Mass Shooting Thread: Waiting on the next one.

[jewseejay]

jewseejay Do your views ever shift when these tragedies happen? Or do you just chalk it up as a necessary evil to keep guns in citizens hands?

I come in peace.

Do my views about guns change when kids shoot eachother?

No.

My response to these things is logical, not emotional.

 

[lazybread]

I just want a well thought out explanation as to why any citizen should have weapons meant for war.

Without access to these weapons, citizens are at the mercy of those who do have access to the weapons.

 

[WASHED KING]

Without access to these weapons, citizens are at the mercy of those who do have access to the weapons.

And who is that? You don't truly believe citizens could ever truly defend themselves agaisnt the military or law enforcement in a martial law type scenario. The government will always win.

See Waco.

 

[blastercombo]

And who is that? You don't truly believe citizens could ever truly defend themselves agaisnt the military or law enforcement in a martial law type scenario. The government will always win.

See Waco.

Also happened when that group in Oregon tried it. They set up a whole “base” and just gave up

Ironically, the “salute the troops!!!!” Demographic are the ones who claim are ready to fight them

 

[lazybread]

And who is that? You don't truly believe citizens could ever truly defend themselves agaisnt the military or law enforcement in a martial law type scenario. The government will always win.

See Waco.

I disagree with this. An armed population is certainly better equipped to defend themselves against the military or any other organized force compared to an unarmed population. They may or may not prevail in the end, but the ability to fight back is an important deterrent to those wishing to impose their will on a population.

 

[WASHED KING]

Also happened when that group in Oregon tried it. They set up a whole “base” and just gave up

Basically .

Still going to get smoked. They have more men, resources, guns than you ever will.

But hey I guess they get to go out in a blaze of glory. That's cool.

 

[getback]

I disagree with this. An armed population is certainly better equipped to defend themselves against the military or any other organized force compared to an unarmed population. They may or may not prevail in the end, but the ability to fight back is an important deterrent to those wishing to impose their will on a population.

I don't think they'd be deterred dude. They'd just turn this B into Nagasaki before they'd ever let a bunch of hillbilly guerillas take the wheel.

 

[WASHED KING]

I disagree with this. An armed population is certainly better equipped to defend themselves against the military or any other organized force compared to an unarmed population. They may or may not prevail in the end, but the ability to fight back is an important deterrent to those wishing to impose their will on a population.

We can’t even get people to wear masks in unity let alone take up arms against a trained military or militia.

This is like me saying because I have the mindset to guard Shaq in the post or I am on the same court as him it would be effective. I'm still getting dunked on each possession.

 

[blastercombo]

I disagree with this. An armed population is certainly better equipped to defend themselves against the military or any other organized force compared to an unarmed population. They may or may not prevail in the end, but the ability to fight back is an important deterrent to those wishing to impose their will on a population.

Idiotic. Simply an idiotic response.

 

[paulwest1985]

Rest in peace to the victims. I really don't know what else to say at this point..........This cycle just keeps repeating itself.

 

[gry60]

I disagree with this. An armed population is certainly better equipped to defend themselves against the military or any other organized force compared to an unarmed population. They may or may not prevail in the end, but the ability to fight back is an important deterrent to those wishing to impose their will on a population.

If this were Ukraine, maybe.

The Mexican and Canadian governments have not shown a desire to annex American land so far, so I fail to see how this argument applies to our country in its current geopolitical setup.

And quite frankly, the argument that "it is a deterrent against one imposing their will" itself is very nebulous. Living in society requires that we be willing to give up some liberties for the safety of all. That's why the speed on your car is regulated; that's why you can't smoke anywhere you want (and especially not in a maternity ward); that's why you can't blow your leaves on the pavement. There are more effective ways of forcing your views tyrannically, like stealing elections and filling ones cabinet and judiciary with bootlickers and loyalists.

There's an argument to be made for gun ownership, but in all places at all times? That's a massive reach.

 

[blastercombo]

The trump government did impose its will on people during peak Covid. Hundreds of thousands died due to it. Who fought back then? Who shot at them? Oh, nobody

 

[lazybread]

Idiotic. Simply an idiotic response.

Ok, this is why people don't want to engage in conversation about topics like this and you end up with an echo chamber. Personally, I think most of what you've posted in this thread is idiotic, but simply stating that doesn't really get us anywhere.

 

[blastercombo]

Ok, this is why people don't want to engage in conversation about topics like this and you end up with an echo chamber. Personally, I think most of what you've posted in this thread is idiotic, but simply stating that doesn't really get us anywhere.

Certain statements do not warrant comments. This was one of them. “At least we can shoot back before we die” sounds like a past idiotic statement made claiming the Tulsa race riot at least would of been harder for white people to slaughter all the blacks if they had more guns.

nobody, NOBODY is fighting against the American government. Jan 6th look place and the majority of deaths were from your type of people killing themselves while NOBODY was shooting at them.

 

[lazybread]

If this were Ukraine, maybe.

The Mexican and Canadian governments have not shown a desire to annex American land so far, so I fail to see how this argument applies to our country in its current geopolitical setup.

geopolitics can and will change over time.

Living in society requires that we be willing to give up some liberties for the safety of all.

This is true, but I think that giving up the right to bear arms would be a huge mistake in the long term. As US citizens, we live in a time and place of relative safety and prosperity, and it's easy to imagine things will continue that way forever, but you know they won't.

 

[heelsandeers]

Gun control is another illustration of our failing political system. In a multi party system broadly popular gun control measures would easily pass

In our two party system those who don't care about gun rights happily trade them for support for low taxes and deregulation

 

[WASHED KING]

geopolitics can and will change over time.
This is true, but I think that giving up the right to bear arms would be a huge mistake in the long term. As US citizens, we live in a time and place of relative safety and prosperity, and it's easy to imagine things will continue that way forever, but you know they won't.

I personally don't think we should lose guns entirely. I'm a gun owner.

Handguns, rifles, shotguns all serve utility from self-defense to hunting. I'm ok with that.

But you don't NEED semi-automatic weapons. That's where the train stops for me the only purpose they serve is to create mass casualty events.

 

[1stwitit]

I personally don't think we should lose guns entirely. I'm a gun owner.

Handguns, rifles, shotguns all serve utility from self-defense to hunting. I'm ok with that.

But you don't NEED semi-automatic weapons. That's where the train stops for me the only purpose they serve is to create mass casualty events.

Not to knit pick, but most guns owned by us civilians are semi automatic. That’s just a buzzword that sounds worse than what it is. Same as “Assault Rifle”.

 

[oidreez]

Not to knit pick, but most guns owned by us civilians are semi automatic. That’s just a buzzword that sounds worse than what it is. Same as “Assault Rifle”.

exactly. Most handguns are semi automatic guns so guy needs to clarify

 

[IATT]

 

[frink85]

the video with the gunman knocking pretending to be cops, and the kids figuring out it was a fakeout because they said "just open the door bro" is wild. like got me here thinking if id have the sense and clarity in the moment to see through that language back when I was in high school

 

[getback]

the video with the gunmen knocking pretending to be cops, and the kids figuring out it was a fakeout because they said "just open the door bro" is wild. like got me here thinking if id have the sense and clarity in the moment to see through that language back when I was in high school

I watched it and thought the same thing.

I'm so glad I don't have kids. I'd be pretty shook sending them to school in the immediate aftermath of these shootings.

And yikes @ this:

Mr Crumbley, who is now in police custody, is believed to have used a semi-automatic handgun his father purchased on Black Friday.

Dad should be held accountable also.

 

[blastercombo]

I watched it and thought the same thing.

I'm so glad I don't have kids. I'd be pretty shook sending them to school in the immediate aftermath of these shootings.

And yikes @ this:

Dad should be held accountable also.

Yup. Parents need to be locked up. You produced the trash and armed that loser. Shoot him on sight idiot policemen. Look at the human filth. Why do “THESE PEOPLE” do this?

 

[TURBO UNO]

I don’t know about locking up the parents or shooting another child though

 

[blastercombo]

I don’t know about locking up the parents or shooting another child though

Allowed it to happen and gave him a weapon.