Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Dislikes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 15, 2018 7:18:25 GMT -5
Siena Grad and NRA Executive VP Wayne LaPierre yesterday added yet another 17 notches to his anti-gun control belt! Another AR-15 mass slaughter in a school. Disgusting!
|
|
SIENA1971
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,647
Dislikes:
|
Post by SIENA1971 on Feb 15, 2018 14:06:34 GMT -5
He participated in antiwar protest @siena, don't think he ever fired a gun before working for the NRA, he just became a hired-gun
|
|
glen
Team Captain
Posts: 1,816
Dislikes:
|
Post by glen on Feb 23, 2018 11:52:52 GMT -5
How is it Wayne's fault? Any fault with the FBI? School psychologists? The freaking sheriff's deputy that was AT THE SCHOOL but wouldn't go in?
I'm totally in favor of tougher pre-purchase screening. That *may* have helped in this case but this case had so many other failures it is ridiculous. I can tell you this...everyone I went to school with as a kid had, or had access to, as many guns as they could want. NOBODY shot anyone. Sure there were fights and there was bullying but still nobody would even dream of doing this sh*t. The access to guns is more restrictive today than 35 years ago and yet the incidence of these shootings is significantly higher. What changed? I'm not sure but I think the inability to involuntarily commit someone + today's youth being unable to handle reality is mostly to blame. I mean, I didn't need a safe space when I was in HS/college so maybe that whole "shelter the kid" thing is coming home to roost.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Dislikes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 23, 2018 15:14:56 GMT -5
How is it Wayne's fault? Any fault with the FBI? School psychologists? The freaking sheriff's deputy that was AT THE SCHOOL but wouldn't go in? I'm totally in favor of tougher pre-purchase screening. That *may* have helped in this case but this case had so many other failures it is ridiculous. I can tell you this...everyone I went to school with as a kid had, or had access to, as many guns as they could want. NOBODY shot anyone. Sure there were fights and there was bullying but still nobody would even dream of doing this sh*t. The access to guns is more restrictive today than 35 years ago and yet the incidence of these shootings is significantly higher. What changed? I'm not sure but I think the inability to involuntarily commit someone + today's youth being unable to handle reality is mostly to blame. I mean, I didn't need a safe space when I was in HS/college so maybe that whole "shelter the kid" thing is coming home to roost. What changed - yikes! Were your classmates active members of your school's AR-15 Gun Club? Did they own multiple large capacity clips to fuel their weapons of choice? Man you are so red meat conservative it scares me. You are unwilling, it appears, to put reasonable controls on gun purchases, background checks, prohibition on semi-automatic long guns (aka military style weaponry), ban on bump stocks, positions preached against by your buddy Wayne as recently as yesterday - he even made the disgusting claim that gun rights were God given!!!! Instead, you are willing to allow a lapse in personal freedoms by involuntarily commiting someone without due process.... Get real, the world is different, much different that that of our Forefathers and your/my generation. I'm no way opposed to gun ownership but truly believe enhanced background checks are needed - you even hint at that need by your indictment of today's youth. Hunters don't hunt with AR-15 or similar weapons. How many crimes have been prevented because the potential victim was carrying an AR-15 or had one on the front seat of his car.
|
|
glen
Team Captain
Posts: 1,816
Dislikes:
|
Post by glen on Feb 25, 2018 13:39:57 GMT -5
MP - Whoa boy. I never said anything about all the things you list. I'm in favor of banning bump stocks. I'm in favor of significant improvements in background checks. I'm in favor of confiscation of weapons owned (or in a residence) with someone who is on psychotropic meds.
All that said, in this case there were so many failures along the line that I'm not sure any of those things would matter. 4 sheriff's deputies were outside the school and failed to enter. WTF!
The 2nd amendment isn't about hunting so regardless of what people use to hunt (and they do user AR's for varmint hunting) it isn't about that.
|
|
saints22
Team Captain
Posts: 2,224
Dislikes:
|
Post by saints22 on Feb 25, 2018 18:52:56 GMT -5
MP - Whoa boy. I never said anything about all the things you list. I'm in favor of banning bump stocks. I'm in favor of significant improvements in background checks. I'm in favor of confiscation of weapons owned (or in a residence) with someone who is on psychotropic meds. All that said, in this case there were so many failures along the line that I'm not sure any of those things would matter. 4 sheriff's deputies were outside the school and failed to enter. WTF! The 2nd amendment isn't about hunting so regardless of what people use to hunt (and they do user AR's for varmint hunting) it isn't about that. Like MP, I have no problem with gun ownership. But why in God’s name (the real God, LaPierre, not your perverted version), would anyone in this country want to own a military-grade weapon, the ONLY purpose of which is to kill somebody else? And why would anyone, outside of a military context, need large capacity ammo clips? There have been a number of Supreme Court decisions concerning the second amendment of the US Constitution. Only somewhat recently have the decisions gone to the extremes that exist today. Earlier decisions leaned in the direction pertaining to that word “militia” that is prominently mentioned. I would like to think that this latest outrage perpetrated by an apparently unbalanced individual who had legal access to a weapon of mass destruction will lead to some meaningful and life-saving changes in the gun laws in this country. But I’ve really given up all hope that that can happen. When the citizens of this country, and it’s spineless Congress, let the slaughter of the children at Sandy Hook pass without even the hint of the possibility of any change, there is no chance for rational, substantive dialogue. God bless the United States of America, and God help us all.
|
|
glen
Team Captain
Posts: 1,816
Dislikes:
|
Post by glen on Feb 26, 2018 7:26:57 GMT -5
Clearly you don't understand the purpose of the 2nd amendment. If you think it is for hunting and shooting sporting clays, think again.
If you think banning all semi-auto style long arms is going to work - it may stop deaths by semai-auto long arms, but then you'll be looking at banning semi-auto pistols, then speed loaders for revolvers, etc.
Your side of the debate also leaves out the thousands of times firearms are used for self defense and save lives.
|
|
saints22
Team Captain
Posts: 2,224
Dislikes:
|
Post by saints22 on Feb 26, 2018 8:55:22 GMT -5
Clearly you don't understand the purpose of the 2nd amendment. If you think it is for hunting and shooting sporting clays, think again. If you think banning all semi-auto style long arms is going to work - it may stop deaths by semai-auto long arms, but then you'll be looking at banning semi-auto pistols, then speed loaders for revolvers, etc. Your side of the debate also leaves out the thousands of times firearms are used for self defense and save lives. Where did I say anything about “long arms”? When I mentioned military-style weapons, I meant everything that would include, long and short, and anything else the term would cover. I’m sure there are situations where people have used a firearm for self-defense or to protect others, but “thousands” may be a stretch. Of course they can useful, and necessary, in some contexts. As I said, I am not against people owning guns. But there are a number of states that prohibit ownership of assault-type weapons. Why can’t Congress make that the law of the land? And why does this country alone have the ongoing problem with day-to-day gun violence that it does? Something is terribly wrong. Don’t you agree that changes are needed?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Dislikes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 26, 2018 8:58:25 GMT -5
Clearly you don't understand the purpose of the 2nd amendment. If you think it is for hunting and shooting sporting clays, think again. If you think banning all semi-auto style long arms is going to work - it may stop deaths by semai-auto long arms, but then you'll be looking at banning semi-auto pistols, then speed loaders for revolvers, etc. Your side of the debate also leaves out the thousands of times firearms are used for self defense and save lives. You are once again, going to extremes in much the same way that the right and NRA do to quell a legitimate attempt to institute rational gun control. No one is arguing that semi-automatic handguns should be banned - NO ONE! LaPierre, in defending the NRA's refusal to allow medical records pertaining to mental health issues to be available and conditional to gun access, went to the extreme at CPAC and said that all medical records would be made available for all people - clearly untrue but a red meat argument they time and time again insert into any discussion. As to your last point, can you cite a reference where these "thousands" of times firearms are used for self defense and save lives? Seriously, what is the basis for that statement.
|
|
Quackman
Team Captain
Posts: 2,438
Dislikes:
|
Post by Quackman on Feb 26, 2018 11:28:46 GMT -5
Clearly you don't understand the purpose of the 2nd amendment. If you think it is for hunting and shooting sporting clays, think again. If you think banning all semi-auto style long arms is going to work - it may stop deaths by semai-auto long arms, but then you'll be looking at banning semi-auto pistols, then speed loaders for revolvers, etc. Your side of the debate also leaves out the thousands of times firearms are used for self defense and save lives. Why stop there, couldn't a militia use a nice howitzer or tank? What about hollow point bullets? Flame thrower anyone?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Dislikes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 26, 2018 12:11:36 GMT -5
The Gatling gun was invented just prior to the Civil War and could fire up to 200 rounds a minute depending on how fast the operator turned the crank. The AR-15 fitted with a bump stock can fire hundreds of rounds per minute. The vertical bar which held cartridges for the Gatling gun had a similar capacity to the large capacity magazines which can be used on the AR-15. Does anyone out there believe the Framers would have permitted such a weapon in the hands of private citizens?
|
|
nolesaint
Team Captain
Posts: 1,891
Dislikes:
|
Post by nolesaint on Feb 27, 2018 19:14:21 GMT -5
Just a couple quick points: The 2nd amendment is about being able to defend self, family and property from tyranny. Real background screening to prevent mentally ill from accessing any firearm. Same goes for anyone ever convicted of a violent felony. Evil is going to exist no matter what we legislate, or how we restrict responsible law abiding citizens. Take away ALL guns if you want and evil and mentally ill will still find a way to create mass casualties. IMHumbleO, Better to arm and train more people to quickly put an end to anyone wanting to harm innocent civilians.
|
|
wwii
Team Manager
Posts: 42
Dislikes:
|
Post by wwii on Feb 27, 2018 22:04:54 GMT -5
Clearly you don't understand the purpose of the 2nd amendment. If you think it is for hunting and shooting sporting clays, think again. If you think banning all semi-auto style long arms is going to work - it may stop deaths by semai-auto long arms, but then you'll be looking at banning semi-auto pistols, then speed loaders for revolvers, etc. Your side of the debate also leaves out the thousands of times firearms are used for self defense and save lives. Why stop there, couldn't a militia use a nice howitzer or tank? What about hollow point bullets? Flame thrower anyone? Hollow point bullets have always been available. fmj rounds are usually used for practice. They pass through most targets where hollow points don't.
|
|
glen
Team Captain
Posts: 1,816
Dislikes:
|
Post by glen on Mar 1, 2018 20:14:52 GMT -5
So in this case we have 1 to 4 deputies told to stand down during the shooting.
The kid self-reported to the sheriff's office and nothing was done.
We have dozens of calls to his house.
We have the school downplaying it all because it would look bad statistically for the school.
But a gun is the problem? Nope.
|
|
saints22
Team Captain
Posts: 2,224
Dislikes:
|
Post by saints22 on Mar 1, 2018 22:03:22 GMT -5
So in this case we have 1 to 4 deputies told to stand down during the shooting. The kid self-reported to the sheriff's office and nothing was done. We have dozens of calls to his house. We have the school downplaying it all because it would look bad statistically for the school. But a gun is the problem? Nope. Yes, the gun is the problem. Given that each of the four points you mention were failures, shouldn't have happened, and need to be addressed, what would have happened in a situation where each of those four things did take place, but this guy didn't have the gun/killing machine that he had? How many of the people that he killed would still be alive today if each of those four things happened, but he didn't have the gun that he did?
|
|