5 killed 18 injured in colorado springs gay nightclub shooting

[royiv 9447]

28 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

Thank you for engaging honestly on this topic, despite whatever disagreements we may have.

How is he engaging honestly? He's being civil, I give you that. He's not offering any actual solutions. He says he agrees that there is likely some common ground -- good. I think most people, except for those on the fringes of either side agree with that. That's where it ends. He doesn't offer any solutions to the problem of the NRA and the gun lobby having politicians bought and paid for. He said that people in his industry discuss these things regularly, but the industry -- and let me be clear, the entire gun industry -- supports the NRA with massive amounts of cash so they are actually totally okay with the status quo.

Money talks in this country. If we want actual change, the NRA has to be neutered and the gun industry isn't willing to do that. @Handcruser can be civil in his discussion, and that's a huge step forward compared to many, but he's not engaging honestly about advocating for real change. In fact, he started this debate saying the "other side" is incapable of negotiation. How is that honest discussion??

[Handcruser 2805]

How is he engaging honestly? He's being civil, I give you that. He's not offering any actual solutions. He says he agrees that there is likely some common ground -- good. I think most people, except for those on the fringes of either side agree with that. That's where it ends. He doesn't offer any solutions to the problem of the NRA and the gun lobby having politicians bought and paid for. He said that people in his industry discuss these things regularly, but the industry -- and let me be clear, the entire gun industry -- supports the NRA with massive amounts of cash so they are actually totally okay with the status quo.
Money talks in this country. If we want actual change, the NRA has to be neutered and the gun industry isn't willing to do that. [mention=214]Handcruser[/mention] can be civil in his discussion, and that's a huge step forward compared to many, but he's not engaging honestly about advocating for real change. In fact, he started this debate saying the "other side" is incapable of negotiation. How is that honest discussion??

How is not “offering solutions” not being honest?

How is me, a party of 1, not changing an industry that, according to you, is paying billions to politicians not being honest.

I’m trying to have a civil conversation and, to be honest, prove a point. You want massive change but are incapable of understanding the side (if we can call it that) that is hindering your change - even change we both agree on.

You want compromise? You want change?

Tell me all of the stupid laws that we need to do away with regarding firearms.

Let’s compromise. Bring shit to the table.

[royiv 9447]

2 minutes ago, Handcruser said:

How is not “offering solutions” not being honest?

How is me, a party of 1, not changing an industry that, according to you, is paying billions to politicians not being honest.

I’m trying to have a civil conversation and, to be honest, prove a point. You want massive change but are incapable of understanding the side (if we can call it that) that is hindering your change - even change we both agree on.

You want compromise? You want change?

Tell me all of the stupid laws that we need to do away with regarding firearms.

Let’s compromise. Bring shit to the table.

Okay, let's do it:

1. You started off saying that the "other side" is incapable of negotiation without recognizing that those of us that you might define as being a member of the "other side" feel the exact same way. You also haven't said anything you're willing to personally do to change the status quo.

2. Change starts with an individual. The industry that you are a part of is a massive part of the problem. Full stop. You, as an individual, could advocate for responsible gun ownership. You could decide to not support politicians who accept money from the NRA. You could talk to your colleagues and convince them to do the same. I'm guessing that there are multiple trade associations that you could be active in to advocate for change.

3. Please explain the side that is hindering change from your perspective. From my perspective, the side that is hindering change are politicians that accept large amounts of money from the gun lobby so therefore they are beholden to the gun industry. If you see it differently, please expound on your opinion here. You've alluded to a difference of opinion, but haven't said anything besides that the "other side" makes negotiation impossible. As a member of what you likely perceive to be the "other side" that is incredibly frustrating. 

4. Let's institute universal background checks. Do away with the private party and gun show loophole. Make high capacity magazines illegal. Mandatory waiting period for all firearms purchase. Safe storage laws. Gun safety education mandatory for gun purchases. Let's start there. Notice that I didn't touch an assault weapon ban. I have strong personal opinions about assault weapons and semi-automatic weapons in general, but I don't think we can get there in this environment so I don't think it's the hill to die on to make some tangible and real progress.

[Handcruser 2805]

Okay, let's do it:
1. You started off saying that the "other side" is incapable of negotiation without recognizing that those of us that you might define as being a member of the "other side" feel the exact same way. You also haven't said anything you're willing to personally do to change the status quo.
2. Change starts with an individual. The industry that you are a part of is a massive part of the problem. Full stop. You, as an individual, could advocate for responsible gun ownership. You could decide to not support politicians who accept money from the NRA. You could talk to your colleagues and convince them to do the same. I'm guessing that there are multiple trade associations that you could be active in to advocate for change.
3. Please explain the side that is hindering change from your perspective. From my perspective, the side that is hindering change are politicians that accept large amounts of money from the gun lobby so therefore they are beholden to the gun industry. If you see it differently, please expound on your opinion here. You've alluded to a difference of opinion, but haven't said anything besides that the "other side" makes negotiation impossible. As a member of what you likely perceive to be the "other side" that is incredibly frustrating. 
4. Let's institute universal background checks. Do away with the private party and gun show loophole. Make high capacity magazines illegal. Mandatory waiting period for all firearms purchase. Safe storage laws. Gun safety education mandatory for gun purchases. Let's start there. Notice that I didn't touch an assault weapon ban. I have strong personal opinions about assault weapons and semi-automatic weapons in general, but I don't think we can get there in this environment so I don't think it's the hill to die on to make some tangible and real progress.

I’ll address all of that when I have time. Family shot right now. That’s a lot to digest and respond to.

Again, tell me all of the stupid laws you will advocate to do away with.

I appreciate your response.

[fattyflattie 4639]

9 minutes ago, royiv said:

4. Let's institute universal background checks. Do away with the private party and gun show loophole. Make high capacity magazines illegal. Mandatory waiting period for all firearms purchase. Safe storage laws. Gun safety education mandatory for gun purchases. Let's start there

All of these would make him $$, I’m certain he’d be fine with them. 
 

Lol at demanding one side lose its entire advocacy group or nothing will work!!1!  As long as there are groups that think x&y completely go away, I want someone fighting to make sure x, y, and z remain.   

[royiv 9447]

1 minute ago, fattyflattie said:

All of these would make him $$, I’m certain he’d be fine with them. 
 

Lol at demanding one side lose its entire advocacy group or nothing will work!!1!  As long as there are groups that think x&y completely go away, I want someone fighting to make sure x, y, and z remain.   

Agree to your first point 100%. Seems like any smart gun dealer would look at those things with $$$ signs in their eyes.

To your second point, the NRA has moved so far away from its original mission that I do think it needs to burn to the ground or somehow radically transform. From the ashes, I would be totally fine with an advocacy group that advocates for safe gun ownership, hunter safety, gun education, etc.. Basically what the NRA was when I went to the range as a kid with my grandfather to target shoot.

[royiv 9447]

12 minutes ago, Handcruser said:

I’ll address all of that when I have time. Family shot right now. That’s a lot to digest and respond to.

Again, tell me all of the stupid laws you will advocate to do away with.

I appreciate your response.

I'm not familiar with laws that you think are stupid. It probably makes more sense for you to list out some that you think are stupid and then we can have a discussion about whether or not we both think they are stupid. My guess is that the number is greater than one since there are often laws that result in unintended consequences.

Edited November 25, 2022 by royiv

[Brian Fantana 6704]

1 hour ago, royiv said:

How is he engaging honestly? He's being civil, I give you that. He's not offering any actual solutions. He says he agrees that there is likely some common ground -- good. I think most people, except for those on the fringes of either side agree with that. That's where it ends. He doesn't offer any solutions to the problem of the NRA and the gun lobby having politicians bought and paid for. He said that people in his industry discuss these things regularly, but the industry -- and let me be clear, the entire gun industry -- supports the NRA with massive amounts of cash so they are actually totally okay with the status quo.

Money talks in this country. If we want actual change, the NRA has to be neutered and the gun industry isn't willing to do that. @Handcruser can be civil in his discussion, and that's a huge step forward compared to many, but he's not engaging honestly about advocating for real change. In fact, he started this debate saying the "other side" is incapable of negotiation. How is that honest discussion??

I think he's being honest, that doesn't mean I agree with what he's saying. Most hardcore 2A purists simply hide behind technicalities, loopholes, and intentionally fallacious arguments. I just don't have the energy to argue at all right now.

Remember, it's not dishonesty to be unhappy with something, but have no solutions to offer. That's an argument gun dweebs often use against us. Is it lazy? Maybe, but that's fine.

Edited November 25, 2022 by Brian Fantana

[fattyflattie 4639]

30 minutes ago, royiv said:

Basically what the NRA was when I went to the range as a kid with my grandfather to target shoot.

I’d love to get there too. But no one wanted a single firearm removed from the public at that point.  We were selling actual, literal, weapons of war to the public at ridiculous prices.  Even rapid fire semi-autos.  They didn’t up and decide to get litigious in nature for no reason. I decided to stop funding LaPierres sugar babies long ago, but when he’s gone, I’d have no issue returning.  Even though they don’t stand for what I do, I’m not certain they aren’t a necessary evil. 

[royiv 9447]

3 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

I’d love to get there too. But no one wanted a single firearm removed from the public at that point.  We were selling actual, literal, weapons of war to the public at ridiculous prices.  Even rapid fire semi-autos.  They didn’t up and decide to get litigious in nature for no reason. I decided to stop funding LaPierres sugar babies long ago, but when he’s gone, I’d have no issue returning.  Even though they don’t stand for what I do, I’m not certain they aren’t a necessary evil. 

An organization should be able to change with the times. The NRA has taken a very extreme position when it comes to guns in this country. If the NRA actually moved a little to the center and advocated for some of the regulations that are supported by the majority of Americans, including a big chunk of gun owners, I think you would see folks on the other side be more willing to engage in fruitful discussions. The current position is so extreme that it makes it impossible to engage in any sort of dialogue. Unfortunately, the NRA even opposes laws that would actually benefit gun dealers, as you pointed out earlier.

[staboner 5015]

Almost everyone agrees on common sense gun reform and you still have these arguments that are on repeat for decades. Its really crazy to me how as a society America is paralyzed and can't do shit about fuck all. 

[Surlymermaid 444]

I’ll address all of that when I have time. Family shot right now. That’s a lot to digest and respond to.

Again, tell me all of the stupid laws you will advocate to do away with.

I appreciate your response.

I have a limited knowledge of guns personally, but I’ll step up with some ideas. I think gun aficionados are wary of a national gun registry which has been proposed by some as a means of regulation. I feel we could let that go if both sides were earnestly trying to solve this problem. In addition the regulations around suppressors could be reduced perhaps. Of course, I have no idea which issues are most important—but it’s evident we need to do something. Having rational, good faith discussions is a first step.

[FartingMonk 3608]

8 hours ago, jimmyjazz said:

Can you please elaborate?

 

Wait . . . is your problem with the way some people express their opinions, or is it with those opinions in general?

This probably isn't what you're asking for, but I'll give it a go:  I don't own guns.  For the most part, I don't care if you own guns.  I believe there is no good reason for the average American citizen to own a high capacity, high firing rate weapon.  Other than that, I don't really give a damn -- handguns, shotguns, low capacity rifles -- but I would like to see beefed up waiting periods, closed loopholes, enforced red flag laws, etc.

Every time I say something like this, I get a bunch of pushback, almost like chaff off a military jet -- "I bet you don't know what AR stands for", "tell me what calibers you're referring to", "you don't know the ballistics", etc.  It's all bullshit.  Reasonable people could come to an agreement based on science and an honest assessment of risk VS reward, but only one side is generally reasonable.  That's a fact.

I think first thing you need to do is make strict ass gun laws against illegal ownership.  Like 10 year automatic sentence type shit.  No plea deal.  If you aren't supposed to have a gun and you have it.  10 years.  It will never happen because people will claim it's racist.  The gun show law i don't give a shit about, but I think it's actually pretty stupid hill to die on because most of the dealers are FFLs.  The days of the gun dealers selling you something out of their trunk is over and still over hyped.  It's just stupid.  It doesn't happen like people think it does.  Private sales to me is a red herring.  It's just another way for the government to tax you.  I think a lot of it starts with gun buybacks.  There are people who probably would like to get rid of their guns but want their investment back.  If the government was serious about it.  Then quit offering 250 bucks to buy back an AR.  Give them it at MSRP.  The training makes sense, but the hoops the anti gun people put into it makes the other side believe they don't really mean it.  Take Oregon for example.  They wanted the training class, but only can be certified by law enforcement.  Law enforcement by law isn't actually allowed to charge for the course nor do they have the time to offer the class.  You also have to bring your own gun to have the class.  Well if you have to take the class before you can legally have a gun.  How the hell do you have the class.  They had a stipulation that you can "borrow" a gun from a friend, but you'd have to sign transfer paperwork.  Well, each time you transfer it over you'd have to pay fees for it.  I also think the buzzwords make the other side sound like big stupid dummies.  Like what is a low capacity rifle vs a high capacity rifle?  What is a high firing rate weapon?

[Handcruser 2805]

I have a limited knowledge of guns personally, but I’ll step up with some ideas. I think gun aficionados are wary of a national gun registry which has been proposed by some as a means of regulation. I feel we could let that go if both sides were earnestly trying to solve this problem. In addition the regulations around suppressors could be reduced perhaps. Of course, I have no idea which issues are most important—but it’s evident we need to do something. Having rational, good faith discussions is a first step.

No gun registry. Ever.
Suppressors should be sold with a simple 4473
All states should have LTC
No magazine limits on pistols anywhere

More later.

[Captainant 27970]

1 hour ago, Handcruser said:

No gun registry. Ever.

Yeah tracking crime committed with a firearm to trace ownership and potential culpability would be a bugaboo in the arms trade, huh?

Edited November 25, 2022 by Captainant

[FartingMonk 3608]

45 minutes ago, Captainant said:

Yeah tracking crime committed with a firearm to trace ownership and potential culpability would be a bugaboo in the arms trade, huh?

Meh.  Another stupid hill to die on.  When you do your 4473 they put the serial number on the form.  The lineage of the gun isn't going to go through 10 different people in most cases.  Registry is just another excuse to put a yearly tax on owning a gun.

 

Let me guess next one ban online gun sales!  Would you believe it if I told you online gun sales is probably safer than doing an in person private sale?  To ship gun to said person you have to go through an FFL.  You know what that FFL requires you to do that's right fill out that damn 4473.

 

But like I said stupid hills.

[Brian Fantana 6704]

I have to register my car for that exact reason and more. It's not even designed specifically to kill.

I'm in favor of guns being at least as heavily regulated as car ownership.

[FartingMonk 3608]

5 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

I have to register my car for that exact reason and more. It's not even designed specifically to kill.

I'm in favor of guns being at least as heavily regulated as car ownership.

Does taxing a gun make it more safe?  No?  Then I'm against it 

[fattyflattie 4639]

1 hour ago, FartingMonk said:

Let me guess next one ban online gun sales! 

As a collector of exhibition wood, this would fuck my shit all up.  I’ve never bought a firearm online that didn’t go straight to FFL and “into the system”. 

[DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12301]

13 hours ago, Handcruser said:

I’ll address all of that when I have time. Family shot right now. That’s a lot to digest and respond to.

Again, tell me all of the stupid laws you will advocate to do away with.

I appreciate your response.

Another family was shot?

[Neonmoon 38130]

10 hours ago, Handcruser said:

No gun registry. Ever.
Suppressors should be sold with a simple 4473
All states should have LTC
No magazine limits on pistols anywhere

More later.

Question about these suggestions. 

Why no gun registry? You have to register a car. What is the difference in your opinion? Is it the tyrannical government can track you idea?

Why no magazine limits on pistols? I’m genuinely curious. What’s the current max magazine can hold? Why would magazine limits inhibit ones right to own the gun? 

 

[FartingMonk 3608]

12 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

Question about these suggestions. 

Why no gun registry? You have to register a car. What is the difference in your opinion? Is it the tyrannical government can track you idea?

Why no magazine limits on pistols? I’m genuinely curious. What’s the current max magazine can hold? Why would magazine limits inhibit ones right to own the gun? 

 

Registering a car is to make sure the car is driveable.  Registering the gun is just for tax purposes.  The 4473 already takes down the serial number of the gun. A messed up gun isn't going to shoot or it might kill the owner.  Win/win.  One more gun off the street.  One less crazy gun owner.  So registration does nothing but collect taxes.

Magazines for pistol generally are 15 or less.  You can buy extended mags that hold up to 100 rounds but it takes away from the actual utility of the gun and it becomes heavy as fuck.  I'm ok with 15 round magazines.  My smaller compact pistols have 9.  

[Bama Chick 28596]

Info on the Walmart shooter







Bought the gun the same day? Check.

Warped by religion?
Check.

Conspiratorial obsessive thinking?
Check.

Incel-like obsession with his failures with women?
Check.

Blames his parents for “social deficits”?
Check.

[PenelopeWitherspoon 19242]

On 11/23/2022 at 10:14 PM, immamac said:

fuckin' see ya later bitch. 

The collective IQ of Surly just went up 20 points with the banning of that idiot.  Well done, imma.

[Captainant 27970]

15 minutes ago, FartingMonk said:

The 4473 already takes down the serial number of the gun.

It's literally illegal to store a 4473 digitally, and the system has been kneecapped to make tracing impossible. It's technically possible, but it takes diving into a warehouse like the end of Indiana Jones and physically sifting through reams and reams of paper. By design. 

Frankly, the 4473 system is woefully inadequate - I can't sell a gun safely without going to a FFL to have them do a NICS check. And even then, NICS is only as good as the data put into it, and we've seen a number of shooters obtain a gun from an FFL despite not passing a NICS check because it fails open by design. 

Don't lie to me or yourself and say that our current system is sufficient and just needs a couple tweaks to be perfect. It's been intentionally designed to make it as easy as possible to get a gun TODAY. Hell, who cares if you're under felony indictment for domestic violence? GIT DAT MAN A DAMN GAT! Handcrushers kids gotta eat too!

[FartingMonk 3608]

17 minutes ago, Captainant said:

It's literally illegal to store a 4473 digitally, and the system has been kneecapped to make tracing impossible. It's technically possible, but it takes diving into a warehouse like the end of Indiana Jones and physically sifting through reams and reams of paper. By design. 

Frankly, the 4473 system is woefully inadequate - I can't sell a gun safely without going to a FFL to have them do a NICS check. And even then, NICS is only as good as the data put into it, and we've seen a number of shooters obtain a gun from an FFL despite not passing a NICS check because it fails open by design. 

Don't lie to me or yourself and say that our current system is sufficient and just needs a couple tweaks to be perfect. It's been intentionally designed to make it as easy as possible to get a gun TODAY. Hell, who cares if you're under felony indictment for domestic violence? GIT DAT MAN A DAMN GAT! Handcrushers kids gotta eat too!

Many places do the 4473 electronically now.  Hell, update the 4473.  Make it more stringent.  Just don't use it to fucking tax me

[Captainant 27970]

Just now, FartingMonk said:

Many places do the 4473 electronically now.  Hell, update the 4473.  Make it more stringent.  Just don't use it to fucking tax me

Nobody but y'all are bringing up taxation lol. This is what the progun side does in this conversation, I've been guilty of doing it in the past too. You're attacking arguments not being made, and defending positions that aren't relfective of reality.

Also, even though those 4473's are electronic, they are still required by the Gun Control Act to print it physically and store that as the record. Not the electronic copy. 

[FartingMonk 3608]

1 minute ago, Captainant said:

Nobody but y'all are bringing up taxation lol. This is what the progun side does in this conversation, I've been guilty of doing it in the past too. You're attacking arguments not being made, and defending positions that aren't relfective of reality.

Also, even though those 4473's are electronic, they are still required by the Gun Control Act to print it physically and store that as the record. Not the electronic copy. 

So just tell me how does registering a gun make for a safer environment?

[FartingMonk 3608]

3 minutes ago, Captainant said:

Nobody but y'all are bringing up taxation lol. This is what the progun side does in this conversation, I've been guilty of doing it in the past too. You're attacking arguments not being made, and defending positions that aren't relfective of reality.

Also, even though those 4473's are electronic, they are still required by the Gun Control Act to print it physically and store that as the record. Not the electronic copy. 

I am not attacking arguments not being made.  I am simply stating registration includes taxes.  What have you registered with the government that doesn't involve taxes?  

[WhatTheBuck 28825]

Religion of hate.

 

[WhatTheBuck 28825]

1 hour ago, FartingMonk said:

What have you registered with the government that doesn't involve taxes? 

My right to vote. 

[Samson's Wig 3195]

26 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Religion of hate.

 

Wonder how he feels about the shooter being nonbinary.   What a douche.

[jimmyjazz 46470]

This thread is proof positive that the pro-gun freaks have zero interest in any compromise.  I'm talking to you, @FartingMonk.

 

 

[chainsaw 10000]

4 hours ago, Samson's Wig said:

Wonder how he feels about the shooter being nonbinary.   What a douche.

I don't believe for a second the shooter is nonbinary. it would destroy his father who otherwise has his life together

[Neonmoon 38130]

4 hours ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Religion of hate.

 

Religion is hate 

[Dahobbs 17805]

On 11/23/2022 at 12:36 PM, Sgt Hulk said:

I came here for the back tracking too lol. Narrative changed quickly once they realized the evil right wing red necks weren’t at fault   They really just need to make guns illegal so no one will own them 

Anytime you want to backtrack. 

[Macanudo 13081]

9 hours ago, Neonmoon said:

Question about these suggestions. 

Why no gun registry? You have to register a car. What is the difference in your opinion? Is it the tyrannical government can track you idea?

Why no magazine limits on pistols? I’m genuinely curious. What’s the current max magazine can hold? Why would magazine limits inhibit ones right to own the gun? 

 

Something everyone overlooks in this conversation is that the hard-core 2A folks look at guns as the thing keeping the government in check.   Their guns are the only thing, in their minds, keeping us safe from a leftist, socialist, communist government taking over.  They are protecting us from that.   

Go listen to the Boeberts and MTGs of the world.   And there are more people in this country like that than some of you would like to admit. 

They need that mulitple ARs with the 25 round mags because one day they may need to fight against tyranny.

And they have a loud voice. 

[Willfully Horn 8087]

3 hours ago, chainsaw said:

I don't believe for a second the shooter is nonbinary. it would destroy his father who otherwise has his life together

His friend didn’t think so, either.

”NBC 9 News Denver correspondent Kelly Reinke reported that a recent neighbor of the suspect said he spent hours talking to the FBI on Tuesday morning. He told Reinke that he informed investigators the suspect made several hateful comments toward the LGBTQ community.

“Just expressed he didn’t like the LGBTQ community,” said Xavier Kraus, a neighbor of the accused shooter, said he and his girlfriend lived across the hall from Aldrich and his mother until September. “And pretty sure at one point he expressed he hated the LGBTQ community, he hated gays.”

Kraus said he specifically remembered one time “Aldrich vocalized verbally using a derogatory term for them [LGBTQ people].” He added that many other “outbursts” were “racial.”

“This is not the type of person I would take around my gay friends,” he said. 

Kraus told NBC 9 News he and Aldrich became close friends last year. They bonded over tech and video games. Kraus added that Aldrich never mentioned being nonbinary in their times together.

“If I knew what he was going to do what he did, I would have done something. I would have said something. I just didn’t know,” Kraus said.””

https://www.losangelesblade.com/2022/11/23/club-q-suspect-in-court-friend-says-never-claimed-to-be-nonbinary/

 

Meanwhile, there are vandals directing invective at the church @Newdoc specifically defended. If other churches are making his church look bad, then I invite him to add his voice condemning these false prophet entities. 

 

Edited November 26, 2022 by Willfully Horn
Edit

[Newdoc 3465]

1 hour ago, Willfully Horn said:

Meanwhile, there are vandals directing invective at the church @Newdoc specifically defended. If other churches are making his church look bad, then I invite him to add his voice condemning these false prophet entities. 

What does “false prophet” mean because that’s now a ubiquitous slander and how does sharing a tweet of bombastic angry man who posts pictures of vandalism prove your point?

[Newdoc 3465]

11 hours ago, Bama Chick said:

Warped by religion?
Check.

How? I don’t see anything in that manifesto that religion warped him. It looks like it might have given him pause.

 

9 hours ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Religion of hate.

 

On a scale of 1-10 how open are you to changing your mind about your blanket opinion if provided with evidence to the contrary? Obviously not about this Thompson character who is probably not Christian.

[Willfully Horn 8087]

33 minutes ago, Newdoc said:

What does “false prophet” mean because that’s now a ubiquitous slander and how does sharing a tweet of bombastic angry man who posts pictures of vandalism prove your point?

I am referring to the many folks forecasting the End Times, using that word as it was used biblically, for folks who claim to know what no one is to know. Often, these same people demagogue about social issues (ironically.)

As to speaking out against these false prophets in the context of riling up hatred towards marginalized groups, my rhetoric tries to remind Christians that they are commanded to love their neighbors, as they love themselves. What my neighbor believes about themself ought be as true for me as what I believe about myself is true for me.

Edited to speak to your last question. You had mentioned Focus on Family, about which I know nothing. You claim they are not anti-LBGTQ, and so I invited you to speak out against the hatred that is being fomented.

Edited November 26, 2022 by Willfully Horn
Explained

[Newdoc 3465]

2 minutes ago, Willfully Horn said:

I am referring to the many folks forecasting the End Times, using that word as it was used biblically, for folks who claim to know what no one is to know. Often, these same people demagogue about social issues (ironically.)

As to speaking out against these false prophets in the context of riling up hatred towards marginalized groups, my rhetoric tries to remind Christians that they are commanded to love their neighbors, as they love themselves. What my neighbor believes about themself ought be as true for me as what I believe about myself is true for me.

 

And the vandals appear to be demagoging one high profile entity based on the hateful rhetoric of others. I mean “hate” by purposeful incitement of violence or the wish of violence/death on another person or people. Views that are not consistent with NT teachings.

[Willfully Horn 8087]

Just now, Newdoc said:

And the vandals appear to be demagoging one high profile entity based on the hateful rhetoric of others. I mean “hate” by purposeful incitement of violence or the wish of violence/death on another person or people. Views that are not consistent with NT teachings.

We agree. You, too, are likely seething that the words of folks like Thompson are a perversion of Christ’s message. 
 

The louder the voices pushing back, the better.

[YGIFS 19453]

12 hours ago, FartingMonk said:

I am not attacking arguments not being made.  I am simply stating registration includes taxes.  What have you registered with the government that doesn't involve taxes?  

My two children after their hospital births.  

[jimmyjazz 46470]

1 hour ago, Newdoc said:

How? I don’t see anything in that manifesto that religion warped him. It looks like it might have given him pause.

 

On a scale of 1-10 how open are you to changing your mind about your blanket opinion if provided with evidence to the contrary? Obviously not about this Thompson character who is probably not Christian.

LMAO.  Sure, he's "not Christian" . . . yet Christians aren't shouting him down.  I'm a recovering Presbyterian, and I won't align with this shit any more.  Why do you?

[Gatorubet 30391]

1 hour ago, YGIFS said:

My two children after their hospital births.  

So you aren’t going to take the tax exemptions?

[Degenerate Gardner 4104]

14 hours ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

The collective IQ of Surly just went up 20 points with the banning of that idiot.  Well done, imma.

Who? I’m late to the party 

[troph 24924]

2 hours ago, Willfully Horn said:

I am referring to the many folks forecasting the End Times, using that word as it was used biblically, for folks who claim to know what no one is to know. Often, these same people demagogue about social issues (ironically.)

As to speaking out against these false prophets in the context of riling up hatred towards marginalized groups, my rhetoric tries to remind Christians that they are commanded to love their neighbors, as they love themselves. What my neighbor believes about themself ought be as true for me as what I believe about myself is true for me.

Edited to speak to your last question. You had mentioned Focus on Family, about which I know nothing. You claim they are not anti-LBGTQ, and so I invited you to speak out against the hatred that is being fomented.

Wait he claimed focus on the family isn’t anti-LGBTQ? Wut?

[52-80 19277]

On 11/24/2022 at 10:17 PM, jimmyjazz said:

You have to understand, though, the average Joe who isn't a collector is mostly reacting to the overarching popularity of the AR-15 and similar weapons in these mass shootings.  It is not our job to understand the entire taxonomy of available weapons.  It is perfectly reasonable to say "we need legal limits on capacity and firing rate", and then work to structure the legal language so those limits get conforming weapons out of the marketplace, and hopefully off the streets.  

Is there a rational basis for targeting high capacity/rate firearms vs “typical” firearm i.e. a pistol?

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2022/02/03/what-the-data-says-about-gun-deaths-in-the-u-s/
 

Quote

Which types of firearms are most commonly used in gun murders in the U.S.?

In 2020, handguns were involved in 59% of the 13,620 U.S. gun murders and non-negligent manslaughters for which data is available, according to the FBI. Rifles – the category that includes guns sometimes referred to as “assault weapons” – were involved in 3% of firearm murders. Shotguns were involved in 1%. The remainder of gun homicides and non-negligent manslaughters (36%) involved other kinds of firearms or those classified as “type not stated.”

 

[Pam Cummings 9696]

22 hours ago, FartingMonk said:

Many places do the 4473 electronically now.  Hell, update the 4473.  Make it more stringent.  Just don't use it to fucking tax me

Nah fuck that. I'm all for making it as expensive as possible for people to own their shooty toys.