns trigger and scare some people.

Speaking of wee foolish people and parroting:
What in the ban made guns less safe?
Out-foxing fox-bots for almost 20 years on the org.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #307 posted 12/02/19 1:00pm

poppys

Yes. Follow the rules. Pokeno never should have posted a photo of the Hard Rock collapse (with dead people in it) in the first place. Completely off-topic. There are no building collapse threads in P&R.

politics: the art or science of government.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #308 posted 12/02/19 1:13pm

poppys

Pokeno4Money said:

poppys said:


Pokeno bragged and took credit for causing the Hard Rock Hotel collapse. Posted a big photo like it was a joke. There are still 2 bodies in there. So he can go to hell - speaking of sociopaths...


Credit? So now you've resorted to blaming me for things that I obviously have no control over?

I facetiously commented about how weird stuff happens whenever I'm around, obviously. Like the "mayhem" insurance company commercials.

But you just can't get along and play nice with others, can you? And when others can and do, it pisses you off.

Sad.


Posting a photo of a collapsed building with dead people in it as a joke - making excuses saying it's funny like a TV commercial is what's sad.


Topic - Is Veteren's day the most pc holiday? - Reply #37

Pokeno4Money said:


That would imply she was holding food, a chicken breast or turkey breast.
If a woman lures a guy by lifting her shirt, you wouldn't call it a "Breast Trap" now would you??
Of course not, it would be called a "Boobie Trap".

So I'm going back to NOLA for Thanksgiving. Last time I was there, I walked right by the Hard Rock Hotel and it collapsed a few days later. What kind of mayhem will I cause this time? lol lol

GettyImages_1175412095.0.jpg

[Edited 12/2/19 13:39pm]

politics: the art or science of government.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #309 posted 12/03/19 8:03am

cborgman

avatar

cborgman said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:
and we people foolishly talk about the clinton bans they have no idea what was banned and how the bans were mostly cosmetic and some make them less safe... all they do is parrot what someone told them and them claim victory. it is okay I get it guns trigger and scare some people.
Speaking of wee foolish people and parroting: What in the ban made guns less safe?

and only said:

tumbleweed

just yet another of only just makes up shit with no back up.

Out-foxing fox-bots for almost 20 years on the org.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #310 posted 12/03/19 8:55am

poppys

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/oshkosh-west-school-shooting-armed-student-prompts-officer-shooting-at-another-wisconsin-high-school-today-2019-12-03/

Armed student, officer injured in another Wisconsin school shooting

Police in Wisconsin say an armed student confronted a school resource officer at a Wisconsin high school Tuesday, prompting an officer-involved shooting. Both the student and the school resource officer were injured and transported to hospitals following the incident at Oshkosh West high school, Oshkosh police say.

The incident comes a day after an officer shot an armed student at another Wisconsin high school, about 80 miles south in Waukesha. The student gunman was injured in the shooting Monday at Waukesha South High School.

politics: the art or science of government.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #311 posted 12/03/19 10:46am

cborgman

avatar

It never ends
Out-foxing fox-bots for almost 20 years on the org.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #312 posted 12/03/19 10:54am

Pokeno4Money

avatar

poppys said:

Yes. Follow the rules. Pokeno never should have posted a photo of the Hard Rock collapse (with dead people in it) in the first place. Completely off-topic. There are no building collapse threads in P&R.


And you know darn well why I did. My bad for thinking there was even the slightest chance you could behave in a civil manner. I'm not playing this game, go find someone else to try and chase off. I'm sure there's plenty of people left, right? lol

"Jussie Smollett wanted to become the Rosa Parks of Gay Black Men, but instead he became the Rosie Ruiz."

https://nypost.com/2019/0...a-is-long/
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #313 posted 12/03/19 11:10am

poppys

Pokeno4Money said:

poppys said:

Yes. Follow the rules. Pokeno never should have posted a photo of the Hard Rock collapse (with dead people in it) in the first place. Completely off-topic. There are no building collapse threads in P&R.


And you know darn well why I did. My bad for thinking there was even the slightest chance you could behave in a civil manner. I'm not playing this game, go find someone else to try and chase off. I'm sure there's plenty of people left, right? lol


Bringing the Hard Rock disaster in as a joke was off-topic in the "Veteren's" Day thread - and just as off topic in the School Shooting thread - when you tried to keep it going. Those are your posts, not mine.

On a public forum, what you say will be read and commented on.

politics: the art or science of government.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #314 posted 12/03/19 1:20pm

IanRG

OnlyNDaUsa said:

IanRG said:

.

Exactly, it is a tactic used by people who put guns before people, the rights to shoot people over the deaths they cause by making the discussion about the minutiae - the technical nuances between different devices so as to prevent any reduction in guns and, therefore any reduction in death and injury from gun violence.

I do not put guns before people... that is just something some seem to miss.

and the technical nuances are vital... 100% vital. As we see people making up reasons to ban "assault rifles" for reasons that would also ban many other kinds of guns.


like do you want any currenrly legal pistols banned?


and we people foolishly talk about the clinton bans they have no idea what was banned and how the bans were mostly cosmetic and some make them less safe... all they do is parrot what someone told them and them claim victory. it is okay I get it guns trigger and scare some people.

.

Then stop putting guns before people in virtually every post you make about guns (note, they are almost never about the victims of gun violence).

.

The technical nuances are not vital. The only thing that is vital is that you always and only obsess about the minutiae because you want no sensible analysis of the rates of gun violence, gun death and gun injury in the US. It is not whether such and such a gun can be classed such and such a type or what your partisan opinion is on rules introduced by different sides of politics. It is about how you always put the minutiae of the techical nuances of guns before the people killed, injured or threatened by guns. It is about the fact that far, far, far more people are killed, injured or threatened by guns than are protected by guns. It about how you consider the current balance of gun control in the US between guns and people as "tolerable". You did not express this in regards to the people killed, injured or threatened and not protected by guns, but, as always, only in regards to any threat that could increase new rules or regulations on being able to kill, injure or threaten with guns.

.

As to parroting: all you ever do is parrot the pro-gun lobby spin.

.

As being scared by guns:

- It is not the guns, but it is the people who think they are effective protection when all they do is increase the rate of gun violence in the US so people are proportionally 10 times more likely to killed, injured or threatened by guns - the statistics show that the criminal with a gun is almost never stopped by a "good" person with a gun and all the good person with a gun has done is significantly escalate the violence and put themselves and their family so much more at risk.

- It is the people like you that think they need to prepare for war against their own police and their own government.

.

Every nation needs to set their own rules and controls with regards to their people's attitudes and circumstances. When a country is an order of magnitude worse than equivalent countries, when a black man at the peaks of violence in the wars in Iraq or Afghanistan was safer over there than in home in Miami, then the rules and regulation and call to action to make it safer than a war zone will be different for the US. The US NEEDS far more restrictive rules than other equivalent nations because it has shown that there are too many "guns before people" people that are not mature, stable or sensible enough in regards to guns. It is people like you that make this necessary. People that think the response to yet another round of gun violence events is to argue the minutiae of different gun specs and ignore the actual rates of death and injury inflicted. People that ignore the individual people lost and the impacts on their family, friends and communities in their need to put guns before people.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #315 posted 12/03/19 2:46pm

poppys

cborgman said:

It never ends


disbelief We could have a permanent sticky. Latest US Shooting...

politics: the art or science of government.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #316 posted 12/04/19 5:38pm

DiminutiveRock
er

avatar

poppys said:

cborgman said:

It never ends


disbelief We could have a permanent sticky. Latest US Shooting...


Sad but true neutral

"Families are torn apart, men women and children are separated. Children come home from school to find their parents have gone missing." - Anne Frank
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #317 posted 12/04/19 6:08pm

poppys

IanRG said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

I do not put guns before people... that is just something some seem to miss.

and the technical nuances are vital... 100% vital. As we see people making up reasons to ban "assault rifles" for reasons that would also ban many other kinds of guns.


like do you want any currenrly legal pistols banned?


and we people foolishly talk about the clinton bans they have no idea what was banned and how the bans were mostly cosmetic and some make them less safe... all they do is parrot what someone told them and them claim victory. it is okay I get it guns trigger and scare some people.

.

Then stop putting guns before people in virtually every post you make about guns (note, they are almost never about the victims of gun violence).

.

The technical nuances are not vital. The only thing that is vital is that you always and only obsess about the minutiae because you want no sensible analysis of the rates of gun violence, gun death and gun injury in the US. It is not whether such and such a gun can be classed such and such a type or what your partisan opinion is on rules introduced by different sides of politics. It is about how you always put the minutiae of the techical nuances of guns before the people killed, injured or threatened by guns. It is about the fact that far, far, far more people are killed, injured or threatened by guns than are protected by guns. It about how you consider the current balance of gun control in the US between guns and people as "tolerable". You did not express this in regards to the people killed, injured or threatened and not protected by guns, but, as always, only in regards to any threat that could increase new rules or regulations on being able to kill, injure or threaten with guns.

.

As to parroting: all you ever do is parrot the pro-gun lobby spin.

.

As being scared by guns:

- It is not the guns, but it is the people who think they are effective protection when all they do is increase the rate of gun violence in the US so people are proportionally 10 times more likely to killed, injured or threatened by guns - the statistics show that the criminal with a gun is almost never stopped by a "good" person with a gun and all the good person with a gun has done is significantly escalate the violence and put themselves and their family so much more at risk.

- It is the people like you that think they need to prepare for war against their own police and their own government.

.

Every nation needs to set their own rules and controls with regards to their people's attitudes and circumstances. When a country is an order of magnitude worse than equivalent countries, when a black man at the peaks of violence in the wars in Iraq or Afghanistan was safer over there than in home in Miami, then the rules and regulation and call to action to make it safer than a war zone will be different for the US.

The US NEEDS far more restrictive rules than other equivalent nations because it has shown that there are too many "guns before people" people that are not mature, stable or sensible enough in regards to guns. It is people like you that make this necessary. People that think the response to yet another round of gun violence events is to argue the minutiae of different gun specs and ignore the actual rates of death and injury inflicted. People that ignore the individual people lost and the impacts on their family, friends and communities in their need to put guns before people.


Really good post Ian. I started to bold some of it but realized I'd have to bold the whole thing.

politics: the art or science of government.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #318 posted 12/04/19 6:12pm

cborgman

avatar

IanRG said:



OnlyNDaUsa said:




IanRG said:



.


Exactly, it is a tactic used by people who put guns before people, the rights to shoot people over the deaths they cause by making the discussion about the minutiae - the technical nuances between different devices so as to prevent any reduction in guns and, therefore any reduction in death and injury from gun violence.





I do not put guns before people... that is just something some seem to miss.

and the technical nuances are vital... 100% vital. As we see people making up reasons to ban "assault rifles" for reasons that would also ban many other kinds of guns.


like do you want any currenrly legal pistols banned?


and we people foolishly talk about the clinton bans they have no idea what was banned and how the bans were mostly cosmetic and some make them less safe... all they do is parrot what someone told them and them claim victory. it is okay I get it guns trigger and scare some people.



.


Then stop putting guns before people in virtually every post you make about guns (note, they are almost never about the victims of gun violence).


.


The technical nuances are not vital. The only thing that is vital is that you always and only obsess about the minutiae because you want no sensible analysis of the rates of gun violence, gun death and gun injury in the US. It is not whether such and such a gun can be classed such and such a type or what your partisan opinion is on rules introduced by different sides of politics. It is about how you always put the minutiae of the techical nuances of guns before the people killed, injured or threatened by guns. It is about the fact that far, far, far more people are killed, injured or threatened by guns than are protected by guns. It about how you consider the current balance of gun control in the US between guns and people as "tolerable". You did not express this in regards to the people killed, injured or threatened and not protected by guns, but, as always, only in regards to any threat that could increase new rules or regulations on being able to kill, injure or threaten with guns.


.


As to parroting: all you ever do is parrot the pro-gun lobby spin.


.


As being scared by guns:


- It is not the guns, but it is the people who think they are effective protection when all they do is increase the rate of gun violence in the US so people are proportionally 10 times more likely to killed, injured or threatened by guns - the statistics show that the criminal with a gun is almost never stopped by a "good" person with a gun and all the good person with a gun has done is significantly escalate the violence and put themselves and their family so much more at risk.


- It is the people like you that think they need to prepare for war against their own police and their own government.


.


Every nation needs to set their own rules and controls with regards to their people's attitudes and circumstances. When a country is an order of magnitude worse than equivalent countries, when a black man at the peaks of violence in the wars in Iraq or Afghanistan was safer over there than in home in Miami, then the rules and regulation and call to action to make it safer than a war zone will be different for the US. The US NEEDS far more restrictive rules than other equivalent nations because it has shown that there are too many "guns before people" people that are not mature, stable or sensible enough in regards to guns. It is people like you that make this necessary. People that think the response to yet another round of gun violence events is to argue the minutiae of different gun specs and ignore the actual rates of death and injury inflicted. People that ignore the individual people lost and the impacts on their family, friends and communities in their need to put guns before people.


This.
Out-foxing fox-bots for almost 20 years on the org.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #319 posted 12/05/19 4:19am

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

IanRG said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

I do not put guns before people... that is just something some seem to miss.

and the technical nuances are vital... 100% vital. As we see people making up reasons to ban "assault rifles" for reasons that would also ban many other kinds of guns.


like do you want any currenrly legal pistols banned?


and we people foolishly talk about the clinton bans they have no idea what was banned and how the bans were mostly cosmetic and some make them less safe... all they do is parrot what someone told them and them claim victory. it is okay I get it guns trigger and scare some people.

.

Then stop putting guns before people in virtually every post you make about guns (note, they are almost never about the victims of gun violence).

.

The technical nuances are not vital. The only thing that is vital is that you always and only obsess about the minutiae because you want no sensible analysis of the rates of gun violence, gun death and gun injury in the US. It is not whether such and such a gun can be classed such and such a type or what your partisan opinion is on rules introduced by different sides of politics. It is about how you always put the minutiae of the techical nuances of guns before the people killed, injured or threatened by guns. It is about the fact that far, far, far more people are killed, injured or threatened by guns than are protected by guns. It about how you consider the current balance of gun control in the US between guns and people as "tolerable". You did not express this in regards to the people killed, injured or threatened and not protected by guns, but, as always, only in regards to any threat that could increase new rules or regulations on being able to kill, injure or threaten with guns.

.

As to parroting: all you ever do is parrot the pro-gun lobby spin.

.

As being scared by guns:

- It is not the guns, but it is the people who think they are effective protection when all they do is increase the rate of gun violence in the US so people are proportionally 10 times more likely to killed, injured or threatened by guns - the statistics show that the criminal with a gun is almost never stopped by a "good" person with a gun and all the good person with a gun has done is significantly escalate the violence and put themselves and their family so much more at risk.

- It is the people like you that think they need to prepare for war against their own police and their own government.

.

Every nation needs to set their own rules and controls with regards to their people's attitudes and circumstances. When a country is an order of magnitude worse than equivalent countries, when a black man at the peaks of violence in the wars in Iraq or Afghanistan was safer over there than in home in Miami, then the rules and regulation and call to action to make it safer than a war zone will be different for the US. The US NEEDS far more restrictive rules than other equivalent nations because it has shown that there are too many "guns before people" people that are not mature, stable or sensible enough in regards to guns. It is people like you that make this necessary. People that think the response to yet another round of gun violence events is to argue the minutiae of different gun specs and ignore the actual rates of death and injury inflicted. People that ignore the individual people lost and the impacts on their family, friends and communities in their need to put guns before people.

compassion for the victims need not be said. But I am sure in most cases I have..,


the technical nuances are vital if we are going to change any laws in terms of what kinds of guns are deemed illegal... most vital...more or less.

I parrot nothing. what I say is my own.

so you agree it is a people problem not a gun problem... make up your mind

"people like [Me]" LOL... weird ask the parents of Mike Brown, Walter Scott, Isiah Murrietta-Golding.... how much trust they have in cops! And as to "Preparing" i never said that... But that IS part of why the 2A exists. read a book. and it is not to wage war but to defend. And not just rogue cops or our government... (ask the people at Waco or ruby ridge) but from foreign threats... or just a burglar or home invader or a school shooter (I am happy to say that some schools have WOKE UP and now let some teachers carry guns!)


I am glad you admit you want SWEEPING bans and massive restrictions... that you want the bad guys and cops to be the only ones armed that you are willing to give away a right do it being abused by a few... thank you... I hope you never have to defend yourself, a loved one, or your property... maybe put a sign in your yard "GUN FREE HOUSE"


oh and if you are asking: how many will it take for me to change my mine... there is no number... I HOPE I have the courage and moral fiber to never change my mind... in fact the MORE it it happens the MORE likely I am to want to get some.

No one is coming for your abortion: they just want common-sense abortion regulations: background checks, waiting periods, lifetime limits, take a class, and a small tax.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #320 posted 12/05/19 4:26am

jaawwnn

avatar

LOL Americans and their guns, you people are insane.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #321 posted 12/05/19 6:51am

cborgman

avatar

OnlyNDaUsa said:

oh and if you are asking: how many will it take for me to change my mine... there is no number...

that sums it up completely.
no matter how many people get murdered, only wont ever change his "mine"


.

[Edited 12/5/19 7:13am]

Out-foxing fox-bots for almost 20 years on the org.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #322 posted 12/05/19 12:32pm

IanRG

OnlyNDaUsa said:

IanRG said:

.

Then stop putting guns before people in virtually every post you make about guns (note, they are almost never about the victims of gun violence).

.

The technical nuances are not vital. The only thing that is vital is that you always and only obsess about the minutiae because you want no sensible analysis of the rates of gun violence, gun death and gun injury in the US. It is not whether such and such a gun can be classed such and such a type or what your partisan opinion is on rules introduced by different sides of politics. It is about how you always put the minutiae of the techical nuances of guns before the people killed, injured or threatened by guns. It is about the fact that far, far, far more people are killed, injured or threatened by guns than are protected by guns. It about how you consider the current balance of gun control in the US between guns and people as "tolerable". You did not express this in regards to the people killed, injured or threatened and not protected by guns, but, as always, only in regards to any threat that could increase new rules or regulations on being able to kill, injure or threaten with guns.

.

As to parroting: all you ever do is parrot the pro-gun lobby spin.

.

As being scared by guns:

- It is not the guns, but it is the people who think they are effective protection when all they do is increase the rate of gun violence in the US so people are proportionally 10 times more likely to killed, injured or threatened by guns - the statistics show that the criminal with a gun is almost never stopped by a "good" person with a gun and all the good person with a gun has done is significantly escalate the violence and put themselves and their family so much more at risk.

- It is the people like you that think they need to prepare for war against their own police and their own government.

.

Every nation needs to set their own rules and controls with regards to their people's attitudes and circumstances. When a country is an order of magnitude worse than equivalent countries, when a black man at the peaks of violence in the wars in Iraq or Afghanistan was safer over there than in home in Miami, then the rules and regulation and call to action to make it safer than a war zone will be different for the US. The US NEEDS far more restrictive rules than other equivalent nations because it has shown that there are too many "guns before people" people that are not mature, stable or sensible enough in regards to guns. It is people like you that make this necessary. People that think the response to yet another round of gun violence events is to argue the minutiae of different gun specs and ignore the actual rates of death and injury inflicted. People that ignore the individual people lost and the impacts on their family, friends and communities in their need to put guns before people.

compassion for the victims need not be said. But I am sure in most cases I have..,


the technical nuances are vital if we are going to change any laws in terms of what kinds of guns are deemed illegal... most vital...more or less.

I parrot nothing. what I say is my own.

so you agree it is a people problem not a gun problem... make up your mind

"people like [Me]" LOL... weird ask the parents of Mike Brown, Walter Scott, Isiah Murrietta-Golding.... how much trust they have in cops! And as to "Preparing" i never said that... But that IS part of why the 2A exists. read a book. and it is not to wage war but to defend. And not just rogue cops or our government... (ask the people at Waco or ruby ridge) but from foreign threats... or just a burglar or home invader or a school shooter (I am happy to say that some schools have WOKE UP and now let some teachers carry guns!)


I am glad you admit you want SWEEPING bans and massive restrictions... that you want the bad guys and cops to be the only ones armed that you are willing to give away a right do it being abused by a few... thank you... I hope you never have to defend yourself, a loved one, or your property... maybe put a sign in your yard "GUN FREE HOUSE"


oh and if you are asking: how many will it take for me to change my mine... there is no number... I HOPE I have the courage and moral fiber to never change my mind... in fact the MORE it it happens the MORE likely I am to want to get some.

.

There is so much wrong in this post:

.

No, compassion does need to be shown. No, you virtually never show it - You only ever put guns before people.

.

No, you NEVER raise the minutiae of the technical details for laws that seek to reduce the deplorable rate of death by guns, injury by guns and threats or intimidation with guns. You only ever raise the minutiae to argue against any changes that seek to reduce death by guns, injury by guns and threats or intimidation with guns by parroting the tactics and press releases of the guns before people lobbies.

.

No, you virtually only ever parrot others. Too often the timing of "your" latest tactic or argument has been within days after the guns before people lobby stating this in their defense of guns.

.

No, I never said it is a gun problem. I have only ever argued that the problem is too many think like you in the US, so people in the US are 10 times more likely to be victims of gun violence resulting gun deaths, gun injuries and the use of guns to threaten and intimidate people.

.

Yes, people like you who are always with the "defending" shooter, always protecting the gun over the victim whilst showing no compassion for the victim. You stood against Justine Damond with post after post after post about how when she was killed by the police for trying to help them. You argued that it was her fault (it was not), that the police officer would not be found guilty of murder (he was) and about how we should be compassionate to the shooter's circumstances, that she must have done something that made it her fault (she did not).

.

Yes, you have said guns are necessary to be prepared for war with the police or the government and you just said it again.

.

Please stop parroting the mythical "good guy with a gun" fantasy from the "guns before people" lobby talking points: All this does is increase the violence, increase the rate of gun deaths, increase the rate of gun accidents, increase the rate of gun injuries, reduce the rights of people to live free and safe, reduce the safety of people. It is immoral.

.

I hope you never have to protect yourself, your family or friends. It is so much easier where I live because most potential assailants here will not have any serious expectation that their intended victims live in gun fixated fantasy. All I need to do is de-escalate and extricate from a generally less potentially violent circumstance compared to you. After all, in both our countries the assailant is most often a family member or a friend or it is themselves. Far, far, far more people are killed injured by their family member with a gun, their friend with a gun or themselves with a gun than ever stop a criminal, police officer or government official from threatening them. Against this, there are very few examples of the good guy with a gun stopping a criminal, police officer or government official

.

If your method worked and was moral, it would show up in the statistics: Instead the statistics show you are 10 times more likely to be shot and killed or injured using your method than in equivalent countries and the perp is most often the person who thinks they are the good guy with a gun.

.

PS I am not for sweeping bans on guns, I am for reducing the intolerable rate of gun violence in Australia knowing is it 1/10 the deplorable rate in the US. If your rate was instead a fraction of ours, then I would consider why mine is so very, very bad compared to yours and seek remedies - not just bury any call for change in the minutiae by parroting the immoral interests of people with no compassion for the victims were it threatens to reduce their perceived rights.

[Edited 12/5/19 12:41pm]

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #323 posted 12/05/19 4:41pm

PennyPurple

avatar

Having stricter laws, such as more extensive background checks, longer waiting periods, no gun show sales, etc., isn't taking away any rights.


But alas, it is fruitless to think that this fuck faced president will ever do anything to strengthen the laws where guns are concerned.


So cheers to 2020 and a change of the politicans, hopefully we'll get fuck face voted out and someone in who at least has some common sense.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Page 11 of 11 « First<234567891011
Reply   New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Forums > Politics & Religion > Another School Shooting