Jump to content

Active shooter thread

Hugo Stiglitz

By Hugo Stiglitz
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

Guest Lobo

Guest Lobo

Posted
Posted

What about the Sunday morning truce?  Seems like it's the perfect thing to bring the gangs, drug dealers, incels, mass shooters, and domestic terrorists together?  

What if we just swapped out all the calendars and just called everyday Sunday?  Specifically Sunday Morning?  $1000 says Dan Patrick would actually go along with this. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 13.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

4th&Five
4th&Five

Fuck off. You vote for this shit. Explain that to your kids. 

Pancho
Pancho

3rd leg of my move from Houston to the Bay Area, and I made it to LA.   I’m just now catching up on the news in my hotel.  I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again—I don’t have kids, but this e

royiv
royiv

WTF world are we living in when people are having a discussion about survival rates of certain rounds? People are being terrorized by gun violence and we're discussing which bullet has worse/better ch

Posted Images

TommyGufano

TommyGufano 6021

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Lobo said:

What about the Sunday morning truce?  Seems like it's the perfect thing to bring the gangs, drug dealers, incels, mass shooters, and domestic terrorists together?  

What if we just swapped out all the calendars and just called everyday Sunday?  Specifically Sunday Morning?  $1000 says Dan Patrick would actually go along with this. 

I'm not excited about having to leave Texas to buy booze

Link to comment
Share on other sites
henrygandorf

henrygandorf 29192

Posted
Posted

to me, the big difference is that a lot of these gang members, and definitely drug dealers are, you know, already breaking the law with their lifestyle.  they carry a gun and use a gun as part of their daily life as a gang member or drug dealer.

most of the mass shootings are people who bought guns, owned guns, loaded guns, drove around with guns, formulated a plan, made a list, targeted specific people or groups of people, but until they actually pulled the trigger, they hadn't yet broken the law.

and that's how you know the law is a problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DixonHur

DixonHur 11341

Posted
Posted
24 minutes ago, zork said:

So you are saying it isn't the guns, then?  We need to round up all the gang members, drug dealers, and incels?

If you and your kids were in Wal-Mart and an incel with a point to prove walks in, would you rather he be armed with a knife, or and AR-15?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
zork

zork 629

Posted
Posted
18 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

 

Why are you being so obtuse? Is it deliberate? 

His comments seemed to indicate very specific types of people that he named specifically, with guns, are the problem.  Occam's razor would indicate to somehow within our liberty and justice for all system to get extremely strict with those people having guns to make the most in roads to limiting future violence. Not sure how that could happen though in practice.  Beto said what he would do.  In London they are using knives and trucks to kill, albeit in lower numbers than our USA gun killing.

It could be where we are going anyway in the next 50-100 years with the social score trends from China now being instituted, employed,   as the Googletrons, Amazon-olith, NSA,(even Apple devices)  also are beginning to hear/read everything we will be saying and then slowly use the immense data gathered to start judging us, our children, grandchildren, etc, accordingly.  Not something I'm ready for but the fear from all of these mass shootings  might entice the majority to give up their rights for perceived security.  Each person killed is getting us more fearful.  We should be careful how much of our rights we give up to try and alleviate the seemingly growing problem.

 

RE: Biden:  Facts are as of now and all summer, Biden is well ahead at this point in just about every poll save a some where he is still leading within the margin of error.  We've heard Beto give his solution, what about the other Dem leaders if you are insistent that it will not be Biden?

  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
henrygandorf

henrygandorf 29192

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, zork said:

His comments seemed to indicate very specific types of people that he named specifically, with guns, are the problem.  Occam's razor would indicate to somehow within our liberty and justice for all system to get extremely strict with those people having guns to make the most in roads to limiting future violence. Not sure how that could happen though in practice.  Beto said what he would do.  In London they are using knives and trucks to kill, albeit in lower numbers than our USA gun killing.

It could be where we are going anyway in the next 50-100 years with the social score trends from China now being instituted, employed,   as the Googletrons, Amazon-olith, NSA,(even Apple devices)  also are beginning to hear/read everything we will be saying and then slowly use the immense data gathered to start judging us, our children, grandchildren, etc, accordingly.  Not something I'm ready for but the fear from all of these mass shootings  might entice the majority to give up their rights for perceived security.  Each person killed is getting us more fearful.  We should be careful how much of our rights we give up to try and alleviate the seemingly growing problem.

you answered your own idiotic query.

nobody, including you, wants to be blindly judged by immense data gathering that likely doesn't work anyway.  therefore, restrict access to the guns.

thanks for the assist.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DixonHur

DixonHur 11341

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, zork said:

RE: Biden:  Facts are as of now and all summer, Biden is well ahead at this point in just about every poll save a some where he is still leading within the margin of error.  We've heard Beto give his solution, what about the other Dem leaders if you are insistent that it will not be Biden?

You know the election isn't for another 14 months, right? 

Who was the poll leader for the GOP in September 2015?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
zork

zork 629

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

If you and your kids were in Wal-Mart and an incel with a point to prove walks in, would you rather he be armed with a knife, or and AR-15?

(your post happened while I was typing out the one above,  I tried to no avail to add your post into the edit of the other)

Our family shops in DFW at all kinds of stores.  We keep our kids with us, closer maybe, a bit more but typically just go about our everyday life without regard to people with guns.   We would be dead meat if we were unlucky enough to be where the incel strikes and we happened to be there.  

We've talked as a family about being at an event and keeping 0.1 to 5% of your perspective on identifying quickly if there is a commotion of possible danger approaching.(trucks coming into public areas, apparent sounds of gunshots, etc)   It is hard to quantify that to kids under 12 but we are talking openly about it in a real way.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cactusflinthead

cactusflinthead 27601

Posted
Posted

I want to know the motive.

I know the motive of gang violence. 

These shitheads are not the same. Random ass shooting up a church, synagogue, mall, theater, school, or any of the other list of ordinary every day places where we don't expect a gun fight. Gangster knows there is a good chance of violence in his every day. I guess that's what zork wants. No reason for Indiana to tighten up its gun laws. Nope. They can buy'em there and shoot up Chicago. Nobody gives a shit. 

But, I think the suburban GOP leaning moms might. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
zork

zork 629

Posted
Posted
18 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

you answered your own idiotic query.

nobody, including you, wants to be blindly judged by immense data gathering that likely doesn't work anyway.  therefore, restrict access to the guns.

thanks for the assist.

So is that going to be in the Dem platform, and how exactly?  I mentioned Biden in earlier posts, but then branched it out to the others?  What is the Democrat solution for restricting access to the guns specifically?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DixonHur

DixonHur 11341

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, zork said:

(your post happened while I was typing out the one above,  I tried to no avail to add your post into the edit of the other)

Our family shops in DFW at all kinds of stores.  We keep our kids with us, closer maybe, a bit more but typically just go about our everyday life without regard to people with guns.   We would be dead meat if we were unlucky enough to be where the incel strikes and we happened to be there.  

We've talked as a family about being at an event and keeping 0.1 to 5% of your perspective on identifying quickly if there is a commotion of possible danger approaching.(trucks coming into public areas, apparent sounds of gunshots, etc)   It is hard to quantify that to kids under 12 but we are talking openly about it in a real way.

 

This post made me sad for our country.  Do we really want to be the kind of society that needs have these types of conversations with our kids?  I thought American exceptionalism meant we were above that.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
henrygandorf

henrygandorf 29192

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, zork said:

So is that going to be in the Dem platform, and how exactly?  I mentioned Biden in earlier posts, but then branched it out to the others?  What is the Democrat solution for restricting access to the guns specifically?

senseless gun violence is not a partisan problem, nor does it require a partisan solution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DixonHur

DixonHur 11341

Posted
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, zork said:

So is that going to be in the Dem platform, and how exactly?  I mentioned Biden in earlier posts, but then branched it out to the others?  What is the Democrat solution for restricting access to the guns specifically?

I don't know enough about any of their specific platforms vis-a-vis guns, but I think treating guns like cars would be a good start.  Requiring gun owners to have a state issued gun license, register their guns, and carry liability insurance.

Edited by DixonHur
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
zork

zork 629

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, cactusflinthead said:

I want to know the motive.

I know the motive of gang violence. 

These shitheads are not the same. Random ass shooting up a church, synagogue, mall, theater, school, or any of the other list of ordinary every day places where we don't expect a gun fight. Gangster knows there is a good chance of violence in his every day. I guess that's what zork wants. No reason for Indiana to tighten up its gun laws. Nope. They can buy'em there and shoot up Chicago. Nobody gives a shit. 

But, I think the suburban GOP leaning moms might. 

 

How is Indiana, or whomever/wherever, going to implement specifically what you are calling for?  Why strike out at me for asking what the specific plan is from the Dem leadership or even you?  I'm not in a position to change anything.  I can understand the feelings of hopelessness for the specific people in these occurrences as well as the criticism towards "Hopes and Prayers", etc.

Will the Pelosi types, Perez from DNC types, allow Beto language into the Dem platform when they won't allow debates on Climate change?(I don't know the extent of the hub-bub about the not allowing the climate change debate)

  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DixonHur

DixonHur 11341

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, zork said:

How is Indiana, or whomever/wherever, going to implement specifically what you are calling for?  Why strike out at me for asking what the specific plan is from the Dem leadership or even you?  I'm not in a position to change anything.  I can understand the feelings of hopelessness for the specific people in these occurrences as well as the criticism towards "Hopes and Prayers", etc.

Will the Pelosi types, Perez from DNC types, allow Beto language into the Dem platform when they won't allow debates on Climate change?(I don't know the extent of the hub-bub about the not allowing the climate change debate)

How does Indiana implement any law?

Well that's exactly how they implement this one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mojo Hand

Mojo Hand 4580

Posted
Posted

There have been killers as long as there have been people, but it's fairly recent that a single person with zero expertise can easily kill dozens of people in like 30 seconds. There are lots of things we should do to minimize the problem, but the first thing we absolutely need to do is roll back that recent development and make it exceedingly difficult for someone to acquire a high-capacity firearm.   

  • Like 3
  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gil Bang

Gil Bang 25975

Posted
Posted
23 hours ago, EMAWesome said:

You can pass any law you can think of.  None of them will stop this.  This isn't a problem that legislatures solve.  This is a problem society solves.  We had less strict gun control laws forty and fifty years ago and this wasn't happening.  Something has happened with our evolution as a species since then.

hey fuckface, you might want to PM Armybrat and ask him to tell you about Charles Whitman. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 89732

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, henrygandorf said:

senseless gun violence is not a partisan problem, nor does it require a partisan solution.

Moscow Mitch, or Massacre Mitch, or Mylanta Mitch, or whatever he goes by these days, says "Go fuck yourselves, it is a partisan issue because I say so, and I'm going to make damn sure my NRA Masters are going to get everything they asked for!"

While the NRA is hurting these days, if they wanted better background checks and a national red-flag law, they could have it within weeks with a few phone calls to Mitch and Co., and Trump would have no problems signing it (he personally doesn't give a shit about guns).

The only problem is that the NRA will make more money by not budging an inch, and they will make even more money should more gun control laws start going into effect.  They will absolutely rake it in when the Dems are back in power.

Edited by atomheartbevo
Link to comment
Share on other sites
atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 89732

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, cactusflinthead said:

But, I think the suburban GOP leaning moms might. 

Based on the ones I know, I believe you're right.  And when you see things like all of those Gofundme donations pouring in for various victims, there's a shitload of suburban moms pitching in money for them.  It ain't Bubba T. Beauregard IV.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 89732

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, texas08 said:

socialistttt....scawyyyy

...dumb fucking right really believes they don’t partake in any socialism...stupid fucks...

Well, he was in a US Mail truck at one point, or at least it was claimed that he was, and the US Postal Service is a commie socialist government program, so...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
henrygandorf

henrygandorf 29192

Posted
Posted

ok, so let's set aside the general idiocy of shit like that for a minute (the beto-related social media post).

let's say the shooter was a huge democrat, stickers and all.

would that change the fact that as a country, we need stricter policy concerning guns?  does the right actually think the left wants the laws changed because it happens that some of the mass shootings were committed by trump supporters/white nationalists/both?

if the dems position is tighter, more restrictive laws governing the purchase of guns.  and the gop position is some tougher pre-screening mental eval (i have no idea) then does that mean whomever the shooter supported, the other side gets their wish?

the fact that someone put something like that together is stupid.  but the fact that people think it matters might be worse.  you could be a diehard dem, kamala/biden/warren stickers up and down your house and car, and still benefit from gun laws that stay relaxed because of the gop senate/nra/trump, allowing you to keep your guns and go fucking crazy when you feel like it.

once again, mass shootings are not a partisan issue.  it is possible to support and oppose issues without it being tied to a specific candidate.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bama Chick

Bama Chick 28596

Posted
Posted
ok, so let's set aside the general idiocy of shit like that for a minute (the beto-related social media post).
let's say the shooter was a huge democrat, stickers and all.
would that change the fact that as a country, we need stricter policy concerning guns?  does the right actually think the left wants the laws changed because it happens that some of the mass shootings were committed by trump supporters/white nationalists/both?
if the dems position is tighter, more restrictive laws governing the purchase of guns.  and the gop position is some tougher pre-screening mental eval (i have no idea) then does that mean whomever the shooter supported, the other side gets their wish?
the fact that someone put something like that together is stupid.  but the fact that people think it matters might be worse.  you could be a diehard dem, kamala/biden/warren stickers up and down your house and car, and still benefit from gun laws that stay relaxed because of the gop senate/nra/trump, allowing you to keep your guns and go fucking crazy when you feel like it.
once again, mass shootings are not a partisan issue.  it is possible to support and oppose issues without it being tied to a specific candidate.


They shouldn’t be a partisan issue.

But the NRA made them one.

And one party is owned by the NRA.

So it’s been made into a partisan issue by assholes who derive their political funding from the NRA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
henrygandorf

henrygandorf 29192

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

They shouldn’t be a partisan issue.

But the NRA made them one.

And one party is owned by the NRA.

So it’s been made into a partisan issue by assholes who derive their political funding from the NRA.

 

right, obviously.

what i guess my question is - what does the right hope to prove by making memes like this.  like i said - even if it was 100% true.  what's the point?  are they that desperate and hoping against hope that the next shooting isn't done by some trump fan?  if a democratic supporter shoots up a school, does that change the need for reform?  just seems like no benefit to the right, or anyone who thinks the gun laws are fine, to have any mass shootings ever.  they're all fucking bad for everyone, but they're all fucking terrible for those who support the status quo.

unless they're trying to say that dems are doing this on purpose to try and point out the flaws in the system, essentially framing the right.  but that would be too stupid to even...no, that sounds about right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhatTheBuck

WhatTheBuck 28788

Posted
Posted
34 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

right, obviously.

what i guess my question is - what does the right hope to prove by making memes like this.  like i said - even if it was 100% true.  what's the point?  are they that desperate and hoping against hope that the next shooting isn't done by some trump fan?  if a democratic supporter shoots up a school, does that change the need for reform?  just seems like no benefit to the right, or anyone who thinks the gun laws are fine, to have any mass shootings ever.  they're all fucking bad for everyone, but they're all fucking terrible for those who support the status quo.

unless they're trying to say that dems are doing this on purpose to try and point out the flaws in the system, essentially framing the right.  but that would be too stupid to even...no, that sounds about right.

It's just a distraction from the shootings by white supremacists and Trump supporters. They're trying to "both sides" the issue so people don't reach the obvious conclusion that Trump's hate speech incites violence. Any shooter who isn't plainly a white supremacist and doesn't have a clear political motive for their killing will be cast as a left-winger by the right. It's a purely political strategy and their base will swallow it hook, line, and sinker. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Lobo

Guest Lobo

Posted
Posted (edited)

Somebody tell Matt Schaefer that, maintaining a long and consistent streak going back to 904AD, God and the Bible continue to remain largely silent on the issue of gun rights.  While once a particularly vengeful God, even assault rifles are treated with an almost perfunctory silence.  

Edited by Lobo
Link to comment
Share on other sites
EMAWesome

EMAWesome 101

Posted
Posted
18 hours ago, JimmyJames said:

Comparing gun control to the war on drugs and prohibition of alcohol is the dumbest think I’ve heard since the last trump hate rally you attended.

Do you get high on your guns? Are you a gun addict? Do you shoot off your guns at your cousins wedding? 

Good job stereotyping asshole, I have one 12 gauge semi-automatic shotgun that I haven't used in at least fifteen years.

 

What's so dumb about comparing gun control to the war on drugs?  How did making stiffer penalties for drug usage and possession decrease the use of drugs in this country?  How did mandated federal sentencing guidelines work to solve that problem? There are two types of people in this world.  Those that follow the laws and those that don't.  More laws only affects the behavior of those that do follow laws.  They do not affect the behavior of people who don't follow laws.  If this problem is going to get solved someone will have to find a way to change the behavior of people who don't follow the law.  Politicians don't do that, if anyone is going to do it it is going to be societies and civilizations in general.

  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
EMAWesome

EMAWesome 101

Posted
Posted
18 hours ago, Mojo Hand said:

Plus, how many Republicans are willing to legalize most drugs?  At most, some are moving in favor of just the most harmless drug that is currently illegal, pot.   Just like most on the gun control side are willing to allow certain arms, like shotguns.   But hardly any Republicans think we should legalize crack and heroin and other serious shit on the basis that "drug laws don't work."

I don't have a problem with any drug being legalized for adults.  Just don't come to me looking to raise my taxes to pay for federally funded rehab centers.  It is your body you can put whatever you want in it and I'm not going to stop you.  It is your body and your life and it is also your responsibility to take care of it, not mine.  You are free to make whatever bad decisions you want to make as long as you accept the responsibility of making them.  Just don't ask me to bail you out of the mess you have made of your life.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bojack

Bojack 2081

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, EMAWesome said:

I don't have a problem with any drug being legalized for adults.  Just don't come to me looking to raise my taxes to pay for federally funded rehab centers.  It is your body you can put whatever you want in it and I'm not going to stop you.  It is your body and your life and it is also your responsibility to take care of it, not mine.  You are free to make whatever bad decisions you want to make as long as you accept the responsibility of making them.  Just don't ask me to bail you out of the mess you have made of your life.

EMA perfectly exhibits current right wing attitudes about government spending.  Would that spending help those that he feels don't deserve it?  Yes?  Then, fuck no, don't want to pay for it.  Never mind that we'd likely pay less in the long run for treating addiction and prevention than we'd pay for overdoses, diseases, broken homes, lost productivity, crime, and whatever else.  Also, never a peep about increased military spending because MAGA and Jesus. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
HenryJames

HenryJames 66127

Posted
Posted
31 minutes ago, Bojack said:

EMA perfectly exhibits current right wing attitudes about government spending.  Would that spending help those that he feels don't deserve it?  Yes?  Then, fuck no, don't want to pay for it.  Never mind that we'd likely pay less in the long run for treating addiction and prevention than we'd pay for overdoses, diseases, broken homes, lost productivity, crime, and whatever else.  Also, never a peep about increased military spending because MAGA and Jesus. 

https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/dying-whiteness-jonathan-metzl-podcast-transcript-ncna987671

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...