Mass Shootings

[NameAlreadyInUse 5169]

10 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

Remember how you keep saying this thing, and I keep asking you to prove I said it, and you keep not.  Pepperidge farm remembers. 

I do want you to know I hold literal dog shit in higher regards than you.  I'm sure you can figure out where I hold firearms in regards to dogshit.

Sadly, fatty, I saw your post where it certainly looked like you said that.  I also saw the post where you asked him to prove you said it.  I also saw the post where multiple people pointed you back to the post where it certainly looked like you said that.  

[royiv 9795]

8 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

Remember how you keep saying this thing, and I keep asking you to prove I said it, and you keep not.  Pepperidge farm remembers. 

I do want you to know I hold literal dog shit in higher regards than you.  I'm sure you can figure out where I hold firearms in regards to dogshit.

I don't have time to go back and find every shitty thing you've said given how shitty of a human being you are, but it was in one of the threads about the Covenant School shooting and I asked if you would reconsider your views on gun control if one of your kids was caught in the crossfire. You replied in the affirmative that you would. I'm quite sure others here remember since I get pos rep everytime I bring it up. The thing about you is that you spew so much vile shit that you can't even remember what vile shit you've said. 

And do you really think I give a shit about what some dork that masturbates to his guns and boats thinks of me? If you haven't figured it out, I enjoy making fun of your stupidity. I wouldn't expect you to like me.

[Brisketexan 106918]

6 minutes ago, NameAlreadyInUse said:

I saw all that to say that for all of you, it isn't too late to think long and hard about what you are willing to give up, because if you don't at some start agree to negotiate in good faith, you will eventually have to give up way way way way more than you are being asked for today.  

Not unique to politics, by the way.  I negotiate a crapload for a living.  Absolutist positions very rarely result in an outcome the absolutist is happy with.

[royiv 9795]

29 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

I understand what you are saying, I just disagree. Oh no, Royiv isn’t onboard anymore. Guess he and his wife negates the 5 people in my family that feel the exact opposite.  So +3.   Check firearm sales. They aren’t going down…

Rent free, my friend.

[fattyflattie 4640]

4 minutes ago, NameAlreadyInUse said:

Sadly, fatty, I saw your post where it certainly looked like you said that.  I also saw the post where you asked him to prove you said it.  I also saw the post where multiple people pointed you back to the post where it certainly looked like you said that.  

He asked me if my tune would change if my kids were mowed down.  I responded, of course, wouldn't anyone?    Any major life event can change your outlook.  That doesnt equal = wouldn't change mind until.  I certainly doesnt mean i dgaf about others children.  You can interpret however you want, I don't really care.  But the post is there to read. 

[royiv 9795]

13 minutes ago, Blotto said:

As far as I'm aware, you only get one vote no matter how many AR-15's you buy. 

 

Don't give the NRA any ideas.

[fattyflattie 4640]

5 minutes ago, royiv said:

And do you really think I give a shit about what some dork that masturbates to his guns and boats thinks of me? If you haven't figured it out, I enjoy making fun of your stupidity. I wouldn't expect you to like me.

And if you haven't figured it out, it makes it all that much sweeter knowing our grandkids will be having this same discussion.   Good luck with your crusade against the firearm in America. 

[DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12301]

49 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Ummm....seriously.  Slow your roll.  BC is primarily a Dem voter, and has been for longer than I have.  He's not your enemy here.  He's not a gun fetishist, he's not an NRA nut, he doesn't support the gun lobby.  He IS painting a realistic picture of the political landscape.  And that picture says "it doesn't matter how good your ideas are, you'll never get shit done in Texas until you start winning elections."  It's an accurate picture. 

Know who your enemy is.  And also, know who your enemy ISN'T.

"I'm not a supporter of the cartels, I just do a lot of cocaine."

He might not be a card-carrying member of the NRA, but he most definitely supports the gun lobby with his continuous purchases of guns and ammo. 

But yeah, my apologies for assuming he was straight ticket R...when I hear someone suggest that it's actually Democrats that are to blame for the lack of progress on gun control I just assume they're dumber than a box of rocks and vote accordingly.

[royiv 9795]

Just now, fattyflattie said:

He asked me if my tune would change if my kids were mowed down.  I responded, of course, wouldn't anyone?    Any major life event can change your outlook.  That doesnt equal = wouldn't change mind until.  I certainly doesnt mean i dgaf about others children.  You can interpret however you want, I don't really care.  But the post is there to read. 

Okay, so you do remember the post? Excellent, so between children getting mowed down on the reg and your own children getting mowed down where would you begin to give enough of a shit to enact real change up to and including giving up your assault weapons? What is that until? A shooting in your school district? A shooting in your kid's school? A niece or nephew getting killed? A neighbor's kid getting killed? Just trying to figure out what's the number of degrees of separation between you and someone's kids before you are down with real change instead of the same five talking points you regurgitate over and over again.

[fattyflattie 4640]

57 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Ummm....seriously.  Slow your roll.  BC is primarily a Dem voter, and has been for longer than I have.  He's not your enemy here.  He's not a gun fetishist, he's not an NRA nut, he doesn't support the gun lobby.  He IS painting a realistic picture of the political landscape.  And that picture says "it doesn't matter how good your ideas are, you'll never get shit done in Texas until you start winning elections."  It's an accurate picture. 

He's literally been voting D longer than Hollywood recently claimed he has.  And he's he's pretty down the middle on his feelings on firearms for years during these discussions.  And makes a few comments others don't agree with and now he's some maga gun nut.  Love it.  And the best part, between yourself, myself, and Bozo we're determined over the last 3-5 years to have the same top 1-5 solutions we are in favor of.  But here we are.  

And @Bozo_Casanova I completely disagree with you about a modern AWB seriously impacting going forwards.   I agree you will never get what's out there back.  But you could stop producing tomorrow, and we would have a large impact.  I have no idea the govt will fuck it up, but who's not used to being fucked by them at this point. 

[Brisketexan 106918]

2 minutes ago, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

"I'm not a supporter of the cartels, I just do a lot of cocaine."

He might not be a card-carrying member of the NRA, but he most definitely supports the gun lobby with his continuous purchases of guns and ammo. 

But yeah, my apologies for assuming he was straight ticket R...when I hear someone suggest that it's actually Democrats that are to blame for the lack of progress on gun control I just assume they're dumber than a box of rocks and vote accordingly.

If you 1) support Dems and Dem positions and 2) aren't royally pissed at how the Texas Dem party has dicked around the past 30 years, you haven't been paying attention.  Nobody should be more pissed at the Texas Democratic Party than Texas Democrats.

And by your argument, any and all purchase or use of firearms or ammo is "supporting the gun lobby."  I just want to be clear on that, because I buy probably a box of 30/06, a few boxes of .22 lr, and 10 boxes of 12 gauge # 7 1/2 shot shells each year.  Is your position that there are only two positions: all, OR, nothing?  Because by your test, every single person who buys even one round of ammunition a year -- which includes millions of people who likely agree with you on most every gun control measure commonly discussed -- is a "supporter of the gun lobby."  

Maybe don't make enemies you don't have to make.  Especially when you're trying to get something done that those folks agree with you on.

[C-Man 27783]

13 minutes ago, royiv said:

I don't have time to go back and find every shitty thing you've said given how shitty of a human being you are, but it was in one of the threads about the Covenant School shooting and I asked if you would reconsider your views on gun control if one of your kids was caught in the crossfire. You replied in the affirmative that you would. I'm quite sure others here remember since I get pos rep everytime I bring it up. The thing about you is that you spew so much vile shit that you can't even remember what vile shit you've said. 

And do you really think I give a shit about what some dork that masturbates to his guns and boats thinks of me? If you haven't figured it out, I enjoy making fun of your stupidity. I wouldn't expect you to like me.

He 100% said that.

 

7 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

And if you haven't figured it out, it makes it all that much sweeter knowing our grandkids will be having this same discussion.   Good luck with your crusade against the firearm in America. 

Not all firearms. Just some. And keeping them out of the hands of those in society who shouldn't be able to get them.

[hobbes2702 13488]

28 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

Remember how you keep saying this thing, and I keep asking you to prove I said it, and you keep not.  Pepperidge farm remembers. 

I do want you to know I hold literal dog shit in higher regards than you.  I'm sure you can figure out where I hold firearms in regards to dogshit.

Lol wut. Your memory is bad. Apparently I’m the pot head though lol

Edited April 12, 2023 by hobbes2702

[NameAlreadyInUse 5169]

5 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

He asked me if my tune would change if my kids were mowed down.  I responded, of course, wouldn't anyone?    Any major life event can change your outlook.  That doesnt equal = wouldn't change mind until.  I certainly doesnt mean i dgaf about others children.  You can interpret however you want, I don't really care.  But the post is there to read. 

See to me, when you say you have given it enough thought that you already know you would change your tune if your kids were gunned down, the only conclusion I can draw is that other people's kids don't matter to you, because you haven't changed your tune yet.  

It reminds me of my family full of smokers.  I had asthma as a kid.  My entire family smoked, inside, nonstop.  My dad and step mother only stopped when my dad had a heart attack when I was in my teens.  My grandparents only stopped when he got lung cancer when I was in my 20's.  They didn't let the fact that their kid/grandkid was asthmatic get in the way of them enjoying their smoking habit, it was only when it affected them directly that they changed their behavior.  Sometimes consequences have to get really really fucking close before you are going to notice them, and what I read from your reiteration of your position is that the consequences haven't gotten close enough to you yet.  I hope that remains true for you.

[fattyflattie 4640]

5 minutes ago, royiv said:

Okay, so you do remember the post? Excellent, so between children getting mowed down on the reg and your own children getting mowed down where would you begin to give enough of a shit to enact real change up to and including giving up your assault weapons? What is that until? A shooting in your school district? A shooting in your kid's school? A niece or nephew getting killed? A neighbor's kid getting killed? Just trying to figure out what's the number of degrees of separation between you and someone's kids before you are down with real change instead of the same five talking points you regurgitate over and over again.

I've oft stated I'd sell them back to the govt at current market.  I've never sold the ones I don't even use any longer to anyone other than my brother, because who knows who would end up with them.  There's a large contingent of people that don't want their tax dollars going to that, and I can understand that.  But I'm not turning them in to the county for 1/20th of their value.  They can sit there and collect dust and not do damage in the safes.  

[Foosters 18285]

29 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

1 in 4 is seeing the majority become less tolerant of having a small minority position shoved down their throat with contempt and glee.  That is never a recipe for long-term success.

Not to mention the collateral consequences of this minority position is a bunch of dead Americans, including children who've had their heads blown off. Its not like we're discussing trickle down economics here.

[C-Man 27783]

7 minutes ago, NameAlreadyInUse said:

See to me, when you say you have given it enough thought that you already know you would change your tune if your kids were gunned down, the only conclusion I can draw is that other people's kids don't matter to you, because you haven't changed your tune yet.  

[royiv 9795]

3 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

If you 1) support Dems and Dem positions and 2) aren't royally pissed at how the Texas Dem party has dicked around the past 30 years, you haven't been paying attention.  Nobody should be more pissed at the Texas Democratic Party than Texas Democrats.

And by your argument, any and all purchase or use of firearms or ammo is "supporting the gun lobby."  I just want to be clear on that, because I buy probably a box of 30/06, a few boxes of .22 lr, and 10 boxes of 12 gauge # 7 1/2 shot shells each year.  Is your position that there are only two positions: all, OR, nothing?  Because by your test, every single person who buys even one round of ammunition a year -- which includes millions of people who likely agree with you on most every gun control measure commonly discussed -- is a "supporter of the gun lobby."  

Maybe don't make enemies you don't have to make.  Especially when you're trying to get something done that those folks agree with you on.

I totally get what you're saying and don't disagree at a micro level for the hunter and sport shooter. Let's be honest .22LR and 30/06 isn't being used in mass murder or even random street shootings. At a macro level, I can see how people, including myself, are so fed up with the gun and ammo industry for supporting the NRA that we hate that any purchase goes to feed the machine.

It would be interesting to see what would happen if someone started a "socially conscious" (I know, I roll my eyes even typing that, just couldn't think of anything better) company that didn't support the gun lobby, focused on sportsmen/hunters, didn't manufacture assault weapons or black rifles, etc. It's a niche and would be interesting to see if it could be profitable. 

[Brisketexan 106918]

Just now, Foosters said:

Not to mention the collateral consequences of this minority position is a bunch of dead Americans, including children who've had their heads blown off. Its not like we're discussing trickle down economics here.

Bingo.

Imagine the following scenario:  In response to MULTIPLE events where a shooter uses an AR or similar platform to slaughter stacks of children, our leadership reacts by.....adding this lapel pin:

 

That's a fucking sociopath move.  If I'd have told you 20 years ago "hey, in response to the repeated slaughter of schoolchildren with AR-15s, the only action Congress took was....to wear lapel pins celebrating the AR-15," you'd have called me fucking crazy.  And shit, you'd have been right, because that response is the textbook definition of having a fucking sociopathic disorder.

[Goofyboy 3434]

One state at a time if necessary.

OLYMPIA - House Bill 1240 cleared another hurdle Saturday as the Senate passed the bill 27-21. The bill would ban the sale, manufacture and distribution of what the state defines as "assault weapons" in Washington state.

[fattyflattie 4640]

10 minutes ago, NameAlreadyInUse said:

See to me, when you say you have given it enough thought that you already know you would change your tune if your kids were gunned down, the only conclusion I can draw is that other people's kids don't matter to you, because you haven't changed your tune yet.  

And that's fine, any one of us can make interpretations with people I don't agree with and hear it the way I want. I answered it in a very matter of fact manner.  Of course it would change my mind - I would challenge you to find a single persons mind that it wouldn't change.  Same thing with your asthma example, people that are racist until they fall in love, people who hate gays/black/white/trans until they make a friend with them, whatever, the examples of real world events changing someone's mind are limitless.  

And, I wouldn't agree with the "changed your tune" comment, unless you are familiar with "my tune".  Which, I'm quite certain, you are not.  And I don't mean that in a harsh way.  This conversation is had over and over and there's maybe 5 people, most of them on the gun thread, that listen in that detail.  One is apparently a crazed gun nut now because he had some thoughts on the way the favored party has handled themselves.  Such a fucking radical, that guy.  

[fattyflattie 4640]

15 minutes ago, royiv said:

Let's be honest .22LR

Va Tech. The leader in the clubhouse for quite some time. And are we talking an AR platform 22lr, or just the other 100 models of high capacity semi auto .22 that's soooooo much less lethal.  You can see why the lines get blurred?

[Bozo_Casanova 26856]

22 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Bingo.

Imagine the following scenario:  In response to MULTIPLE events where a shooter uses an AR or similar platform to slaughter stacks of children, our leadership reacts by.....adding this lapel pin:

 

Edited April 12, 2023 by Bozo_Casanova

[royiv 9795]

7 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

Va Tech. The leader in the clubhouse for quite some time. And are we talking an AR platform 22lr, or just the other 100 models of high capacity semi auto .22 that's soooooo much less lethal.  You can see why the lines get blurred?

Well, as you already know, I'm all for banning the AR platform. Take that away and .22LR is mostly used as a fun little gun. No lines blurred, my friend.

Edited April 12, 2023 by royiv
The more you make the blurs lines argument, the more the other side digs in and just says "fuck it, the only I option left is to just get rid of everything."

[fattyflattie 4640]

25 minutes ago, royiv said:

company that didn't support the gun lobby, focused on sportsmen/hunters, didn't manufacture assault weapons or black rifles, etc. It's a niche and would be interesting to see if it could be profitable. 

A company did.  Cooper firearms.  They supported Obama on something or another and got fucking drug.  Now, they build VERY high end hunting and target rifles, and they are still around.  Because the people that can afford a 5k .22 can typically think beyond the hurr durr.  And someone will have to refresh my memory but I *believe it was S&W that got drug over the "Hillary hole".  Stock value affected, the value of non "hillary hole" frames went up immediately, new ones with is sold like shit.  But that's revolver talk, and our resident expert isn't wading into this board.  

[NameAlreadyInUse 5169]

7 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

And that's fine, any one of us can make interpretations with people I don't agree with and hear it the way I want. I answered it in a very matter of fact manner.  Of course it would change my mind - I would challenge you to find a single persons mind that it wouldn't change.  Same thing with your asthma example, people that are racist until they fall in love, people who hate gays/black/white/trans until they make a friend with them, whatever, the examples of real world events changing someone's mind are limitless.  

But I'm confused why you were saying that you didn't say it, when you were able to remember you said it just fine in response to my post.  No one had to even go looking for it, because you repeated it for us all.

And yes, lots of people change their minds when a thing hits them closely enough.  Seeing as how you were saying a few posts after mine that you looked forward to your grandchildren arguing with other people's grandchildren about this same issue, I think I'm pretty clear that your position is that nothing should change.  Which just means it hasn't gotten close enough to you yet.  Some of us have to burn our hands on the stove, first, I guess.  

I hope that you find the place to compromise before your kid's get shot or before you lose the protection in government that's keeping you where you are now.  One of those two things is likely to happen, and neither of them will be good for you.

Finally, I'm not 100% sure that I've even stated my position on this topic, aside from the idea that absolutists need to be ready to not be absolutists before they lose power, because they won't like the outcome if they weren't willing to work in good faith with the people who are out of power.  I have guns sitting downstairs in my closet right now, in fact, so I'm pretty sure that whatever position you think I have, you are incorrect. 

[fattyflattie 4640]

4 minutes ago, royiv said:

Take that away and .22LR is mostly used as a fun little gun. No lines blurred, my friend.

Can you please clarify this sentence.  I'm asking you if you want to only ban the AR .22, or if you also want to ban something like the 10/22, which half the gun owners on this board own?  The 10/22 also being a high capacity SA platform.

[Sawbonz 28228]

Is gun fetishist a thing?

[royiv 9795]

4 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

Can you please clarify this sentence.  I'm asking you if you want to only ban the AR .22, or if you also want to ban something like the 10/22, which half the gun owners on this board own?  The 10/22 also being a high capacity SA platform.

I've changed my mind, just ban them all. It's easier. No blurred lines. And since you believe that tough sentences are an effective deterrent to crime, we'll go ahead and make possession of a firearm a felony punishable by firing squad using your confiscated weapons.

[fattyflattie 4640]

2 minutes ago, NameAlreadyInUse said:

But I'm confused why you were saying that you didn't say it, when you were able to remember you said it just fine in response to my post.  No one had to even go looking for it, because you repeated it for us all.

Because his statement was I said that "I wouldn't change my mind until it happened".  That's not what I said.  I was asked if I would change my mind if that tragedy happened, to which I replied, of course.  I'm not trying to be pedantic.  But I was asked and answered a question, and it's being claimed that I said something different.  Something very different, imo. 

5 minutes ago, NameAlreadyInUse said:

And yes, lots of people change their minds when a thing hits them closely enough.  Seeing as how you were saying a few posts after mine that you looked forward to your grandchildren arguing with other people's grandchildren about this same issue, I think I'm pretty clear that your position is that nothing should change.  Which just means it hasn't gotten close enough to you yet.  Some of us have to burn our hands on the stove, first, I guess.  

I've literally been shot in the face by some dipshit.  Not peppered.  Taken to Ben Taub.  I'm not against change.  I've proposed lots of things.  I'm not going to change my feelings on other political issues enough to align with the absolutists on the other side. 

7 minutes ago, NameAlreadyInUse said:

I hope that you find the place to compromise before your kid's get shot or before you lose the protection in government that's keeping you where you are now.  One of those two things is likely to happen, and neither of them will be good for you.

I'm not sure I'd use the term likely.  But it sucks.  It's probably going to end up costing me a fortune in private schooling. 

8 minutes ago, NameAlreadyInUse said:

I have guns sitting downstairs in my closet right now, in fact, so I'm pretty sure that whatever position you think I have, you are incorrect. 

I'm not certain I made any comments about your position on the subject?  I certainly don't remember your posts in any of the threads, so I wouldn't pretend to know your thoughts on it. 

[David Dennison 19553]

25 minutes ago, Goofyboy said:

One state at a time if necessary.

OLYMPIA - House Bill 1240 cleared another hurdle Saturday as the Senate passed the bill 27-21. The bill would ban the sale, manufacture and distribution of what the state defines as "assault weapons" in Washington state.

Has SCOTUS ruled on whether these bans are constitutional?

[fattyflattie 4640]

Just now, royiv said:

I've changed my mind, just ban them all. It's easier. No blurred lines. And since you believe that tough sentences are an effective deterrent to crime, we'll go ahead and make possession of a firearm a felony punishable by firing squad using your confiscated weapons.

Oh, I stumped you.  Good luck in your crusade.  

[DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12301]

49 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

If you 1) support Dems and Dem positions and 2) aren't royally pissed at how the Texas Dem party has dicked around the past 30 years, you haven't been paying attention.  Nobody should be more pissed at the Texas Democratic Party than Texas Democrats.

And by your argument, any and all purchase or use of firearms or ammo is "supporting the gun lobby."  I just want to be clear on that, because I buy probably a box of 30/06, a few boxes of .22 lr, and 10 boxes of 12 gauge # 7 1/2 shot shells each year.  Is your position that there are only two positions: all, OR, nothing?  Because by your test, every single person who buys even one round of ammunition a year -- which includes millions of people who likely agree with you on most every gun control measure commonly discussed -- is a "supporter of the gun lobby."  

Maybe don't make enemies you don't have to make.  Especially when you're trying to get something done that those folks agree with you on.

I’m just pointing out that a portion of the proceeds from gun/ammo sales goes towards the gun lobby. 

And yeah, we’ll just have to disagree about the motives of someone that says “I want there to be less guns in society” while simultaneously stockpiling an arsenal of guns for “bullshit reasons”.

[royiv 9795]

1 minute ago, fattyflattie said:

Because his statement was I said that "I wouldn't change my mind until it happened".  That's not what I said.  I was asked if I would change my mind if that tragedy happened, to which I replied, of course.  I'm not trying to be pedantic.  But I was asked and answered a question, and it's being claimed that I said something different.  Something very different, imo. 

I've literally been shot in the face by some dipshit.  Not peppered.  Taken to Ben Taub.  I'm not against change.  I've proposed lots of things.  I'm not going to change my feelings on other political issues enough to align with the absolutists on the other side. 

I'm not sure I'd use the term likely.  But it sucks.  It's probably going to end up costing me a fortune in private schooling. 

I'm not certain I made any comments about your position on the subject?  I certainly don't remember your posts in any of the threads, so I wouldn't pretend to know your thoughts on it. 

It's going to cost you a fortune in private schooling? A) That's the ultimate I don't give a shit about other kids flex. You can afford private schooling so fuck those poor kids if they die. You keep digging that hole for yourself. B) I think it has recently been proven that private schools aren't immune from mass shootings. Or did you forget about Covenant along with your post on that subject. 

Are you really this stupid or are you Ted Cruz?

[Satchel 6982]

Texags and Tiger Droppings devotees would read this thread with shock and horror since it advances a view that guns are not loved and adored by all Americans. That millions of us want to see guns demoted in the culture is just not something gun idolators can even comprehend. Fact is more Americans agree with us than with them. That’s why the public narrative about the widespread, enduring love of guns must be corrected. 

[Blotto 24023]

5 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

A company did.  Cooper firearms.  They supported Obama on something or another and got fucking drug.  Now, they build VERY high end hunting and target rifles, and they are still around.  Because the people that can afford a 5k .22 can typically think beyond the hurr durr.  And someone will have to refresh my memory but I *believe it was S&W that got drug over the "Hillary hole".  Stock value affected, the value of non "hillary hole" frames went up immediately, new ones with is sold like shit.  But that's revolver talk, and our resident expert isn't wading into this board.  

Lulz. You mean the Cooper Firearms in Montana that forced their founder and CEO to resign because he supported Obama's campaign for presidency. The same Obama that said "I believe in the Second Amendment. I believe in people's lawful right to bear arms. I will not take your shotgun away. I will not take your rifle away. I won't take your handgun away." The same Obama that didnt take away shotguns, rifles, or handguns during his 8 years in office? 

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=6152085&page=1

Because I would argue that, as usual, your ability to synthesize information and come to an intelligent conclusion is utter dogshit. People who can afford a 5k .22 don't typically think beyond the hurr durr. Otherwise he would still be leading the fucking company he started. 

[Satchel 6982]

10 minutes ago, royiv said:

It's going to cost you a fortune in private schooling? A) That's the ultimate I don't give a shit about other kids flex. You can afford private schooling so fuck those poor kids if they die. You keep digging that hole for yourself. B) I think it has recently been proven that private schools aren't immune from mass shootings. Or did you forget about Covenant along with your post on that subject. 

Are you really this stupid or are you Ted Cruz?

Wonder what Ted’s thoughts are on the poignant embrace of the Republican voting mom who lost her kid in the Covenant shooting, of Justin Pearson? Why wasn’t he there to hug her, or any of the kids slaughtered in gun massacres?

[Sawbonz 28228]

Why not start with a $1000 surcharge on any magazine that holds more than 6 rounds? 

[royiv 9795]

5 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

Oh, I stumped you.  Good luck in your crusade.  

Didn't stump me. You deleted the operative sentence in your quote. You launched into your tired blurred lines argument of calibers, etc. What you fail to recognize, because you're a dumb sonofabitch, is that you like to say you want meaningful change so that you can appear to be reasonable and lots of people see through it.

As a result, people like you propagate the frustration that actual reasonable people have when it comes to gun violence. To you it's a competition. I make a comment that my wife and I would be fine getting rid of shooting toys if it meant putting an end to the sick gun culture of this country and your response is "I've got five people in my house that love guns" so to you it's "I'm winning." When presented with how this moves people further apart, you jump to but gun ownership is growing! When presented with stats that dispute that, you jump back to blurred lines! It's all just obfuscation that you don't really care about gun violence because it hasn't hit close enough to home.

In reality, you're just a simple dude that loves guns, boats and low taxes (jokes on you since taxes went up under Trump) and all the other shit doesn't matter to you. Kids getting killed doesn't move the needle. Attacks on women's rights don't move the needle. Attacks on education don't move the needle. Attacks on the rights of the LGBTQ+ community don't move the needle. Attacks on our nation's capitol don't move the needle. Attacks on voting rights don't move the needle. I could go on, but you get the point. You don't care because those things don't impact you or your family from where you sit in a position of privilege.

[GhostOfTomJoad 9509]

3 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

Why not start with a $1000 surcharge on any magazine that holds more than 6 rounds? 

And require that the surcharge is applied to gun violence survivor benefits, burial services for the slain, anti-gun violence education and training. Lots of good could be done by the pew-pew fanbois.

[royiv 9795]

11 minutes ago, Blotto said:

Lulz. You mean the Cooper Firearms in Montana that forced their founder and CEO to resign because he supported Obama's campaign for presidency. The same Obama that said "I believe in the Second Amendment. I believe in people's lawful right to bear arms. I will not take your shotgun away. I will not take your rifle away. I won't take your handgun away." The same Obama that didnt take away shotguns, rifles, or handguns during his 8 years in office? 

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=6152085&page=1

Because I would argue that, as usual, your ability to synthesize information and come to an intelligent conclusion is utter dogshit. People who can afford a 5k .22 don't typically think beyond the hurr durr. Otherwise he would still be leading the fucking company he started. 

What's funny is that he's trying to suggest my idea, and I knew this before I posted it, is a dumb one. It just reinforces how strong the NRA and their followers are. There's no room in their world for a different path. You're with them or you're against them.

[fattyflattie 4640]

1 hour ago, royiv said:

You launched into your tired blurred lines argument of calibers, etc.

Always a victim. I just wanted you to clarify, from your butchered original sentence, what is OK for average American Joe to possess.   Then you immediately went into a ban em all hissy fit. 
 

54 minutes ago, royiv said:

What's funny is that he's trying to suggest my idea, and I knew this before I posted it, is a dumb one. It just reinforces how strong the NRA and their followers are. There's no room in their world for a different path. You're with them or you're against them.

Again, it’snotyourfault.gif.   Suggesting that there are recent examples of trying is not some attack on you.  Remember, it’s not your fault.  

[Beantown Express 2.0 6597]

1 hour ago, Sawbonz said:

Why not start with a $1000 surcharge on any magazine that holds more than 6 rounds? 

So you just want rich people to have the ability to be a mass murderer and poor lunatics don’t get to shoot up schools just because they are poor?  That sounds like class warfare at it’s finest.  

Before responding check your sarcasm meters as I am for banning all high capacity guns that are privately owned.  My solution would be those type of weapons are only available to shoot at shooting ranges and are owned by the shooting range and aren’t allowed off the premises.  That way you can go and get your rocks off shooting those weapons but they stay locked up from the masses.  Everyone still gets to keep their hunting rifles, shotguns and hand guns so of course there will still be tons of gun violence in this country but maybe we save a few lives by taking the assault style weapons and high capacity magazines out of the public’s hands. 

[Goofyboy 3434]

I love the idea of gun ranges owning weapons. Shot a .50 sniper and shot a mini gun at a range. Lots of fun… no one should own one.

[Beantown Express 2.0 6597]

9 minutes ago, Goofyboy said:

I love the idea of gun ranges owning weapons. Shot a .50 sniper and shot a mini gun at a range. Lots of fun… no one should own one.

Exactly.  If you really feel the need to shoot some high powered guns and don’t want to go to a shooting range you can always join the army or marines and then you can shoot guns to your hearts content.  Otherwise, go shoot a rocket launcher at a gun range for all I care, as long as it’s owned by a licensed gun range, can’t be taken home and can’t harm anybody.

[wild_turkey 3297]

Both of those things, but also what [mention=5728]956 Worldwide[/mention] said. In 1994 gun ownership and shooting sports were bipartisan and most gun owners associated assault weapons with criminals and goofy paranoids. That’s not the case anymore. Gun ownership is far less bipartisan, and the AR-15 is a mainstream totem of tribal identity.
There are many good things we could do to save lives (like waiting periods, NFA restrictions, red flag laws, etc) but reinstating the ban or specifically banning the AR-15 seems out of reach. 

Okay, so just to address both of those points and your objections to each:

1. You seem to be of the belief that banning assault weapons would not help because there are already too many in circulation. The counterpoint is that both the Uvalde shooter and the Louisville bank shooter bought a brand new AR-15 within days of their respective massacres. That’s 19 dead children, 2 dead teachers, and 6 dead bank employees. And that’s just the easy memorable shootings from the past year.

If the purchase of new assault weapons were not permitted, both of those shooters would still be able to buy a gun, but presumably they would choose something that has a lower capacity and is less effective for committing mass murder. Maybe in that scenario, we end up with different death totals from those two events. Maybe it’s only 17 dead children, 2 dead teachers, and 5 dead bank employees. Thats 3 murder victims still alive today. That’s a win.

Is there some part of that you would dispute?


2. You also seem to believe that it is politically impossible to ban assault weapons. There have been many times in the history of our country that people thought something was politically out of reach. The right to vote, gay marriage, buy weed - the list is endless. It’s only impossible if people believe it’s impossible and everyone gives up. Your subsequent posts took a little bit of the opposite stance regarding changing things with our votes (which this is the politics board and I’m not sure how else it would change), so maybe I’m not clear your true thoughts on this part.


Look, I’m not suggesting an assault weapons ban would fix everything, nor is it the only change I want to see implemented. It just appears to be low hanging fruit and an obvious thing to target as part of gun control legislation.

And I’m bewildered why someone who claims to be a reasonable responsible gun owner would cling so hard to the right to buy an AR-15 other than to justify your own personal ownership of one, because otherwise you might feel a tad bit hypocritical. Like maybe you don’t want to admit to yourself that your toy (which you claim is for “reference” purposes) is also the preferred weapon of mass murder for many of these shootings, and your right to buy that toy also allowed Salvador Ramos and Connor Sturgeon and [insert yet to be named mass shooter in May 2023] to buy their murder weapons.

[Anastasis 23722]

Holy shit last few pages are pretty off the rails. BC is right about a lot of shit in this discussion. Amazing watching the extremists try to roll him on it. 

 

There are reasonable solutions that the vast majority of gun owners/aficionados here and across America would support. In particular when we can focus on shit that is actually evidence based and outcomes oriented wrt gun violence. We've been over them ad nauseum here. Taking real meaningful ground will require a grand compromise, but our political system is not capable of that at atm or over the last 40 years really, in broader terms. Shit has been said going back decades on this board, but give me the pick of about 10 posters on this board and we can land on reasonable policies that would move the needle.  Healthcare, immigration, guns, foreign policy, etc. But our system is fundamentally broken and doesn't allow for common sense or common ground.  Except when it comes to the real core bipartisan issues like military spending, arms sales, and war making.    

[royiv 9795]

1 hour ago, fattyflattie said:

Always a victim. I just wanted you to clarify, from your butchered original sentence, what is OK for average American Joe to possess.   Then you immediately went into a ban em all hissy fit. 
 

Again, it’snotyourfault.gif.   Suggesting that there are recent examples of trying is not some attack on you.  Remember, it’s not your fault.  

WTF is going on here? I've never played the victim. Quite the opposite. I'm one seriously lucky guy and I'm thankful for it everyday, which is reflected in my views that I want others afforded the privileges I've had and I don't mind paying my fair share to help make that happen. It seems like you've finally hit the wall and resorted to MTG-level rhetoric. Congrats on leveling up!

[fattyflattie 4640]

Just now, royiv said:

WTF is going on here? I've never played the victim. Quite the opposite. I'm one seriously lucky guy and I'm thankful for it everyday, which is reflected in my views that I want others afforded the privileges I've had and I don't mind paying my fair share to help make that happen. It seems like you've finally hit the wall and resorted to MTG-level rhetoric. Congrats on leveling up!

Should law abiding adults be able to own a 10/22?

[ultimaton 2985]

3 hours ago, fattyflattie said:

I'm not sure I'd use the term likely.  But it sucks.  It's probably going to end up costing me a fortune in private schooling. 

sorry all those dead kids are turning out to be such a burden for you

Edited April 13, 2023 by ultimaton