BREAKING: School shooting in Uvalde, Texas. 21 dead including shooter. (RIP to the victims)

Bolzmark

Superstar
Joined
May 23, 2012
Messages
8,006
Reputation
1,144
Daps
25,891
Reppin
ATL
I been thinking on it brehs. And I'm really coming to the conclusion that this can't just be blamed on Republicans and the NRA. This is really on anyone who supports the Second Amendment (me included). Here's why:

- If you support the 2nd Amendment, that means you are comfortable with instruments of death in the hands of civilians. It's that simple. We ask the same question all the time - "why don't other countries experience this?" Well...do you know how many countries on the planet actually have a constitutional right to bear arms? THREE. The U.S., Mexico, and Guatemala.

- What do "gun control" advocates want? Universal background checks, a prohibition on assault rifles, and the required age to own a gun to be 21. That pretty much sums it up.

- Age - I guess a 21 year old may be more responsible, but these shootings are not about youth. They are about either evil, mental health issues, recklessness, or a combination of the three. People of all ages kill. I believe this would do little to nothing to curb gun violence in this country.

- Background checks - What Steve Kerr was focused on during his speech was the fact that there is a bill to require universal background checks just sitting in Congress and they refuse to vote on it. Yes universal background checks is basic common sense. How do you justify requiring a check at a gun store, but then down the street at the gun show it's not required? Makes zero sense. But as much as Democrats talk about background checks, they are only effective against someone who actually has a criminal background. If they are clean they can get a gun under what Dems and gun control advocates propose. The dude who shot up the school yesterday passed his background check.

- Assault rifles - I have not heard a compelling reason yet why these are allowed to be owned by civilians. Outlawing them is also common sense. But as much attention as they get, please understand that they make up a small fraction of the gun deaths in the U.S. Statistics show that in 2019 , assault weapons were used to kill 364 people. The number of people killed by handguns? 6,365.

- Are we naive enough to believe that this dude couldn't have slaughtered the same amount of kids with 2 handguns? And handguns are much more concealable. With a pair of cargo pants you could probably carry 6 or 8 of them at least. While an assault rifle requires two hands, you can fire a handgun with one. Dude could have literally shot up both sides of the classroom at the same time. I was watching CNN last night in awe as two guests made it a point for several minutes to say that the kids would have been better off getting shot by handguns than an assault rifle. In fact, in a closed in space like a classroom, I'm not sure it's not more advantageous to have a handgun.

Change the facts of what happened to fit under what gun control advocates are asking for. Let's say instead of 18 he was 21. Instead of the AR-15, he had two .40 caliber handguns. He actually passed a background check so that's a moot point. How does this end differently?

I feel like almost everyone is on the same side of the gun issue. Because the issue should be guns vs. no guns. Yes of course the Republicans are further down the line, with their crazy positions on guns, but just about everybody is on the same side. I haven't heard Dems complain about the fact that the gun industry manufactured 11.3 million guns in one year alone. I guess as long as they were handguns, no problem.
 

Bar Razor

All Star
Joined
Mar 11, 2022
Messages
1,827
Reputation
920
Daps
8,759
I been thinking on it brehs. And I'm really coming to the conclusion that this can't just be blamed on Republicans and the NRA. This is really on anyone who supports the Second Amendment (me included). Here's why:

- If you support the 2nd Amendment, that means you are comfortable with instruments of death in the hands of civilians. It's that simple. We ask the same question all the time - "why don't other countries experience this?" Well...do you know how many countries on the planet actually have a constitutional right to bear arms? THREE. The U.S., Mexico, and Guatemala.

- What do "gun control" advocates want? Universal background checks, a prohibition on assault rifles, and the required age to own a gun to be 21. That pretty much sums it up.

- Age - I guess a 21 year old may be more responsible, but these shootings are not about youth. They are about either evil, mental health issues, recklessness, or a combination of the three. People of all ages kill. I believe this would do little to nothing to curb gun violence in this country.

- Background checks - What Steve Kerr was focused on during his speech was the fact that there is a bill to require universal background checks just sitting in Congress and they refuse to vote on it. Yes universal background checks is basic common sense. How do you justify requiring a check at a gun store, but then down the street at the gun show it's not required? Makes zero sense. But as much as Democrats talk about background checks, they are only effective against someone who actually has a criminal background. If they are clean they can get a gun under what Dems and gun control advocates propose. The dude who shot up the school yesterday passed his background check.

- Assault rifles - I have not heard a compelling reason yet why these are allowed to be owned by civilians. Outlawing them is also common sense. But as much attention as they get, please understand that they make up a small fraction of the gun deaths in the U.S. Statistics show that in 2019 , assault weapons were used to kill 364 people. The number of people killed by handguns? 6,365.

- Are we naive enough to believe that this dude couldn't have slaughtered the same amount of kids with 2 handguns? And handguns are much more concealable. With a pair of cargo pants you could probably carry 6 or 8 of them at least. While an assault rifle requires two hands, you can fire a handgun with one. Dude could have literally shot up both sides of the classroom at the same time. I was watching CNN last night in awe as two guests made it a point for several minutes to say that the kids would have been better off getting shot by handguns than an assault rifle. In fact, in a closed in space like a classroom, I'm not sure it's not more advantageous to have a handgun.

Change the facts of what happened to fit under what gun control advocates are asking for. Let's say instead of 18 he was 21. Instead of the AR-15, he had two .40 caliber handguns. He actually passed a background check so that's a moot point. How does this end differently?

I feel like almost everyone is on the same side of the gun issue. Because the issue should be guns vs. no guns. Yes of course the Republicans are further down the line, with their crazy positions on guns, but just about everybody is on the same side. I haven't heard Dems complain about the fact that the gun industry manufactured 11.3 million guns in one year alone. I guess as long as they were handguns, no problem.
And therein lies the problem. All the talk about background checks, banning AR-15s, etc. is throwing buckets of water on a forrest fire. Yes, it may prevent some deaths, and one could argue that any life saved is good, but the real issue is that the US would still be awash with guns and a society awash with guns + rampant societal instability = mass carnage.

It's basically an intractable issue at this point, even IF these measures were taken (and they won't be).

You just have to hope you and yours don't get caught up in it. That's about it.
 

Absolut

Legal Bookie
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
15,148
Reputation
535
Daps
53,547
Reppin
Las Vegas
And therein lies the problem. All the talk about background checks, banning AR-15s, etc. is throwing buckets of water on a forrest fire. Yes, it may prevent some deaths, and one could argue that any life saved is good, but the real issue is that the US would still be awash with guns and a society awash with guns + rampant societal instability = mass carnage.

It's basically an intractable issue at this point, even IF these measures were taken (and they won't be).

You just have to hope you and yours don't get caught up in it. That's about it.
The “there’s nothing we can do about this so why bother trying” horseshyt is unacceptable. There are many, many things they can try and see what happens. Standing pat with the current status quo is as p*ssy as those officers were
 

Professor Emeritus

Veteran
Poster of the Year
Supporter
Joined
Jan 5, 2015
Messages
50,687
Reputation
19,571
Daps
201,883
Reppin
the ether
I been thinking on it brehs. And I'm really coming to the conclusion that this can't just be blamed on Republicans and the NRA. This is really on anyone who supports the Second Amendment (me included). Here's why:

- If you support the 2nd Amendment, that means you are comfortable with instruments of death in the hands of civilians. It's that simple. We ask the same question all the time - "why don't other countries experience this?" Well...do you know how many countries on the planet actually have a constitutional right to bear arms? THREE. The U.S., Mexico, and Guatemala.

- What do "gun control" advocates want? Universal background checks, a prohibition on assault rifles, and the required age to own a gun to be 21. That pretty much sums it up.

- Age - I guess a 21 year old may be more responsible, but these shootings are not about youth. They are about either evil, mental health issues, recklessness, or a combination of the three. People of all ages kill. I believe this would do little to nothing to curb gun violence in this country.

You can't ignore that a lot of these killings do come from young people 20 or under. Even if they would still kill at 21, they're much more likely to have been exposed as fukked up and built up a record (or gotten themselves incarcerated) by that point and thus not be in position to do it anymore.




- Background checks - What Steve Kerr was focused on during his speech was the fact that there is a bill to require universal background checks just sitting in Congress and they refuse to vote on it. Yes universal background checks is basic common sense. How do you justify requiring a check at a gun store, but then down the street at the gun show it's not required? Makes zero sense. But as much as Democrats talk about background checks, they are only effective against someone who actually has a criminal background. If they are clean they can get a gun under what Dems and gun control advocates propose. The dude who shot up the school yesterday passed his background check.

That's why you have to expand background checks past backgrounds and include references. They've shown references are extremely effective in background checks for three reasons:

1. Most people who don't trust someone with a gun are not going to officially co-sign that person acquiring a gun
2. Someone who is thinking about plotting something doesn't want other people in their life to know about it and might not go through if they have to cross that line of telling 3 people they know that they're trying to get a gun/guns
3. Hearing that someone is trying to get a gun can be a real warning sign to the people in their life that some sort of intervention is immediately necessary



- Assault rifles - I have not heard a compelling reason yet why these are allowed to be owned by civilians. Outlawing them is also common sense. But as much attention as they get, please understand that they make up a small fraction of the gun deaths in the U.S. Statistics show that in 2019 , assault weapons were used to kill 364 people. The number of people killed by handguns? 6,365.

- Are we naive enough to believe that this dude couldn't have slaughtered the same amount of kids with 2 handguns? And handguns are much more concealable. With a pair of cargo pants you could probably carry 6 or 8 of them at least. While an assault rifle requires two hands, you can fire a handgun with one. Dude could have literally shot up both sides of the classroom at the same time. I was watching CNN last night in awe as two guests made it a point for several minutes to say that the kids would have been better off getting shot by handguns than an assault rifle. In fact, in a closed in space like a classroom, I'm not sure it's not more advantageous to have a handgun.

Change the facts of what happened to fit under what gun control advocates are asking for. Let's say instead of 18 he was 21. Instead of the AR-15, he had two .40 caliber handguns. He actually passed a background check so that's a moot point. How does this end differently?

If he has handguns instead, then the cops likely take him down at the beginning and he never even reaches the classroom.

If he's 21 instead of 18, then he's likely already gotten caught up in the legal system by then. If he's gone 3 more years clean then he's more likely than not to have grown out of whatever bullshyt he was going through. Teenage brains are simply less developed, that's a fact.

If his background check included references, it sounds like there's a ton of people who knew he was messed up and would have asked questions. Where would he have found 3 people who knew him personally who would cosign that? He sounds like too much of a loner to even trust 3 people who actually knew him with that info.
 

fact

Fukk you thought it was?
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
14,549
Reputation
6,014
Daps
58,969
Reppin
How you gonna ROFL with a hollow back?
Instead of saying “this shot should never happen, again”, these crazy, masochistic, deranged, sick in the head, broken brains are literally having fever dreams, fantasizing with their violence porn about how they would have John Wick’d the fukking shytbag that killed the kids. They are literally the worst people on earth, absolutely on par with this murderer, and on par with chomos, because instead of feeling guilty about contributing to this, which every single one of them did/do, they are playing a movie in their head about how they can be heroes! Instead of picturing in their head about a world that kids don’t get slaughtered, they think “if innocents didn’t die, then I wouldn’t be able to be the real life punisher”. WE ARE fukkED
 

Bar Razor

All Star
Joined
Mar 11, 2022
Messages
1,827
Reputation
920
Daps
8,759
The “there’s nothing we can do about this so why bother trying” horseshyt is unacceptable. There are many, many things they can try and see what happens. Standing pat with the current status quo is as p*ssy as those officers were

You misunderstand. I'm not saying that they shouldn't do anything - anything is better than nothing. What I'm saying is that even with the moderate measures that are being proposed, gun culture nuttery, and violent impulses are too ingrained in this society (not to mention mass depression as suicide makes up the majority of gun deaths). So perhaps instead of 43,000 gun deaths per year maybe we get to 40,000 or so. Certainly great for the 3000 or so lives saved, but still disgraceful for a "first world" country, nevermind the richest country in the history of the world. But anyway, I doubt even these modest measures will be taken. This is in the news for a while, there's shock, horror, anger then back to "normal" until the next time. Over and over and over. Sandy Hook was the chance to do something. These cracker Republicans are on another level of nihilism and they're about to get back congress, while already holding the SC. It's bleak my man.
 

Professor Emeritus

Veteran
Poster of the Year
Supporter
Joined
Jan 5, 2015
Messages
50,687
Reputation
19,571
Daps
201,883
Reppin
the ether
And therein lies the problem. All the talk about background checks, banning AR-15s, etc. is throwing buckets of water on a forrest fire. Yes, it may prevent some deaths, and one could argue that any life saved is good, but the real issue is that the US would still be awash with guns and a society awash with guns + rampant societal instability = mass carnage.

It's basically an intractable issue at this point, even IF these measures were taken (and they won't be).

You just have to hope you and yours don't get caught up in it. That's about it.


Why do you think the death rates between gun control states and non-gun control states, especially in the cities, vary so dramatically? Nearly all the most murderous cities are either in states with poor gun control or in cities that directly border states with poor gun control. While spots like NYC, Boston, most of the west coast, etc. have miniscule homicide rates. And we're not talking 20% lower (which would still be meaningful), we're talking 500% lower or even more in some cases. That's a HUGE difference, not to be taken lightly.
 

fact

Fukk you thought it was?
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
14,549
Reputation
6,014
Daps
58,969
Reppin
How you gonna ROFL with a hollow back?
If any of my Republican colleagues bring this up to me, I swear I’m gonna laugh in their face and act like I don’t care about it. They thrive on the reaction, and people talking to them very slowly and compassionately, like they are part of the “concerned” citizens, when they own this shyt. I also hope they literally take EVERYTHING away from Alex Jones over that Sandy Hook shyt. Every single fukking time this happens, those Sandy Hook parents must go through deja vu, it’s one thing that should never happen, losing your child, but to do it over and over again, there is no “time heals all”. I’m sorry, I truly have no idea, even though it happens again and again, I have no idea how we let this happen when there was nearly a civil war over a football player taking a knee before a game! lolololololol
 
Top