crickets...

[zimmy]

what a surprise

[Sea Dangles]

Is there something that you would like to discuss Zimmy?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Got Stripers]

I'll go, I"m sure others like me were thinking it would only be a short time until another (yeah non Muslim, non radicalized) person with a life experience or two recent or past, that would push him or her over the edge. And of course the lucky recipients of their anger are unfortunate that they have access to an arsenal of assault type rifles and even without the advantages of the bump stocks that did so much damage in Vegas, they easily and quickly kill dozens or more.

Like I said in one of the other threads, I'd be worried about someone just like anyone on this board with access to these types of weapons, with a life changing experience putting them in a very dark place with a need to vent that anger. We legislate the amount of fertilizer you can buy, we legislate seat belt laws, the amount of alcohol you can legally have in order to drive, all to save a life or two; I think it's time to legislate some sensible gun laws to save thousands every year.

Our founding fathers just finished a bloody war, against what they viewed as a tyrannical government, which was the reason they penned 27 words to insure they could form a militia and have the arms to do so. Does anyone really see any circumstance in our lifetime or your kids, where we need to take up arms against our own government? Also consider their time and place, where aside from a cannon position from a fort or ship, they were all basically playing on the same single shot playing field.

Imagine your a responsible father or grandfather and your AR's are properly locked away and safe from all.....or so you thought. Like many parents, we are sometimes blindsided by finding out what some of our teens or young sons and daughters are dealing with, be it bullying, drugs, rape, PTSD; you pick a life changing emotional experience. Imagine getting the call at work from the FBI wanting to talk to you, asking you how your son or daughter had access (locks aren't a guarantee) to your AR rifles, then asking if you have seen the news?

Be safe and check your locks boys.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

I'll go,

I think it's time to legislate some sensible gun laws to save thousands every year.

what specifically would you like to see done

[BigBo]

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

I'll go, I"m sure others like me were thinking it would only be a short time until another (yeah non Muslim, non radicalized) person with a life experience or two recent or past, that would push him or her over the edge.

I've been reading online about his background. Discharged from the military for domestic abuse to wife and child. Joined with the Antifa movement. Recently converted to Muslim faith. Lots of stuff not being reported by MSM.

[spence]

Originally Posted by BigBo

Joined with the Antifa movement. Recently converted to Muslim faith. Lots of stuff not being reported by MSM.

Did you ever think maybe the MSM isn't reporting it because it's likely made up?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[BigBo]

Originally Posted by spence

Did you ever think maybe the MSM isn't reporting it because it's likely made up?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Why no I didn't spence. That thought just never crossed my mind. I'm such a moron.

[zimmy]

Originally Posted by BigBo

I've been reading online about his background. Discharged from the military for domestic abuse to wife and child. Joined with the Antifa movement. Recently converted to Muslim faith. Lots of stuff not being reported by MSM.

It isn't being reported because that antifa connection is fake. B.S. Made up. Fabricated. The same way the russians made up hundreds of fake stories to spread on the facebook. God help us. We are doomed.

[spence]

Stop making sense. Please.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[PaulS]

Now is not the time to discuss gun control.

[JohnR]

Geee - beginning to sound like another lost boy. Gonna be real interesting when we find out his motivation.

Dishonorable discharge so shouldn't have legal access to a firearm, would not pass a federal background check - just like many other people that commit crimes / homicides with illegally procured weapons.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

Now is not the time to discuss gun control.

It really pisses me off when conservatives say that, because if the guy was a Muslim, now WOULD be the right time for conservatives to talk about immigration control.

Another loser whose sick fantasies were obviously fueled by the appearance of his weapon of choice. The rifle was his Facebook profile pic, with a comment something like "she's a nasty little b*tch".

Our moral compass is badly broken, we have huge numbers of kids being raised without dads, we have a major political party that never stops making fun of people who go to church, we have the internet (a place where weirdos can retreat deeper into their fantasies, and get further away from having real connections with real people). And we also have the other major political party making it impossible to have an intelligent conversation about the subject of guns.

To the liberals: everybody in the Dakotas has guns, yet they have almost zero gun crime. So maybe instead of constantly making fun of those people as "bitter clingers" and "deplorable", just maybe, there are some lessons to be learned from that culture, about how to treat others. Maybe we should be encouraging some of those values, instead of mocking them. And we need to talk about curbing the graphic violence that comes out of Hollywood. It's not easy to have a rational conversation with liberals on this subject.

To the conservatives: yes, the gun in this case is an inanimate object. But it's nonsense to act as if the gun played no bigger role in this, than his shoelaces. I have no idea, none whatsoever, what hypothetical law might have stopped this, or at least reduced the body count. But there are some laws that can reduce the body count in some cases, we need to stop pretending that's not the case. It's not easy to have a rational conversation with conservatives on this subject.

People on both sides, as soon as they here anything that doesn't serve their agenda, put their fingers in their ears. No one listens. So the body count keeps raising.

[Nebe]

We live in a #^&#^&#^&#^&ed up world.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by Nebe

We live in a #^&#^&#^&#^&ed up world.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Do not worry. We have strong leadership to give us direction.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Do not worry. We have strong leadership to give us direction.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It's the GOP's fault?

Conservatives won't budge on gun control. Liberals won't budge on the notion that secular progressive values, are morally superior, to traditional family values.

Our moral compass is badly broken, and from where I sit, much of liberalism contributes to that.

At the same time, it's way too easy to get guns/accessories that nobody needs. From where I sit, conservatism contributes to that.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

it's way too easy to get guns/accessories that nobody needs.

you are getting closer

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

From where I sit

Ted kennedy and Jim are both "moderates"

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

Do not worry. We have strong leadership to give us direction.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The world was #^&#^&#^&#^&ed up long before Trump became President. None of "leaders" were able to un#^&#^&#^&#^& it.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Nebe

We live in a #^&#^&#^&#^&ed up world.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

same as it ever was....

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by scottw

same as it ever was....

I don't know about that Scott. We didn't see these mass shootings a few decades ago. When my parents were young, many people left their doors unlocked at night. I don't think everything is the same. When I was 9 years old, I left my house at 8 AM, with my bike and my baseball glove, and told my parents I was going out to play, and I'd be home for dinner. They didn't know exactly where I was, but they were confident I was fine. That was common. Today, you'd be an absolute maniac to let a 9 year old have that kind of freedom, it's too dangerous.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

I don't know about that Scott. We didn't see these mass shootings a few decades ago. When my parents were young, many people left their doors unlocked at night. I don't think everything is the same. When I was 9 years old, I left my house at 8 AM, with my bike and my baseball glove, and told my parents I was going out to play, and I'd be home for dinner. They didn't know exactly where I was, but they were confident I was fine. That was common. Today, you'd be an absolute maniac to let a 9 year old have that kind of freedom, it's too dangerous.

depends on where you live probably and I don't know that it's that different though the tv constantly tells us how dangerous it is out there...danger around every corner probably

[wdmso]

Trump says Texas shooting is a problem of mental health, not guns
called him a deranged individual,

guy kills 8 with a truck Trump calls him Trump referred to terrorism suspect Sayfullo Saipov as an "animal," and called for "swift justice" instead of regular due process.


and Blames visa program and blames political correctness for not addressing the issue


it is amazing to see to verbal gymnastics and how Consertives see the world and solution's so clearly . if its a Muslim or immigrant

But when Terrorism or Muslim or immigrant cant be used or shown involvement in the incident .. and all they have is white guy with a gun they default to its a Mental heath issue ....

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by scottw

depends on where you live probably and I don't know that it's that different though the tv constantly tells us how dangerous it is out there...danger around every corner probably

We have more knowledge of what goes on now, for sure. But I don't buy that mass shootings took place in the 1950s, but we didn't know because it was only local news. Elementary schools didn't have lockdowns and lessons to kids about not letting strangers touch them. I guess I can't prove it, but I think things are worse. I think things are worse at the bottom. I think the most dangerous ten percent, are worse than they used to be. The breakdown of the nuclear family, not going to church, the internet, it all leads to this.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Raider Ronnie]

I find it very predictable & ironic that every time political corruption is in the news and being exposed a mass shooting happens to knock it out of the lead story in the news.
As predictable as anyone who exposes the Clinton corruption and afterward the feel the urge to commit suicide.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[zimmy]

Originally Posted by Raider Ronnie

As predictable as anyone who exposes the Clinton corruption and afterward the feel the urge to commit suicide.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Are you talking about the actual fake news about the Haitian official who is still alive or the GOP traitor Smith who was coordinating with Russian hackers?

[detbuch]

QUOTE=Got Stripers;1131128]I'll go, I"m sure others like me were thinking it would only be a short time until another (yeah non Muslim, non radicalized) person with a life experience or two recent or past, that would push him or her over the edge. And of course the lucky recipients of their anger are unfortunate that they have access to an arsenal of assault type rifles and even without the advantages of the bump stocks that did so much damage in Vegas, they easily and quickly kill dozens or more.

I think that environmentalists should prefer mass killings rather than one-at-a-time types. Overpopulation leads to human pollution of the planet. We need more of those human cleansing incidents and conditions--mass killings, abortions, gay marriage, gender displacements, war/pestilence/famine/and hunger, More ideologies like Islam, and restrictive laws to keep us controlled and in place, in order to reduce the population and keep it down.

Assault weapons should be considered a good thing.

Like I said in one of the other threads, I'd be worried about someone just like anyone on this board with access to these types of weapons, with a life changing experience putting them in a very dark place with a need to vent that anger. We legislate the amount of fertilizer you can buy, we legislate seat belt laws, the amount of alcohol you can legally have in order to drive, all to save a life or two; I think it's time to legislate some sensible gun laws to save thousands every year.

The only gun law, sensible or not, that would save thousands of lives a year would be to outlaw, worldwide, the production of guns. Would be kind of hard to enforce without the use of guns. But, the only gun law able to stop thousands or single digits of deaths is to eliminate the existence of guns. That would, without a need for further legislation, disarm everyone including, and especially, all governments.


Our founding fathers just finished a bloody war, against what they viewed as a tyrannical government, which was the reason they penned 27 words to insure they could form a militia and have the arms to do so. Does anyone really see any circumstance in our lifetime or your kids, where we need to take up arms against our own government?

The 2A helps to make sure that we don't have to fight our own government. That's the whole point of it. To ensure government doesn't remove itself from the bonds the Founders placed it. Before the British government tried to change things, the colonists too were in a place where it didn't seem necessary to defend against government tyranny. So they had to scramble to fight against it when it showed up. They learned the hard way the need of prevention, rather than waiting for disaster to occur in order to mobilize against it.

Also consider their time and place, where aside from a cannon position from a fort or ship, they were all basically playing on the same single shot playing field.

So when Gatling guns were created for military use, what happened to the playing field?

Imagine your a responsible father or grandfather and your AR's are properly locked away and safe from all.....or so you thought. Like many parents, we are sometimes blindsided by finding out what some of our teens or young sons and daughters are dealing with, be it bullying, drugs, rape, PTSD; you pick a life changing emotional experience. Imagine getting the call at work from the FBI wanting to talk to you, asking you how your son or daughter had access (locks aren't a guarantee) to your AR rifles, then asking if you have seen the news?

Be safe and check your locks boys.[/QUOTE]

Most of the bad stuff you talk about, to the extent that it can be prevented by government, is avoidable to the greatest extent under dictatorial governments.

[Got Stripers]

Originally Posted by detbuch

QUOTE=Got Stripers;1131128]I'll go, I"m sure others like me were thinking it would only be a short time until another (yeah non Muslim, non radicalized) person with a life experience or two recent or past, that would push him or her over the edge. And of course the lucky recipients of their anger are unfortunate that they have access to an arsenal of assault type rifles and even without the advantages of the bump stocks that did so much damage in Vegas, they easily and quickly kill dozens or more.

I think that environmentalists should prefer mass killings rather than one-at-a-time types. Overpopulation leads to human pollution of the planet. We need more of those human cleansing incidents and conditions--mass killings, abortions, gay marriage, gender displacements, war/pestilence/famine/and hunger, More ideologies like Islam, and restrictive laws to keep us controlled and in place, in order to reduce the population and keep it down.

Assault weapons should be considered a good thing.

Wow, not much I can say to that, I'm sure the mothers, fathers, brothers and sisters of the children killed in this latest AR carnage will find comfort in your empathy. I hope you don't loose the other screws holding you together, I also hope that you too are armed to the teeth, because those are some scary and evil sentiments. Also for one who has such a fear of big government, I'd suggest you better watch what you type, homeland security is looking for text just like that; no doubt those statements fits the profile of many that might be on their radar.

Like I said in one of the other threads, I'd be worried about someone just like anyone on this board with access to these types of weapons, with a life changing experience putting them in a very dark place with a need to vent that anger. We legislate the amount of fertilizer you can buy, we legislate seat belt laws, the amount of alcohol you can legally have in order to drive, all to save a life or two; I think it's time to legislate some sensible gun laws to save thousands every year.

The only gun law, sensible or not, that would save thousands of lives a year would be to outlaw, worldwide, the production of guns. Would be kind of hard to enforce without the use of guns. But, the only gun law able to stop thousands or single digits of deaths is to eliminate the existence of guns. That would, without a need for further legislation, disarm everyone including, and especially, all governments.


Don't read more into what I'm suggesting, I have no issues with handguns, hunting rifles, shotguns or any other legally purchased firearm in the pursuit of what every warm blooded man or women loves to do. I too loved hunting back when I was younger, but aside from fueling a shortage of testosterone, helping someone deal with a little big man issue or making someone like you with such a dismal view of the future feel more secure; what purpose does the AR assault weapon serve?

Our founding fathers just finished a bloody war, against what they viewed as a tyrannical government, which was the reason they penned 27 words to insure they could form a militia and have the arms to do so. Does anyone really see any circumstance in our lifetime or your kids, where we need to take up arms against our own government?

The 2A helps to make sure that we don't have to fight our own government. That's the whole point of it. To ensure government doesn't remove itself from the bonds the Founders placed it. Before the British government tried to change things, the colonists too were in a place where it didn't seem necessary to defend against government tyranny. So they had to scramble to fight against it when it showed up. They learned the hard way the need of prevention, rather than waiting for disaster to occur in order to mobilize against it.

Again, while we are witnessing a lot of scary stuff, I feel sorry that you have such a depressing view of where our government is or could become. Do you really think one leader or some government/military conspiracy to take total control is in the cards, boy how do you sleep at night? And if you do and the possibility that the military in it's entirety will actually sign on (tin foil hat tipped here), do you think the small percentage of AR armed civilians are going to stop that?

Also consider their time and place, where aside from a cannon position from a fort or ship, they were all basically playing on the same single shot playing field.

So when Gatling guns were created for military use, what happened to the playing field?

Imagine your a responsible father or grandfather and your AR's are properly locked away and safe from all.....or so you thought. Like many parents, we are sometimes blindsided by finding out what some of our teens or young sons and daughters are dealing with, be it bullying, drugs, rape, PTSD; you pick a life changing emotional experience. Imagine getting the call at work from the FBI wanting to talk to you, asking you how your son or daughter had access (locks aren't a guarantee) to your AR rifles, then asking if you have seen the news?

Be safe and check your locks boys.

Most of the bad stuff you talk about, to the extent that it can be prevented by government, is avoidable to the greatest extent under dictatorial governments.[/QUOTE]

Again I feel sorry for you and your view of where our government and society is, must be tough on you to see where your kids and grand-kids are in a couple decades. Do I like our government today, not in the least, but I'm not looking at the glass half empty. We need change and I'm 110% convinced term limits is the exact change needed, but if that happens; I'd suggest to you the interpretation of the 2nd amendment will likely change to a more realistic one in light of our time and place and not one living in the past like you.

[ReelinRod]

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

aside from fueling a shortage of testosterone, helping someone deal with a little big man issue or making someone like you with such a dismal view of the future feel more secure; what purpose does the AR assault weapon serve? . . .

I'd suggest to you the interpretation of the 2nd amendment will likely change to a more realistic one in light of our time and place and not one living in the past like you.

The AR platform meets the 2nd Amendment protection criteria established by SCOTUS better than any other type of firearm.

That criteria is, to boil it down, how well the gun performs in battle, IOW, killing people. To have the possession and use of the gun protected, the gun must be of a type:

In common use at the time by the general citizenry and that constitute the ordinary military equipment and/or that can be employed advantageously in the common defense of the citizens.

This protection criteria is a direct outcome of the "right to arms" being linked to militia service.

It has been the intransigence of the collectivist left that has kept the right connected to militia usefulness while the gun rights side has been trying to separate the two for 3/4 of a century now.

Are you saying now, that you want to reinterpret the 2nd Amendment so the right to arms can be formally divorced from any militia usefulness standard for arms protection, while you promise that we would be allowed to keep some sporting arms and others that don't offend you?

Why would we (gun rights people) accept such a disingenuous premise? Do you really think you speak from a position of trust, tolerance and respect on the subject of preservation of rights? You obviously hold my rights in disdain and contempt so pardon me while I tell you to KMA.

Thanks for your concern about my manhood and my outlook for the future but I'll just retain my rights, all of them in their current condition, with hopes for expansion.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by ReelinRod

The AR platform meets the 2nd Amendment protection criteria established by SCOTUS better than any other type of firearm.

That criteria is, to boil it down, how well the gun performs in battle, IOW, killing people. To have the possession and use of the gun protected, the gun must be of a type:

In common use at the time by the general citizenry and that constitute the ordinary military equipment and/or that can be employed advantageously in the common defense of the citizens.

This protection criteria is a direct outcome of the "right to arms" being linked to militia service.

It has been the intransigence of the collectivist left that has kept the right connected to militia usefulness while the gun rights side has been trying to separate the two for 3/4 of a century now.

Are you saying now, that you want to reinterpret the 2nd Amendment so the right to arms can be formally divorced from any militia usefulness standard for arms protection, while you promise that we would be allowed to keep some sporting arms and others that don't offend you?

Why would we (gun rights people) accept such a disingenuous premise? Do you really think you speak from a position of trust, tolerance and respect on the subject of preservation of rights? You obviously hold my rights in disdain and contempt so pardon me while I tell you to KMA.

Thanks for your concern about my manhood and my outlook for the future but I'll just retain my rights, all of them in their current condition, with hopes for expansion.

[spence]

Originally Posted by ReelinRod

The AR platform meets the 2nd Amendment protection criteria established by SCOTUS better than any other type of firearm.

That criteria is, to boil it down, how well the gun performs in battle, IOW, killing people. To have the possession and use of the gun protected, the gun must be of a type:

In common use at the time by the general citizenry and that constitute the ordinary military equipment and/or that can be employed advantageously in the common defense of the citizens.

This protection criteria is a direct outcome of the "right to arms" being linked to militia service.

It has been the intransigence of the collectivist left that has kept the right connected to militia usefulness while the gun rights side has been trying to separate the two for 3/4 of a century now.

Are you saying now, that you want to reinterpret the 2nd Amendment so the right to arms can be formally divorced from any militia usefulness standard for arms protection, while you promise that we would be allowed to keep some sporting arms and others that don't offend you?

Why would we (gun rights people) accept such a disingenuous premise? Do you really think you speak from a position of trust, tolerance and respect on the subject of preservation of rights? You obviously hold my rights in disdain and contempt so pardon me while I tell you to KMA.

Thanks for your concern about my manhood and my outlook for the future but I'll just retain my rights, all of them in their current condition, with hopes for expansion.

Such spin. The early cases your referring to were decisions in context of militias. Later individual rights cases made no such argument.

This is a complex issue with many opinions and legal contradictions. It's a work in process.

To claim its black and white is just disengenuous.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device