Just thinking (shooting)
- Thread starter roadtrasheer
- Start date
"Shooting deaths" is a loaded term. I'd guess the majority of "shooting deaths" are suicides and they would mostly be done with hand guns.
In a country of 300+ million the impacts of islamic terrorism is negligible.
About 2/3 of gun deaths are suicide and I doubt people are using AR-15s for that. Seems like they may be an issue for gun murders?
No, they didn't. The guy had been in trouble in schools, but it didn't sound like he had any sort of record to keep him from legally purchasing or possessing guns.
Look, the realty is we have like 1-5 of these a year that people actually give a **** about. We’ve abandoned the inner cities and caring about what happens there. That reality can’t be questioned.
However, of the 1-5 that we have. Wait, I almost just began addressing something that equates to like .0001% of all shootings and affects like .000000001% of the population. This isn’t a problem that needs a solution.
I don't remember the Pulse shooting, San Bernardino or any other terrorist attack in the last decade having any economical impact.
Then you’re blind. There is a whole industry using terrorism as a basis for business production and sales and has been since 9/12/01.
Maybe law enforcement should tap into Facebook, YouTube and others.....they seem to have a lot useful info. Obviously some civil liberty issues are in play.....But something has to be done.
17 families in Parkland Florida disagree.
In fact, I’m guessing a bunch of parents will become more outspoken in the future.
Well set the bar then. What’s our target objective. You’re a numbers nerd, quantify it. Set the bar. Same thing I asked Cunty last night. I’m not limiting a Constitutional liberty over you’re fvcking feelings. It sucks, bad **** happens. Bad **** always happens. It’s life.
You said it bub. Your party epitomizes action for sake of feelings against logic.
Luckily, our process is so slow that we don’t legislate feelings.
Feelings?
How about facts. Like elementary children, 20 of them to be precise, between the ages of 6 and 7 years old being murdered.
That’s pathetic.
Exactly....but I'll keep bringing it up......like I do with Chicago. Luckily you Baltinomorons have recently experienced a lull in the carnage.
Final Chicago 2017 Totals
Shot & Killed: 625
Total Shot: 3561
Chicago 2018 Year to Date
Shot & Killed: 52
Total Shot: 270
Yes that is pathetic...now compare that to the total number of people killed in the US.
I didn't say that did I...it's just that mass shootings (even as defined loosely) are rare when compared to other gun deaths (2/3 being suicides).
Right, it’s horrific, but it’s not enough to make a change to Constitutional freedoms
So the Constitution says you have the right to own an AR15 with 100 round magazines and a bump stock and a flash suppressor?
Maybe it's time.
CNN)Long before he slaughtered 17 people at the South Florida high school he once attended, Nikolas Cruz had a disturbing way of introducing himself.
"Hi, I'm Nick," he used to say, according to an acquaintance interviewed by CNN. "I'm a school shooter."
Cruz posed with guns and knives in photos posted on Instagram and made a chilling online comment about a mass shooting carried out in New York this summer.
There are online posts in which he writes:
"I wanna shoot people with my AR-15" and "Im going to be a professional school shooter"
The latter post, made with Cruz's name attached to it, was reported to the FBI. But FBI officials said they were unable to determine who was responsible.
This summer a Nikolas Cruz made an online comment in response to a story about a disgruntled doctor in New York who used an AR-15 to shoot seven people, killing one and wounding six others.
"Man, I can do so much better," he wrote.
The comment was linked to one of Cruz's YouTube accounts, which have since been removed in the wake of Wednesday's shooting.
I wouldn't dismiss it, but I would concentrate on the 95% before I focus on the 5%.
If the idea behind the intent of the 2nd is to ensure the ability of the populace to guard against a tyrannical Govt, then yes. However, as I’ve said, I’d support mag restrictions and elimination of bump stocks. Flash suppressors mean nothing but sure, get rid of them.
They had plenty of reason to take his guns. They found ammo in his backpack at school. He had threatened to kill students. They could have put a restraining order against him and that is enough to confiscate his guns.
Florida law does not permit confiscation of firearms due to having a protective order imposed.
The constitution also doesn't say you can tweet random ******** to people every hour. It's the principles of the constitution that they don't get.
That wasn’t the argument.
Are there federal laws against sawed-off shotguns?
Did the Constitution say you could yell "FIRE" in a crowded theatre? It's time for you 2nd Amendment people to understand that things can be changed......deal with it.
Jesus H Christ, this is why we can't discuss this issue with any sense of logic.
You don't ban the word "FIRE" you ban the use of it. Just as you ban the particular uses of firearms.
When the Constitution was written, the citizens had the same weapon as the government armed forces. It didn't say citizens can arm themselves but must use bow and arrows or slingshots.
Yes. You still don’t get it. I’m not saying you can’t make any laws. I’m saying that because it’s a Constitutionally protected freedom you better be damn sure it makes sense.
Nothing you all have advocated for is based in statistical fact or backed up by data. It’s based in emotion. You don’t **** with the constitution over emotion.
I’ve asked you some very pointed questions that would aid in the dialogue of our two sides coming to the middle. You’ve not answered a single one. You’ve not even attempted to take a shot at it.
Jesus H Christ, this is why we can't discuss this issue with any sense of logic.
You don't ban the word "FIRE" you ban the use of it. Just as you ban the particular uses of firearms.
You are the one with no sense of logic.......certain guns have no purpose in general population other than military purposes. Civilians have no expectations to these type of weapons, thus it is time for the Supreme Court to state what is and is not allowed under the 2nd Amendment.