Active shooter thread

[fattyflattie 4639]

34 minutes ago, lemonlime said:

We also regulate both driving and food production/safety.   We don't just say food is a public good, so fuck the FDA, fuck labeling, and we don't need food safety inspectors.

You understand there’s a fuckload of firearm regulations or no?  May not be as many as you would like, but it’s not an unregulated industry by any stretch of the imagination. 

[ndawg 1242]

2 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

You understand there’s a fuckload of firearm regulations or no?  May not be as many as you would like, but it’s not an unregulated industry by any stretch of the imagination. 

Oh, a "we only differ on degree, not principle" argument. OK.

So, does the second amendment establish that I have a right to own a nuke? How about anthrax?

[956 Worldwide 34706]

45 minutes ago, Helobious said:

Article doesn’t address non-hispanic whites. A bit flawed imo.

And the reality is in this country white men are the best at mass shootings. Of the top 10 mass shootings by death toll here, 7 were committed by white men. 8 if we include Nikolas Cruz, white kid adopted and raised by a hispanic parent.

 Part of the issue is that the definition of white per keeps shifting and there’s no agreement. This guy is likely to be classified as white. Not a shooting but the Boston marathon bombing could credibly be called an act of terror by a white (literally Caucasian in the strictest sense of the word) perpetrator-  a Chechen.

The random mass shootings grab our attention because there is no way to predict them and they seem to strike without regard to who you are. I’d even argue they get more press because the VICTIMS are more likely to be white. But they are not more deadly overall and if we want to talk about guns, let’s talk about guns and killings. Most shootings, and most mass shootings— even those committed by white dudes— happen as part of another crime or as part of family/interpersonal dispute. Are those lives worth less? 

 

 

Edited March 23, 2021 by 956 Worldwide

[fattyflattie 4639]

29 minutes ago, TexArcher said:

What most of us, 70+% last I checked, are saying is, "let's ban the guns that make it easy for some nutbar to kill double digit school children before he's stopped."

As far as I'm concerned, if you want to own a Glock pistol or a hunting rifle or even a shotgun for home defense, go right ahead.

Everything you listed in your second paragraph could do the damage you listed in the first.  You can just say you don’t like ARs, that’s fine.  But to treat other weapons as if they aren’t capable of the same feats is ignorant at best. 

[fattyflattie 4639]

1 minute ago, ndawg said:

Oh, a "we only differ on degree, not principle" argument. OK.

So, does the second amendment establish that I have a right to own a nuke? How about anthrax?

Of course not. But a better analogy would have been to say the FDA recognizes sugar is terrible for 90% of our country, then removes or regulates it.    His post speaks as there is no regulation, which is patently false. 

[Foosters 17855]

Sorry your father had to die. Too bad the strongest, most powerful country in the world is powerless to do anything about it. Have some prayers instead.

[wildcat09 29352]

I’m so fucking tired of all the idiots on the internet who think they’re the Joker with the “why don’t you propose we do something about other types of gun violence!?” hot takes every time there’s a mass shooting.

[ndawg 1242]

1 minute ago, fattyflattie said:

Of course not. But a better analogy would have been to say the FDA recognizes sugar is terrible for 90% of our country, then removes or regulates it.    His post speaks as there is no regulation, which is patently false. 

I read his post as suggesting that we don't have firearms regulation that keeps us safe from gun violence. That doesn't necessarily preclude the existence of firearms regulation at all.

[Willfully Horn 8014]

Police arrested a suspect, and Boulder police Chief Maris Herold identified the 21-year-old man, Ahmad Al Aliwi Alissa, of Arvada, Colorado,
 

My ass puckered. 

[956 Worldwide 34706]

1 minute ago, wildcat09 said:

I’m so fucking tired of all the idiots on the internet who think they’re the Joker with the “why don’t you propose we do something about other types of gun violence!?” hot takes every time there’s a mass shooting.

We need to make guns harder to buy and that will make gun violence of all types of go down.

[Serak The Preparer 3431]

Man, this thread is so on-brand for the Texags crowd. @markstanco pops in with the obligatory factually incorrect take (that is never retracted when it is immediately refuted), @dcar00 shows up to make sure he tells a brown person that his experience with racism in Texas is wrong, and @slorch gets to point out that guns aren't the problem, just the people (never minding the fact that we regulate ownership / use of dangerous objects all the fucking time). Just need @Cheeseweasel to make a 2 weeks joke and we can be all done.

[Cheeseweasel 26438]

1 minute ago, Serak The Preparer said:

Just need @Cheeseweasel to make a 2 weeks joke and we can be all done.

Everyone will move on to the next shiny object in 2 weeks.

[High Plains Drifter 11046]

13 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

 

 

 She goes into a class, she instinctively scopes it out for cover and escape routes.

 

 

 

Does she know the weight of her instructor and that he can handle himself? Does she know the best place to find a gun?

 

 

[Serak The Preparer 3431]

Just now, Cheeseweasel said:

Everyone will move on to the next shiny object in 2 weeks.

There are about 10 people who wont.

[fattyflattie 4639]

5 minutes ago, Serak The Preparer said:

There are about 10 people who wont.

plus another 25 in Chicago.  Don't forget them.  1 life lost is too many. 

[Brisketexan 105106]

1 minute ago, wildcat09 said:

I’m so fucking tired of all the idiots on the internet who think they’re the Joker with the “why don’t you propose we do something about other types of gun violence!?” hot takes every time there’s a mass shooting.

I mean, other than it has zero logical match.

There are 4 broad types of gun violence death in this country.

1 -- domestic violence (family/friend dispute, one shoots the other).

2 -- crime connected/adjacent shootings (drug deal gone bad, gang turf war, shooting in a robbery)

3 -- suicides (seriously, in terms of gun deaths, this racks up a serious body count)

4 -- random shootings, including mass shootings.  That is, it's not connected to either of the first two items above (domestic violence or crime-connected).

 

The reason that we focus on #4 in these discussions is because that is one that has a chance of affecting ANY of us, and there's nothing about our behavior that makes us more or less susceptible to it.  I can avoid #1 by avoiding toxic relationships.  I can mostly avoid #2 by not getting involved in the drug trade or gangs.

I can't "avoid" #4.  I'm going to go to the grocery store.  My kids are going to go to school.

Problems 1 and 2 can and should be addressed by the legal system.  But problems 3 and 4 particularly involve the need for a functioning mental health system.  And maybe, just maybe, not making it super-easy for the mentally ill to get rapid fire weapons.

So, pointing to gun violence in Chicago -- which is almost all under #2 -- is a red herring.  We are talking about random  mass shootings here, which are a totally different animal -- the only overlap they have is that firearms are involved in both.

[Nivek 16923]

Everything you listed in your second paragraph could do the damage you listed in the first.  You can just say you don’t like ARs, that’s fine.  But to treat other weapons as if they aren’t capable of the same feats is ignorant at best. 

Ok guys wait while I cycle 4 rounds through my bolt action rifle. Then reload.

There is a reason a pistol is a sidearm and not a primary weapon. The ability to accurately place a high volume of rounds on target(s) is more easily accomplished with an AR-15 or class of weapons than any pistol or rifle can achieve.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, henrygandorf said:

ok, so back to a bigger talking point that's been touched on a few times.

in some people's opinions, there is an "allowable amount" of these shootings that we, as a society, can "live with".

as it's been pointed out, there are car accidents, obesity issues, etc, without those industries being threatened or wrecked completely (sorry about the unintentional wordplay).  of course cars and food serve a real purpose, and one could argue guns do not, outside of recreation and the feeling of self-safety.

which brings around the greater point - if we are willing to deal with 2-3 mass casualty shootings per year without doing anything, then does that mean we don't care at all?  is 10 too many?  is 50 (one per week)?  is 100 per year?  if any of those numbers are not ok, then there becomes a tipping point.  people die in cars every day.  but if certain cars were causing deaths at alarming rates, something would be done (cue the fight club airplane speech - "you wouldn't believe")

so if we agree that there's a number that's deemed "too high", the rest is negotiation.  so how high is too high?

and to add, because i just read it, i agree any shooter that's not a troubled white middle aged male actually does help the case for gun control.  sad and sick but truthful.

Who says we aren't doing anything?

Raise better fucking kids.  but hey, the guilt complex in America says that's impossible, so let's look to the guvamint for solutions, right?

 

[TexArcher 37774]

49 minutes ago, TexArcher said:

This would be a better analogy if fat people were going into schools and stabbing a bunch of children with forks several times a year.

Of course no one is saying ban forks because they make people fat.  And no one is saying ban all guns, either.  What most of us, 70+% last I checked, are saying is, "let's ban the guns that make it easy for some nutbar to kill double digit school children before he's stopped."

 

17 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

Everything you listed in your second paragraph could do the damage you listed in the first.  You can just say you don’t like ARs, that’s fine.  But to treat other weapons as if they aren’t capable of the same feats is ignorant at best. 

Are you seriously saying that a Glock, a hunting rifle, or a shotgun can do the same damage as an assault rifle in the hands of an active shooter?

With a straight face?

[Bama Chick 28596]

Yeah.

[ndawg 1242]

Just now, slorch said:

Who says we aren't doing anything?

Raise better fucking kids.  but hey, the guilt complex in America says that's impossible, so let's look to the guvamint for solutions, right?

I'm not raising any fucking kids in this hellscape. But even though I exercised muh pErSoNaL rEsPoNsIbIliTy and decided not to breed, other people's shitty offspring can nevertheless mow me down at a moments notice anytime I'm out in public.

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

 

So, pointing to gun violence in Chicago -- which is almost all under #2 -- is a red herring.  We are talking about random  mass shootings here, which are a totally different animal -- the only overlap they have is that firearms are involved in both.

address the behavior.  The gun is the easy part.  Wanna discuss horrific crimes against people that didn't involve firearms?

Edited March 23, 2021 by slorch

[fattyflattie 4639]

7 minutes ago, Nivek said:

Ok guys wait while I cycle 4 rounds through my bolt action rifle. Then reload.

There is a reason a pistol is a sidearm and not a primary weapon. The ability to accurately place a high volume of rounds on target(s) is more easily accomplished with an AR-15 or class of weapons than any pistol or rifle can achieve.

So you understand BAR's and Woodmasters were around decades before "AR-15 class" weapons?  And they are deer hunting rifles.  Back when mass shootings didn't exist, I guess?  

Also, everyone on this board should be VERY fucking aware what damage can be done in mass quantities with a bolt action rifle.  

[Brisketexan 105106]

3 minutes ago, slorch said:

Who says we aren't doing anything?

Raise better fucking kids.  but hey, the guilt complex in America says that's impossible, so let's look to the guvamint for solutions, right?

 

 

1 minute ago, slorch said:

address the behavior.  The gun is the easy part.  Wanna discuss crimes against people that didn't involve firearms?

Cool.  Please provide for us the blueprint on "how to not raise a schizophrenic with psychotic delusions that lead him to murder 10 people."  

[Bama Chick 28596]

Six days ago.

Right after the ban was overturned in Boulder.

[henrygandorf 29189]

23 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

Everything you listed in your second paragraph could do the damage you listed in the first.  You can just say you don’t like ARs, that’s fine.  But to treat other weapons as if they aren’t capable of the same feats is ignorant at best. 

 

1 minute ago, fattyflattie said:

So you understand BAR's and Woodmasters were around decades before "AR-15 class" weapons?  And they are deer hunting rifles.  Back when mass shootings didn't exist, I guess?  

Also, everyone on this board should be VERY fucking aware what damage can be done in mass quantities with a bolt action rifle.  

you're making my "get rid of all guns" argument for me whether you're trying to or not.

[Nivek 16923]

Who says we aren't doing anything?
Raise better fucking kids.  but hey, the guilt complex in America says that's impossible, so let's look to the guvamint for solutions, right?
 

Didn’t your kid vandalize someone’s car?

[fattyflattie 4639]

7 minutes ago, TexArcher said:

 

Are you seriously saying that a Glock, a hunting rifle, or a shotgun can do the same damage as an assault rifle in the hands of an active shooter?

With a straight face?

Remind me what firearm Charles Whitman used?

And yes, people who are proficient with arms can do alot of shit with whatever they have.

 

[Brisketexan 105106]

1 minute ago, fattyflattie said:

So you understand BAR's and Woodmasters were around decades before "AR-15 class" weapons?  And they are deer hunting rifles.  Back when mass shootings didn't exist, I guess?  

Also, everyone on this board should be VERY fucking aware what damage can be done in mass quantities with a bolt action rifle.  

High cap magazines weren't nearly as available for civilian use.

And yes, a bolt action can do damage.....when you have high ground, an incredibly large target field, and limitless defilade to allow you to fire for a LONG ASS TIME.  Take any of those away -- say, walk into a King Sooper with my Weatherby -- and you aren't cranking out enough fire to inflict mass casualties, and you and I both know that.

[MC Fresh Breath 4074]

21 minutes ago, Foosters said:

Sorry your father had to die. Too bad the strongest, most powerful country in the world is powerless to do anything about it. Have some prayers instead.

Need a “makes me sad +1” reaction option.

Edited March 23, 2021 by MC Fresh Breath

[fattyflattie 4639]

5 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

 

you're making my "get rid of all guns" argument for me whether you're trying to or not.

Sure.  Wont happen in your grandkids lifetimes though.  Sorry. 

[Guest]

Just now, Nivek said:

Didn’t your kid vandalize someone’s car?

Broke a windshield.  Yep.  Answered for it. 

That's absolutely the equivalent of shooting someone, right?

 

 

[4th&Five 41526]

21 minutes ago, TexArcher said:

To paraphrase an Onion article from years ago: "It's a shame there's nothing we can do to stop this" say leaders of only country where this happens with any regularity.

they repost it every time...so about 3 times a month.

 

[fattyflattie 4639]

5 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

and you aren't cranking out enough fire to inflict mass casualties, and you and I both know that.

Ok.  But take the video I posted of Mr. Testa, who with a shotgun anyone can easily get, roasted 12 targets in what, 2 seconds.  I know you know what buckshot does.  Put it together.  We have a much bigger problem than "AR's".   So now you need to take away dove guns.    Good luck with that is all I'm saying. 

[henrygandorf 29189]

obligatory...

 

[TexArcher 37774]

3 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

Remind me what firearm Charles Whitman used?

And yes, people who are proficient with arms can do alot of shit with whatever they have.

 

 

Did you seriously just post a video of clay shooting to support the bullshit assertion that all guns are equally dangerous?

Does it not matter to you what 70+% of the country wants?  Are you actually anti-democracy on this issue?

[Brisketexan 105106]

Just now, fattyflattie said:

Ok.  But take the video I posted of Mr. Testa, who with a shotgun anyone can easily get, roasted 12 targets in what, 2 seconds.  I know you know what buckshot does.  Put it together.  We have a much bigger problem than "AR's".   So now you need to take away dove guns.    Good luck with that is all I'm saying. 

Dude.  Sure, there are a handful of people in the US who are so skilled with a firearm that they can take out 20 people with a single shot 20 gauge.  But for 99.5% of folks, including functionally all of the people we're worried about, limited rate of fire is a significant limiting factor to their ability to do damage.  Shit, I'm pretty handy with a thunderstick, and I can't come CLOSE to repeating what the guy does in that video.  Come on.  You're getting absurd.

High rate of fire makes it much, much easier for the average/inexperienced shooter (which almost every mass shooter is) to kill lots of people as opposed to only a few.

[fattyflattie 4639]

5 minutes ago, TexArcher said:

Did you seriously just post a video of clay shooting to support the bullshit assertion that all guns are equally dangerous?

Does it not matter to you what 70+% of the country wants?

My post was to show that anything in the right hands is going to be dangerous.  We focus entirely too much on one thing.  That's fine.  I don't gaf about AR's.  

I want more control, too.  People like me aren't going to have an issue getting them, affording them, or using them.  Gun control won't affect my life one bit, but what maybe a few grand a year? wgaf.

[JimmyJames 12271]

The “muh guns” faction is the most annoying one in the entire Republican Party because there are plenty of things we could do to minimize (not eliminate) the problem but they won’t stand for it because “muh freedoms” and “da constitution!”  Even though they understand the constitution about as well as they understand a nuclear science textbook.

 

As proof more could be done to lessen the problem let’s just take a look at every single other first world country in the entire world. 

[cactusflinthead 27598]

Cue up the talking points. 3,2,1...and go!

 

[fattyflattie 4639]

7 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Dude.  Sure, there are a handful of people in the US who are so skilled with a firearm that they can take out 20 people with a single shot 20 gauge.  But for 99.5% of folks, including functionally all of the people we're worried about, limited rate of fire is a significant limiting factor to their ability to do damage.  Shit, I'm pretty handy with a thunderstick, and I can't come CLOSE to repeating what the guy does in that video.  Come on.  You're getting absurd.

High rate of fire makes it much, much easier for the average/inexperienced shooter (which almost every mass shooter is) to kill lots of people as opposed to only a few.

Brisket.  You dont have to be a world class pigeon shooter.  The point is I can buy a dove gun and fire 7 fucking rounds of buckshot in high succession at 200# targets.  You can, anyone can.  The point is that isnt a boogey man gun.  It's something you and your kids own (SA shotgun).    I know you've loaded up an 1100 and fired it off as fast as you can.  

Nevermind, fuck it.  Ban all the AR's.  Expend all the political capital you can, and wait 6 months.  Let me know what happens. 

[Brisketexan 105106]

1 minute ago, fattyflattie said:

My post was to show that anything in the right hands is going to be dangerous. 

But those hands are functionally never at issue.  Seriously, stop.  People are not being mowed down at King Sooper by trained trick shooters.  They are being mowed down by someone who bought the weapon a mere 6 days before, and was able to use it with minimal experience and training to do real damage.

[henrygandorf 29189]

1 minute ago, cactusflinthead said:

Cue up the talking points. 3,2,1...and go!

 

biden made a statement urging congress to finally "do something" and made it sound like it was a priority.  not sure i would classify that as "crickets" though i'm sure the twitter takes are quite different.

[956 Worldwide 34706]

The Constitution allows for people to keep and bear arms and that’s fine.  It says nothing about regulating their sale and trade. There needs to be a national registry and a complete ban on nonregulated sales of firearms and ammunition. There needs to be a waiting period, real background checks, and red flag laws.  Hell, there needs to be evidence that you passed a standardized, subsidized psychological evaluation and gun safety course. And there need to be stiff civil and and criminal penalties for trading in weapons outside the system. Strict civil and criminal liabilities if your gun is used in a crime and it was not sold legally or reported stolen. Strict criminal and civil penalties for possessing an unregistered weapon or one without a serial number.

Lets start with that and then you can have all the registered AR-15s you want. 

[fattyflattie 4639]

6 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

But those hands are functionally never at issue.  Seriously, stop.  People are not being mowed down at King Sooper by trained trick shooters.  They are being mowed down by someone who bought the weapon a mere 6 days before, and was able to use it with minimal experience and training to do real damage.

The kid that shot up the jack shacks bought a 9mm pistol (iirc) the day of, and wounded and killed almost as many people as this guy.  COMPLETELY different everything.  

We don't know what either of them had in terms of handling firearms previously, but to my eye, it appears they were both pretty proficient.  And deadly.   But lets by all means continue to focus on one fucking rifle/round.  Seems par for the course for everything else we do. 

[wildcat09 29352]

Since Slorch already thinks he doesn't live in a society, I move that we deport him to an uninhabited island.

[cactusflinthead 27598]

1 minute ago, henrygandorf said:

biden made a statement urging congress to finally "do something" and made it sound like it was a priority.  not sure i would classify that as "crickets" though i'm sure the twitter takes are quite different.

It's the same as ever. Everyone hollering and cute critters. 

[Brisketexan 105106]

6 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

Brisket.  You dont have to be a world class pigeon shooter.  The point is I can buy a dove gun and fire 7 fucking rounds of buckshot in high succession at 200# targets.  You can, anyone can.  The point is that isnt a boogey man gun.  It's something you and your kids own (SA shotgun).    I know you've loaded up an 1100 and fired it off as fast as you can.  

Nevermind, fuck it.  Ban all the AR's.  Expend all the political capital you can, and wait 6 months.  Let me know what happens. 

How about we just implement red flag laws so a guy known to his entire family to be delusionally psychotic can't go in and buy a weapon meant to inflict mass casualties.

[Trey3216 15346]

3 hours ago, dcar00 said:

why does this matter?

Because the fuckfaces that jerk off on this site thinking only right wing white folks do stupid shit have to check their judgements a little bit.  

[UpperWestside 6163]

1 minute ago, cactusflinthead said:

Cue up the talking points. 3,2,1...and go!

 

We know this song and dance. It’s just sad and dangerous at the same time Someone reading all of this anti-Muslim rhetoric is going to take it to heart and feel like they are doing God’s work by getting some revenge on a group of Muslims. Again we live in a nation with millions of people who value a weapon more than they do human beings and will fight over a weapon harder than they will for the people they share a country with. It’s a toxic mindset to be saddled with. We see these people posting here and we know them in real life. I will never understand these folks. I don’t hate them, but the mindset of the attachment to an object that can cause harm to a person over an actual person baffles me.