Active shooter thread

[David Dennison 18944]

1 minute ago, Longhornlove said:

The Democrats blaming the Republicans for their own racial replacement theory is just classic. The hypocrisy has no end. I'm just a troll though, don't mind me.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/29/opinion/stacey-abrams-georgia-governor-election-brian-kemp.html

You're comparing black people winning elections to white fear of racial replacement?

Nope, no trolling here.

[safe sex 11740]

Gtfo of here with that disingenuous bullshit

[StruggleBus 3922]

41 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

Unless you are fighting our troops, this will not be an issue.  Look like /=/ same same. 
 

You can now, and would likely make money on the deal.  
 

 

Just haven’t gotten around to it. It hasn’t seen daylight in ten years 

[jimmyjazz 46027]

1 hour ago, fattyflattie said:

True. But I have a whole lot less issue banning purpose built body armor.  The avg person does not need it for their safety or protection. 

This is a bizarre take.  Body armor isn't a weapon.  It's safety gear.  A motorcycle helmet is "body (OK, skull) armor".  On what grounds could it be banned?  How does one justify the idea of disallowing a citizen from protecting themselves because they feel unsafe at the grocery store?

[Anastasis 23481]

2 hours ago, fattyflattie said:

I don’t understand, at all, not a single bit, why civilians “need” body armor. 

 

 

[WhatTheBuck 28795]

1 hour ago, wildcat09 said:

Some Surly posters would blame Hillary.

They’d blame whomever Trump and Fox News, etc. tells them to blame. 

[fattyflattie 4638]

1 minute ago, jimmyjazz said:

This is a bizarre take.  Body armor isn't a weapon.  It's safety gear.  A motorcycle helmet is "body (OK, skull) armor".  On what grounds could it be banned?  How does one justify the idea of disallowing a citizen from protecting themselves because they feel unsafe at the grocery store?

An extremely easy argument about why someone needs to be able to protect themselves with a firearm can be made.  Legit body armor plates aren’t motorcycle helmets.  
 

I can easily be missing why someone would need this? https://uarmprotection.com/product/fas-full-armor-system/?gclid=CjwKCAjw7IeUBhBbEiwADhiEMSseUbtjpqQXlmtERyz39-o8U-VWtcxqneiytWyD03ZZY7sh2yorQBoCw64QAvD_BwE

[jimmyjazz 46027]

I don't care if you think they don't "need" it.  I don't "need" my guitar amp.  I want it.  Same thing.  You are assigning nefarious intent to the purchaser, but you don't have a problem with that person purchasing a gun?

One item is potentially deadly, the other is in no way shape or form deadly.  You have it completely ass-backwards.

[B00M 6436]

46 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

It doesn’t need to be repealed. It needs to be interpreted correctly. You won’t get a gun nut to admit it but the words “well regulated militia” are there. You can ask them what those words mean but they’ll just ignore you as if they’re deaf. But those words are in the amendment and have meaning. 

"Well regulated in the 18th century tended to be something like well-organized, well-armed, well disciplined... It didn't mean 'regulation' in the sense that we use it now"

Source: 1st Google result of "what does a well regulated militia mean"

 

Edited May 16, 2022 by B00M

[wildcat09 29363]

30 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

You're comparing black people winning elections to white fear of racial replacement?

Nope, no trolling here.

He's not trolling, he's an actual fucking nazi piece of shit.

[TexArcher 38000]

49 minutes ago, Longhornlove said:

The Democrats blaming the Republicans for their own racial replacement theory is just classic. The hypocrisy has no end. I'm just a troll though, don't mind me.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/29/opinion/stacey-abrams-georgia-governor-election-brian-kemp.html

I wish you were a troll.

Hell, I wish the entire GOP for the last 15 or so years had been one really well organized Punk'd sketch. 

It pisses me off that you're all real.

[B00M 6436]

14 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

I don't care if you think they don't "need" it.  I don't "need" my guitar amp.  I want it.  Same thing.  You are assigning nefarious intent to the purchaser, but you don't have a problem with that person purchasing a gun?

One item is potentially deadly, the other is in no way shape or form deadly.  You have it completely ass-backwards.

I think this is coming up because concealed carriers are realizing they would've been straight up fucked trying to draw against this guy. 

 

25 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

 

 

I'm confused. What point are you trying to make? That plates would've saved that guy from suicide by cop?

[WhatTheBuck 28795]

13 minutes ago, B00M said:

"Well regulated in the 18th century tended to be something like well-organized, well-armed, well disciplined... It didn't mean 'regulation' in the sense that we use it now"

Source: 1st Google result of "what does a well regulated militia mean"

Well, if it’s the first result from a Google search then it must be authoritative, right?

How deep in the search results did you have to go before you reached Federalist No. 29, “Concerning the Militia?”

https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed29.asp

Or Federalist No. 69, “The Real Character of the Executive?”

https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed69.asp

The authors didn’t intend that every dickhead with a gripe on either side could arm themselves to the teeth and fight each other over disagreements about politics.

Also, you forgot to cite your source.

[fattyflattie 4638]

32 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

I don't care if you think they don't "need" it.  I don't "need" my guitar amp.  I want it.  Same thing.  You are assigning nefarious intent to the purchaser, but you don't have a problem with that person purchasing a gun?

One item is potentially deadly, the other is in no way shape or form deadly.  You have it completely ass-backwards.

Ok. Let have both then. 

[jimmyjazz 46027]

1 minute ago, fattyflattie said:

Ok. Let have both then. 

Isn't that what we have right now?

[Covri 6252]

1 hour ago, tx 3 putt said:

center mass until he’s not standing. I have 15 shots and he’s getting all 15, only if I can’t make it to an exit though. If I can’t, I’m going down with an empty magazine 

 

Probably not getting 15 shots off which is why I just carry a single grenade everywhere these days. All I have to do is get it close and I’m good.

['stache 21827]

35 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

He's not trolling, he's an actual fucking nazi piece of shit.

I never neg but goddamn, if for no other reason to let the kids know since a line exists. What a despicable piece of human garbage to post that take.

Edited May 16, 2022 by 'stache

[WhatTheBuck 28795]

5 minutes ago, Covri said:

Probably not getting 15 shots off which is why I just carry a single grenade everywhere these days. All I have to do is get it close and I’m good.

I should be allowed to open carry an RPG and shoot first at anyone I find threatening. 

[wildcat09 29363]

I have a Constitutional right to protect myself with one of these:

[tx 3 putt 77274]

1 hour ago, Covri said:

Probably not getting 15 shots off which is why I just carry a single grenade everywhere these days. All I have to do is get it close and I’m good.

 

playing call of duty and medal of honor online, taught me that rocket launcher is the way to go 

[B00M 6436]

1 hour ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Well, if it’s the first result from a Google search then it must be authoritative, right?

How deep in the search results did you have to go before you reached Federalist No. 29, “Concerning the Militia?”

https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed29.asp

Or Federalist No. 69, “The Real Character of the Executive?”

https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed69.asp

The authors didn’t intend that every dickhead with a gripe on either side could arm themselves to the teeth and fight each other over disagreements about politics.

Also, you forgot to cite your source.

Hamilton in Federalist 29 is arguing that the federal government, not the states, is best suited to efficiently/fairly regulate ("provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining") and command ("governing") the militia. That's exactly what I said was meant by well-regulated. 

In 69 (nice) Hamilton uses the words "regulate" and "regulating" in a negative way, like modern useage, as he's describing the absolute powers of a monarch in sharp contrast to the limited powers of the US President. 

 

[horn4life 3780]

6 hours ago, fattyflattie said:

Lol. Pubs would have the popular vote wrapped up if every racist person of color was republican. Or we only taking white racists? 

unbelievably false, but please don’t let that stop you. 

There is also currently only one political party that is the PREFERRED party of White Supremacists  and Nazi's.  That would be the Republican Party, and Donald Trump specifically.  Just to make it more simple what my opinion of the GOP is currently.

I am fascinated by the logic "that if the White racists could only get the "person of color racists" to vote along with them the GOP could be a majority party musings... 

Perhaps I should have just responded more succinctly, stating, "Of course white racists, we are talking about the Republican Party!?!"  

[horn4life 3780]

I'm sorry Flattie Fattie,  I just listened to Tucker Carlson's opening explaining how "white identity politics" is really because (insert giggle here)... Dems started politics of color...

So I understand your logic, as I watched 10 minutes of Tucker Carlson.  White victimhood is what Fox and the GOP has decided is foundational now.

[fattyflattie 4638]

9 minutes ago, horn4life said:

I'm sorry Flattie Fattie,  I just listened to Tucker Carlson's opening explaining how "white identity politics" is really because (insert giggle here)... Dems started politics of color...

So I understand your logic, as I watched 10 minutes of Tucker Carlson.  White victimhood is what Fox and the GOP has decided is foundational now.

Congratulations. You’ve now wasted more time than I ever have watching that idiot. 

[Homercles 10206]

3 hours ago, Covri said:

Probably not getting 15 shots off which is why I just carry a single grenade everywhere these days. All I have to do is get it close and I’m good.

Not me.  I’m not leaving anything up to chance 

[WhatTheBuck 28795]

1 hour ago, B00M said:

Hamilton in Federalist 29 is arguing that the federal government, not the states, is best suited to efficiently/fairly regulate ("provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining") and command ("governing") the militia. That's exactly what I said was meant by well-regulated. 

In 69 (nice) Hamilton uses the words "regulate" and "regulating" in a negative way, like modern useage, as he's describing the absolute powers of a monarch in sharp contrast to the limited powers of the US President. 

Are you arguing that heavily armed right-wing militia groups are what the authors meant by “well regulated militia?” I haven’t read the constitution of every State but in Ohio the militia is under the command of the Governor. It’s not up to a bunch of douchebags to decide what they believe or don’t believe and then take up arms against the democratically elected government. To interpret it that way is to invite chaos where there could be many different loosely organized militias with competing ideologies decided on a whim who would only wind up creating civil war. 

[Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13586]

Used to be sixteen lanes
Used to be Nuevo Spain
Used to be Juan Wayne
Used to be Mexico
Used to be Navajo
Used to be yippy-ay-I-don't-know

 

 

[B00M 6436]

50 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Are you arguing that heavily armed right-wing militia groups are what the authors meant by “well regulated militia?” ...To interpret it that way is to invite chaos where there could be many different loosely organized militias with competing ideologies decided on a whim who would only wind up creating civil war. 

Well, yes, and no. State militias that, if needed, could resist a federal army. Federalist 46 goes into detail about how the state militias must vastly out number the federal army (25 to 1). I think here's the disconnect: the militia was simply able bodied male* civilians that met up 2 whopping days a year to check each other. Make sure people were competent, equipped, informed (federalist 26)... They weren't right wing extremists larping in the woods every weekend fantasizing about overthrowing the government. Fuck those guys. The militia was and is just an armed populace and any true 2nd amendment supporter celebrates the arming of minorities. 

*whites only because shit was fucked up

[SimonBolivar 10958]

10 hours ago, B00M said:

 any true 2nd amendment supporter celebrates the arming of minorities. 

Well unless they are an originalist of course.

[956 Worldwide 34745]

Did not have “Chinese immigrant goes on shooting spree in Taiwanese Presbyterian church” on the horrible thing bingo card.

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/05/16/church-shooting-china-taiwan-00032883 
 

 

 

 

[Brisketexan 105195]

2 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Did not have “Chinese immigrant goes on shooting spree in Taiwanese Presbyterian church” on the horrible thing bingo card.

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/05/16/church-shooting-china-taiwan-00032883 
 

 

 

 

Well, sir, you just suffer from a lack of imagination.  This is earth, 2022.  If you don't have "psychotic asian territorial dispute erupts in violence in exclusive Orange County," you just aren't thinking hard enough.

[4th&Five 41574]

 

[Pancho 44922]

Christ.

 

[David Dennison 18944]

2 minutes ago, Pancho said:

Christ.

 

I was told all lives matter.

[Brisketexan 105195]

37 minutes ago, Pancho said:

Christ.

 

1 -- that call was recorded, as all 911 calls are.

2 -- Buffalo PD will find a way not to release it, or will find out it was accidentally deleted, etc.

[Gil Bang 25987]

3 hours ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Did not have “Chinese immigrant goes on shooting spree in Taiwanese Presbyterian church” on the horrible thing bingo card.

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/05/16/church-shooting-china-taiwan-00032883 
 

 

 

 

Everytime I hear about a mass shooting, I go through the 

"please don't be white. please don't be white. please don't be white".

Usually, followed by "FUCK". 

[horn4life 3780]

On 5/16/2022 at 12:11 PM, fattyflattie said:

Because apparently, every racist is a republican, as stated upthread.  Which is a mind numbing my stupid fucking statement.  Fuck, I can argue the president has done more racist shit with more long lasting detrimental effects than anyone posting here. Also wins the award of televised racist “gaffes” too.  Republican?

NOT at all. And that is why is is so difficult to engage Republicans today.  Because it is now near reflex to make affirmations that are untruthful, to create straw men to battle. you say, "I said" something I did not say and respond to said strawman.  What I said was, And I have been saying this a very, very long time. Is  "While all Republicans are not racist, nearly all racists are Republican."

And rather than addressing this seemingly simple affirmation, a new "what about" category of "dark skinned racism" was your defense.  Pause and think about that for a second. I would LOVE to hear how personally non-white racism impacted your life.  As It would be as rare as me killing a polar bear in my backyard in NW Austin.  😉

The sad truth about the Republican party today is that even with all the non-white racist vote it's still a minority party that cannot win the majority of the vote nationally for a first term President.  Again I state that not all my Republican friends are racist, but they do vote with the party preferred by Nazis, Proud Boys, The Klu Klux Klan, and White Nationalists.  And Trump was the first Presidential candidate since Buchanan to give them such a warm embrace.  Very good people on both sides!

 

[gmr548 16590]

On 5/15/2022 at 11:12 AM, Pancho said:

did you go to college?

I was not convinced he finished middle school until I saw the thread asking surly to pay off his student loans.

[Satchel 6939]

On 5/9/2019 at 12:14 PM, fattyflattie said:

Are you under the impression there is not an equally loud crowd, shouting the polar opposite? A completely separate ideological group with opposite beliefs? 

There’s a very large opposing crowd that is nowhere close to being as noisy.

[MrBig 5424]

I don’t understand why Trump would let the Justice Department ban bump stocks under his watch. Does Trump have any financial ties to binary trigger producers? 

[fattyflattie 4638]

10 minutes ago, MrBig said:

I don’t understand why Trump would let the Justice Department ban bump stocks under his watch. Does Trump have any financial ties to binary trigger producers? 

Because he, like many (if not all) politicians, don’t gaf about firearms or the 2nd.  Just the votes that follow them. 

[Thatguy 8785]

On 5/16/2022 at 12:11 PM, fattyflattie said:

Because apparently, every racist is a republican, as stated upthread.  Which is a mind numbing my stupid fucking statement.  Fuck, I can argue the president has done more racist shit with more long lasting detrimental effects than anyone posting here. Also wins the award of televised racist “gaffes” too.  Republican?

   I would say it differently. Racists are typically conservative and conservatives, at least in the US, tend to be Republicans. So therefore most racists tend to be Republican. This country has us forgetting that you can be conservative on both sides of the aisle. This country was once in a place where conservatives voted Democrat but these days they vote on the other side of the aisle. If you are not a racist then it does not apply to you. However, look to your left and right and see who is voting with you, and understand that sometimes you can be guilty by association. If I am riding in a car with a bunch of bank robbers and the police pull us over.......

[babysdaddy 2727]

12 hours ago, horn4life said:

NOT at all. And that is why is is so difficult to engage Republicans today.  Because it is now near reflex to make affirmations that are untruthful, to create straw men to battle. you say, "I said" something I did not say and respond to said strawman.  What I said was, And I have been saying this a very, very long time. Is  "While all Republicans are not racist, nearly all racists are Republican."

And rather than addressing this seemingly simple affirmation, a new "what about" category of "dark skinned racism" was your defense.  Pause and think about that for a second. I would LOVE to hear how personally non-white racism impacted your life.  As It would be as rare as me killing a polar bear in my backyard in NW Austin.  😉

The sad truth about the Republican party today is that even with all the non-white racist vote it's still a minority party that cannot win the majority of the vote nationally for a first term President.  Again I state that not all my Republican friends are racist, but they do vote with the party preferred by Nazis, Proud Boys, The Klu Klux Klan, and White Nationalists.  And Trump was the first Presidential candidate since Buchanan to give them such a warm embrace.  Very good people on both sides!

 

why do you go through the effort to change colors of your text and bold certain portions?

[ConferenceRoom 6144]

Don't begrudge a man his style. 

[WhatTheBuck 28795]

17 hours ago, Pancho said:

Christ.

 

“Well, that is certainly unfortunate, Letitia.”

Nice response, asshole.

[Thatguy 8785]

17 hours ago, Pancho said:

Christ.

 

 

[WhatTheBuck 28795]

17 hours ago, David Dennison said:

I was told all lives matter.

“All animals are equal but some are more equal than others.”

[horn4life 3780]

3 hours ago, babysdaddy said:

why do you go through the effort to change colors of your text and bold certain portions?

Why not? Usually I do it to draw a distinction in content, or for emphasis.  If the internet BBS Gods did not intend for me to use it, they would not have given me the tools!

[WhatTheBuck 28795]

5 minutes ago, horn4life said:

Why not? Usually I do it to draw a distinction in content, or for emphasis.  If the internet BBS Gods did not intend for me to use it, they would not have given me the tools!

If you’re posting online then I don’t think underlines should be used because people might mistake them for hyperlinks. Also, low contrast text, like red on white (or black on burnt orange, see the menu below,) is harder to read than black text on a white background and is just poor design. I don’t think it’s having the effect you think it does. I just scroll on by.

[horn4life 3780]

37 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

If you’re posting online then I don’t think underlines should be used because people might mistake them for hyperlinks. Also, low contrast text, like red on white (or black on burnt orange, see the menu below,) is harder to read than black text on a white background and is just poor design. I don’t think it’s having the effect you think it does. I just scroll on by.

😉