Active shooter thread

[Dahobbs 17703]

3 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

Holy shit. I knew you were pretty fucking stupid, but this is too much.   

I think every American of age should take the opportunity to use their rights to the fullest.  We've seen recently how quickly they can be taken away.  

Question, did Briskets post this morning sound the same to you or nah?  Just mine, I bet.  

Honestly, I just thought it was a funny way to phrase your post. That is a not so uncommon way to threaten someone. No idea why you're deciding to implode on this thread. Take some time off. 

[jimmyjazz 46268]

1 minute ago, royiv said:

Dude, you're not changing anyone's mind, 

Dude, you're not changing mine.  Neg away if you need to.  My hope is that someone else actually learns something.

[Sawbonz 27623]

11 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

We lost a war because Vietnamese citizens were armed. 

[fattyflattie 4638]

9 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

The thing you're worried about hasn't happened, in spite of 25+ years of you and yours being manipulated into believing it will. 

So, the National Firearms Act of 1934, Gun control act of 1968, Clinton exec orders, Lautenberg Act, S&W agreement, Brady Law, and School safety and law enforcement improvement act are just figments of the imagination?  Cool, cool.

Edited July 5, 2022 by fattyflattie

[fattyflattie 4638]

9 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Honestly, I just thought it was a funny way to phrase your post. That is a not so uncommon way to threaten someone. No idea why you're deciding to implode on this thread. Take some time off. 

No.  There is no need to threaten people on a fucking message board, especially over a hobby.  I believe in our rights, and people should use them to the full extent, before we lose them to political extremists. 

[Doc Sam Beckett 5797]

This is worse than when someone gets to debating whatthebuck about sky daddy

[Sawbonz 27623]

1 minute ago, fattyflattie said:

I believe in our rights, and people should use them to the full extent, before we lose them to political extremists. 

Too late for your wife and daughters 🤷

[Red Five 40910]

No idea if this is news on this shitty thread, but the number of dead in Highland Park is now up to seven. 

[fattyflattie 4638]

1 minute ago, Sawbonz said:

Too late for your wife and daughters 🤷

Is it? 

[C-Man 27285]

50 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

I'd like to start off with a hearty fuck you.  I think it would be the the same answer for any gun you'd want to use, down to a pellet gun.  You pick your bullet for what you are trying to accomplish.  Ballistic tip, soft point, or wad cutters.  It matters little with pretty much any centerfire rifle.  You are going to get fucked up with pawpaws 30-30, just the same. 

I understand that.  They are also in closets of literally hundreds of millions of Americans, even the "not gun people".  But if semi auto is the issue, or magazine capacity is the issue, where are you drawing the line?  I asked the question because I'm curious.  Is an A400 ok but any double stack 9mm not?  Curiosity on your thoughts is all.

I'd be OK with coming up with an agreement that lasts xx years.  Ban some shit, make some shit like suppressors more easily obtainable, and add some common sense laws (a bunch of them).  You are going to have to do a lot better than naming a specific rifle platform that hosts 15 calibers and pointing to it as the issue, though, with the option to just ban the next one when you figured out you got that wrong.  Banning a new host of guns every few years because you cant figure out that it's who's behind the trigger that is the problem is not going to work.  

More likely our grandchildren, but I reckon we eventually will.  

300 AAC.  Google and let me know. Until then, your railing against everything AR paints your picture.  Your continued avoidance on it has not gone unnoticed. 

But I care about you. That's a rude thing to say. 

LOL, wut?   Love it.  Just pure shitflinging.  I don't like your POV, you want to see your daughters dead!!1!  Never change.  

While I don't think these "weapons of war" need to be in the hands of normal Americans, let's start with this:

1) No one under the age of 25 is allowed to buy, own or possess semi-automatic rifles such as AR-15's, etc (shotguns can be a carveout since there's practical applications for these guns -- sporting/hunting

2) All gun sales are subject to a mandatory 7-day waiting period -- during this time, stringent background checks will be conducted

3) Red flag laws

4) Mental health measures implemented

That would be a hell of a start -- and doesn't "ban" a single firearm.

 

17 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

Really?  Because I've only seen you mention one.  Over and over, the same one.  And then speak to its undeniable destruction and lethality, without backing up any of those stats.  Or even speaking in specifics about which chambering make it so lethal, and the more/less lethality of it's other chamberings. 

You've got your boogeyman, I get it.   

 

Really? Uvalde, Buffalo, El Paso, etc, etc, etc, etc ...

[WhatTheBuck 28811]

5 minutes ago, Doc Sam Beckett said:

This is worse than when someone gets to debating whatthebuck about sky daddy

You’re free to change my mind. All you have to do is perform a miracle in front of me. And let me record it on video. 

[Sawbonz 27623]

2 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

Is it? 

The party that wants to restore their rights is the one that wants to make it more difficult for psychos to get guns. You tell me

[fattyflattie 4638]

4 minutes ago, C-Man said:

While I don't think these "weapons of war" need to be in the hands of normal Americans, let's start with this:

1) No one under the age of 25 is allowed to buy, own or possess semi-automatic rifles such as AR-15's, etc (shotguns can be a carveout since there's practical applications for these guns -- sporting/hunting   

2) All gun sales are subject to a mandatory 7-day waiting period -- during this time, stringent background checks will be conducted

3) Red flag laws

4) Mental health measures implemented

That would be a hell of a start -- and doesn't "ban" a single firearm.

 

1) Ok.  Semi-auto pistols?  VA Tech was done with a 9mm and .22LR irrc.  Can someone who's served and is out at 22 own a SA rifle?  Centerfire, or are we taking away .22's from 8 yo's (possess gets tricky).

2) Make it 30, idgaf. 45, whatever it takes to make sure we enforce the laws we already have would be a good start. 

3) OK.  Needs to be reasonable.  Needs to be severe punishment for fuckery (false claims from ex, pissed co-worker, etc).  

4) Awesome.  Take them from the pay for everyone's college budget. 

Appreciate your response.

 

6 minutes ago, C-Man said:

Really? Uvalde, Buffalo, El Paso, etc, etc, etc, etc ...

The sad fact is Uvalde could have happened with a pointed stick because the police cowardice.  This HP event looks like 31 sustained gunshots, 7 have perished.  I don't believe that's outside the realm of the damage any firearm can accomplish.  As noted above, VA tech was a couple of pistols, one "low power".  Santa Fe a shotgun, iirc.  It turns out that sending metal projectiles at someone at high rates of velocity is deadly af. 

[wildcat09 29431]

*Sane people* "We would like to not be horrifically murdered, please." 

*fatty et al*:

 

[Brisketexan 105457]

18 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

So, the National Firearms Act of 1934, Gun control act of 1968, Clinton exec orders, Lautenberg Act, S&W agreement, Brady Law, and School safety and law enforcement improvement act are just figments of the imagination?  Cool, cool.

Please identify for me all of your firearms that were confiscated by any of those acts.

I'll wait....

[Longhorn_Fan68 33900]

everyone feeling extra free after this week/weekend? I know I sure am!

[Brisketexan 105457]

1 minute ago, fattyflattie said:

The sad fact is Uvalde could have happened with a pointed stick because the police cowardice. 

1 -- fucking bullshit, with a pointed stick, the teachers in those rooms would have had a chance to fight back.

2 -- THE MAJOR fucking reason for police cowardice was the fact that an AR was on the other side of the door.  That's right, the weapon is so fucking terrifying that the people whose literal JOB it is to confront armed people are utterly terrified of that particular weapon.  That should tell you something.

You are making our points for us, you just haven't realized it yet.

[bluto 4943]

3 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

1) Ok.  Semi-auto pistols?  VA Tech was done with a 9mm and .22LR irrc.  Can someone who's served and is out at 22 own a SA rifle?  Centerfire, or are we taking away .22's from 8 yo's (possess gets tricky).

2) Make it 30, idgaf. 45, whatever it takes to make sure we enforce the laws we already have would be a good start. 

3) OK.  Needs to be reasonable.  Needs to be severe punishment for fuckery (false claims from ex, pissed co-worker, etc).  

4) Awesome.  Take them from the pay for everyone's college budget. 

Appreciate your response.

 

The sad fact is Uvalde could have happened with a pointed stick because the police cowardice.  This HP event looks like 31 sustained gunshots, 7 have perished.  I don't believe that's outside the realm of the damage any firearm can accomplish.  As noted above, VA tech was a couple of pistols, one "low power".  Santa Fe a shotgun, iirc.  It turns out that sending metal projectiles at someone at high rates of velocity is deadly af. 

Good god you’re a disgrace 

[RomaVicta 30033]

35 minutes ago, Bullneck said:

 

Washington keeping an army together is what we did to gain independence. That and decisive help from the French navy.

It wasn't the myth of clever yanks hiding behind trees while the British Army marched in the open.

More generally, battles were won with the bayonet after an exchange of volleys. The National Bayonet Association is really slipping in their PR efforts.

I saw the t-shirt below being worn by a tall, skinny yokel with the mandatory beard in Kerrville over the weekend.

His girlfriend looked like a skinny teenager. This idiotic, violent mythology that is embraced by so many Americans is a deep, poisonous root that will likely never be dug out of the ignorant soil of the American people. Malign Idiot World.

Oh yeah, again, the nomenclature fetishists should be forced to survive on the peanuts in my shit.

Just one of the mass shootings on July 4 would have been huge news anywhere else in the whole world. The increasing and inevitable acceptance of mass shooting as a form of expression teamed with the t-shirt above speeds the circulation of the vortex.

 

[fattyflattie 4638]

Just now, Brisketexan said:

Please identify for me all of your firearms that were confiscated by any of those acts.

I'll wait....

I mean, I wasn't around in 1934.  Were certain arms banned in that act or no, either thru extreme and exorbitant taxation or other means?  Just more bullshit that gun owners "don't compromise".  

[Brisketexan 105457]

1 minute ago, fattyflattie said:

Just more bullshit that the 2nd amendment "shall not be infringed" doesn't allow for some firearms regulation.

FIF correcting literally every 2nd amendment bro out there.

And again.....I've owned firearms for nearly 50 years.  I've been told most of that time, thuh ebil libz are coming to take yer gunz!  Yet I still own all of the same firearms, and in fact, they've become even EASIER to acquire.

An American being motivated by the fear that the government is coming to take your guns is like someone in the Amazon being terrified of dying of dry skin.

[mr.goodkat 464]

21 minutes ago, C-Man said:

While I don't think these "weapons of war" need to be in the hands of normal Americans, let's start with this:

1) No one under the age of 25 is allowed to buy, own or possess semi-automatic rifles such as AR-15's, etc (shotguns can be a carveout since there's practical applications for these guns -- sporting/hunting

2) All gun sales are subject to a mandatory 7-day waiting period -- during this time, stringent background checks will be conducted

3) Red flag laws

4) Mental health measures implemented

That would be a hell of a start -- and doesn't "ban" a single firearm.

 

Really? Uvalde, Buffalo, El Paso, etc, etc, etc, etc ...

a tax on sales of ALL semi autos rifle and pistol magazines  that directly goes to funding of mental health programs .

[fattyflattie 4638]

1 minute ago, Brisketexan said:

FIF correcting literally every 2nd amendment bro out there.

And again.....I've owned firearms for nearly 50 years.  I've been told most of that time, thuh ebil libz are coming to take yer gunz!  Yet I still own all of the same firearms, and in fact, they've become even EASIER to acquire.

An American being motivated by the fear that the government is coming to take your guns is like someone in the Amazon being terrified of dying of dry skin.

How many people have they killed?  I find it hard to believe you could own guns for 50 years, and none of them just up and killed someone.  You must be lying.   Guns are the problem, right?  Must just be you, me, and every single person I know who got lucky and our guns never snuck out the house and killed someone.  Just cosmic amounts of statistical odds there that we'd both have a bunch of guns, for a bunch of years, and none of them went and killed somebody!  I'm going to buy a lotto ticket on the way home. 

[Vegas64 678]

4 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

FIF correcting literally every 2nd amendment bro out there.

And again.....I've owned firearms for nearly 50 years.  I've been told most of that time, thuh ebil libz are coming to take yer gunz!  Yet I still own all of the same firearms, and in fact, they've become even EASIER to acquire.

An American being motivated by the fear that the government is coming to take your guns is like someone in the Amazon being terrified of dying of dry skin.

With all due respect, if the Roe vs Wade decision from two weeks ago doesn't open the door to everything being on the table to being taken at some point, then what does?

[RomaVicta 30033]

14 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

The sad fact is Uvalde could have happened with a pointed stick because the police cowardice. 

Negged for lying/distortion. The cops were afraid because the killer had the weapon he did. It's not the first time. 

[DDD Dad 14359]

1 hour ago, jimmyjazz said:

What is the effective firing rate, including reload, of paw-paw's 30-30 compared to an AR-15 with, oh let's say 30 round capacity?  Imagine we want to fire 150 round out of each weapon.

African or European?

[ConferenceRoom 6147]

3 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

How many people have they killed?  I find it hard to believe you could own guns for 50 years, and none of them just up and killed someone.  You must be lying.   Guns are the problem, right?  Must just be you, me, and every single person I know who got lucky and our guns never snuck out the house and killed someone.  Just cosmic amounts of statistical odds there that we'd both have a bunch of guns, for a bunch of years, and none of them went and killed somebody!  I'm going to buy a lotto ticket on the way home. 

Martin Harris, Dumb Dumb Dumb. 

[fattyflattie 4638]

Just now, RomaVicta said:

Negged for lying/distortion. The cops were afraid because the killer had the weapon he did. It's not the first time. 

Fair enough.  They would have killed him had he had a stick. I'm not certain about other arms, but I won't argue that.  I strongly sense their cowardice would have been just as bright with anything that goes bang.  But you are right, they were afraid to advance on someone equally as armed.  

[RomaVicta 30033]

2 minutes ago, DDD Dad said:

African or European?

[aggie08 21560]

4 minutes ago, Vegas64 said:

With all due respect, if the Roe vs Wade decision from two weeks ago doesn't open the door to everything being on the table to being taken at some point, then what does?

Is this satire? Are you fucking kidding me?

[lemonlime 5503]

6 minutes ago, Vegas64 said:

With all due respect, if the Roe vs Wade decision from two weeks ago doesn't open the door to everything being on the table to being taken at some point, then what does?

We're playing Calvin ball with the law that protects the rights of women and brown people.  And you should buy AR-15's just in case we decide to also play Calvin ball to get rid of firearms, despite rulings that make clear we will gut the already existing gun control laws on the books.  

That's I guess the argument from your side on it.  Cool cool.

[Longhorn_Fan68 33900]

1 minute ago, RomaVicta said:

lol, he is clearly saying "i don't know" not "excellent"

[Brian Fantana 6692]

Here's me, sitting at home hoping someone of fatty's ilk trespasses on my land instead of shitting up supposedly serious discussion threads so I can exercise my second amendment rights. Maybe he/they can report back on the relative velocities of my loads. But, you know, in a video game, not for real.

[Willfully Horn 8058]

3 minutes ago, lemonlime said:

We're playing Calvin ball with the law that protects the rights of women and brown people.  And you should buy AR-15's just in case we decide to also play Calvin ball to get rid of firearms, despite rulings that make clear we will gut the already existing gun control laws on the books.  

That's I guess the argument from your side on it.  Cool cool.

While conveniently and dishonestly overlooking the first seven words of the second amendment🌧 

[fattyflattie 4638]

1 minute ago, Brian Fantana said:

Here's me, sitting at home hoping someone of fatty's ilk trespasses on my land instead of shitting up supposedly serious discussion threads so I can exercise my second amendment rights. Maybe he/they can report back on the relative velocities of my loads. But, you know, in a video game, not for real.

Lol.  This is your second or third post in this vain.  Any thoughts on this one @Dahobbs?  

[Brisketexan 105457]

12 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

How many people have they killed?  I find it hard to believe you could own guns for 50 years, and none of them just up and killed someone.  You must be lying.   Guns are the problem, right?  Must just be you, me, and every single person I know who got lucky and our guns never snuck out the house and killed someone.  Just cosmic amounts of statistical odds there that we'd both have a bunch of guns, for a bunch of years, and none of them went and killed somebody!  I'm going to buy a lotto ticket on the way home. 

It's actually a perfect example.  Again, you're making my point for me.

I would pass any background check.  No red flags for me.  I also wasn't out acquiring heavy-duty semi-autos when I was 18.  And, I'm not a psychotic piece of shit (I'm a piece of shit for totally independent reasons).  The fact that a person NOT intending to cause mayhem didn't have to go through any checks doesn't make your point. 

To that end, before metal detectors, 99.9% of people did NOT bring a weapon onto a plane to blow it up or hijack it -- therefore, any use of metal detectors to detect knives, guns, or explosive devices is logically unsupported.  I mean, I personally have travelled by air hundreds of times, and never once did I try to hijack a plane.  Therefore, any rules or regs preventing people from carrying a gun, knife, or bomb on a plane is useless.

Again....you have no idea how well you are making my point.

12 minutes ago, Vegas64 said:

With all due respect, if the Roe vs Wade decision from two weeks ago doesn't open the door to everything being on the table to being taken at some point, then what does?

Oh, it might.  And that's ripped right from the "every accusation is a confession."  Remember how we've heard the right scream for decades about how the gubmint was coming to take our rights?  Well, when they finally took control of our government, that's exactly what they did, and have promised to continue to do.  But it's totally Calvinball - they're only going to take away those rights they find icky or that obstruct their goals.  Having a massive semi-deputized force of heavily armed right-wing assholes itching to do their bidding is in their FAVOR, so they're gonna make sure that particular right continues unabated for a long, long, long time.

Edited July 5, 2022 by Brisketexan

[Brian Fantana 6692]

Just now, fattyflattie said:

Lol.  This is your second or third post in this vain.  Any thoughts on this one @Dahobbs?  

Hey, you're the one who said I should exercise my rights! 

[Vegas64 678]

Just now, Brisketexan said:

 

Oh, it might.  And that's ripped right from the "every accusation is a confession."  Remember how we've heard the right scream for decades about how the gubmint was coming to take our rights?  Well, when they finally took control of our government, that's exactly what they did, and have promised to continue to do.  But it's totally Calvinball - they're only going to take away those rights they find icky or that obstruct their goals.  Having a massive semi-deputized force of heavily armed right-wing assholes itching to do their bidding is in their FAVOR, so they're gonna make sure that particular right continues unabated for a long, long, long time.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to equate the two here. I'm just very acutely aware now that things in the past we said were theatre and not gonna happen, and then they actually happened, puts my sensors on alert.

And to be clear, I could not care less about the 2nd amendment and guns. Take 'em for all I care.

[C-Man 27285]

18 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

1) Ok.  Semi-auto pistols?  VA Tech was done with a 9mm and .22LR irrc.  Can someone who's served and is out at 22 own a SA rifle?  Centerfire, or are we taking away .22's from 8 yo's (possess gets tricky).

2) Make it 30, idgaf. 45, whatever it takes to make sure we enforce the laws we already have would be a good start. 

3) OK.  Needs to be reasonable.  Needs to be severe punishment for fuckery (false claims from ex, pissed co-worker, etc).  

4) Awesome.  Take them from the pay for everyone's college budget. 

Appreciate your response.

 

The sad fact is Uvalde could have happened with a pointed stick because the police cowardice.  This HP event looks like 31 sustained gunshots, 7 have perished.  I don't believe that's outside the realm of the damage any firearm can accomplish.  As noted above, VA tech was a couple of pistols, one "low power".  Santa Fe a shotgun, iirc.  It turns out that sending metal projectiles at someone at high rates of velocity is deadly af. 

Virginia Tech took place in 2007, only a few years after the assault weapons ban expired and made it easier to get AR-15's and similar weapons. There's a reason these semi-automatic rifles are being chosen for these attacks. They're lethal and you can put a lot of bullets down the range in a really short time window. And you know as well as I do that the number of casualties would've been far less if this kid used a pistol or shotgun from his rooftop perch.

[fattyflattie 4638]

2 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

Hey, you're the one who said I should exercise my rights! 

You should.  The thinly veiled threats can fuck off though, friend.

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, C-Man said:

you can put a lot of bullets down the range in a really short time window. 

You mean you can "shoot fast"

[David Dennison 18951]

13 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

How many people have they killed?  I find it hard to believe you could own guns for 50 years, and none of them just up and killed someone.  You must be lying.   Guns are the problem, right?  Must just be you, me, and every single person I know who got lucky and our guns never snuck out the house and killed someone.  Just cosmic amounts of statistical odds there that we'd both have a bunch of guns, for a bunch of years, and none of them went and killed somebody!  I'm going to buy a lotto ticket on the way home. 

If guns aren't the problem, why do mass shootings and gun crimes happen with so much more frequency in the United States than in other peer nations?

[fattyflattie 4638]

1 minute ago, C-Man said:

Virginia Tech took place in 2007, only a few years after the assault weapons ban expired and made it easier to get AR-15's and similar weapons.

Yes.  The deadliest school shooting to date, iirc.  Dude used a 9mm and .22, when he had access to anything (AWB had expired).  But he chose what's in most of Americans nightstands and what we use to introduce children to the sport, not a SA rifle.  No "weapon of war".     

 

[DixonHur 11395]

8 minutes ago, Willfully Horn said:

While conveniently and dishonestly overlooking the first seven words of the second amendment🌧 

This.  It was a well regulated militia that defeated the British, not random citizens with guns.  Fuck the NRA.

[Brisketexan 105457]

Just now, Vegas64 said:

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to equate the two here. I'm just very acutely aware now that things in the past we said were theatre and not gonna happen, and then they actually happened, puts my sensors on alert.

And to be clear, I could not care less about the 2nd amendment and guns. Take 'em for all I care.

And, I mean, you're actually pointing to an even greater issue, one I pointed out as being problematic as a practicing attorney: WTF is the law on anything, and does it really matter?

Are there certain rights that are rock solid, and inviolable?  Are there certain canons of statutory construction that will be applied to any legislation?  Maybe.  Maybe not.  Fuck if I know, because Calvinball.  The SCOTUS is far from alone.  This is an affliction common among MAGA-heavy courts.

So, you're right.  I'm being made to looks the gullible-ass fool for ever arguing that "the law says X."  From a standpoint of logic, reason, and the rule of law, I have ZERO idea what the SCOTUS will do on much of anything.  But from a standard of MAGA, results-oriented decisionmaking, I have a pretty good idea.  And based on that current canon of judicial conduct, I can predict that your ability to own a gun is very, very safe.*

 

* I reserve the right to later say "this rule not applicable for certain demographics/skin tones."  For example, while SCOTUS likely won't revoke birthright citizenship, I could see them holding that certain rights only apply to citizens of certain "credentials" -- say, you have to prove that your parents were legally birthright citizens (which I likely couldn't do to their satisfaction, as my father was born in a Texas border hospital with shitty recordkeeping 80+ years ago, to mexican parents).  So, note that I am leaving myself room to hedge.

[safe sex 11798]

3 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

If guns aren't the problem, why do mass shootings and gun crimes happen with so much more frequency in the United States than in other peer nations?

We're exceptional.

[fattyflattie 4638]

1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

If guns aren't the problem, why do mass shootings and gun crimes happen with so much more frequency in the United States than in other peer nations?

If a specific gun is the problem, and it's been available for the last 60+ years, why has it only been an issue in the last 10?

[Brisketexan 105457]

3 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

If guns aren't the problem, why do mass shootings and gun crimes happen with so much more frequency in the United States than in other peer nations?

Texags explained it for us - it's because woke libtards are mean to white males.  It's thuh libz fault.  Duh.

[Brian Fantana 6692]

8 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

You should.  The thinly veiled threats can fuck off though, friend.

What threat? You're scared of video games?

[wildcat09 29431]

17 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

Here's me, sitting at home hoping someone of fatty's ilk trespasses on my land instead of shitting up supposedly serious discussion threads so I can exercise my second amendment rights. Maybe he/they can report back on the relative velocities of my loads. But, you know, in a video game, not for real.

You don't have to be on your own land to exercise your 2nd amendment rights. SCOTUS just gave everyone the go ahead to carry wherever they want for self defense.