Mass Shooting Thread: Waiting on the next one.

Lets also mention that it isn't the first Euro nation to allow members of the armed forces to keep firearms at home (Switzerland does it, as do many other nations throughout the world).

That's a completely separate discussion from the free-for-all attitude we have here regarding gun ownership.
 
well they have a valid reason (threat of war) for doing so considering they are close proximity with an invading Russia as opposed to the U.S. whose main reason for owning one is because the 2nd amendment allows it and because they love their guns. funny part is that the 2nd amendment was made during the time of war and not because of our fascination with guns which is now using the 2nd amendment as an excuse. I doubt that every american gun owner is "practicing now" in preparation of what could be WW3. point is, totally different scenario and justification.
So now that there are more imminent threats of danger the people are to be trusted and youre good with that? Good.
 
So now that there are more imminent threats of danger the people are to be trusted and youre good with that? Good.
I don't carry a firearm and never had to deal with such paranoia of being in danger. I have more fear of wildlife and Acrophobia than people. if I did carry one, I would have brandish the weapon on idiots that are not worth my time. fact is, "most people" don't even need one nor use it responsibly nor for protection. like this one for example....
 

Attachments

  • _121513924_gettyimages-1236479580.jpg
    _121513924_gettyimages-1236479580.jpg
    57.9 KB · Views: 620
If any new laws do pass, please do not make songs about what we already know is obvious, to escalate random incidents. This has been a public service announcement from the living
 
I don't carry a firearm and never had to deal with such paranoia of being in danger. I have more fear of wildlife and Acrophobia than people. if I did carry one, I would have brandish the weapon on idiots that are not worth my time. fact is, "most people" don't even need one nor use it responsibly nor for protection. like this one for example....
You just stated a great reason as to why you shouldn’t have a gun and it doesn’t have anything to do with fear. Also, your Rittenhouse example is not a good one either.
 
You just stated a great reason as to why you shouldn’t have a gun and it doesn’t have anything to do with fear. Also, your Rittenhouse example is not a good one either.
well that is exactly the primary reasons why people buy guns especially in the U.S. I don't doubt that most people buy them because they are afraid or for protection. just asked the people that attend gun shows and how many they have in their arsenal. just look at all the mass shootings that happened for the last 5 years alone. you have to ask yourself why becoming a law enforcer orbeing in the military takes a lot of studying and training.
 
I don't carry a firearm and never had to deal with such paranoia of being in danger. I have more fear of wildlife and Acrophobia than people. if I did carry one, I would have brandish the weapon on idiots that are not worth my time. fact is, "most people" don't even need one nor use it responsibly nor for protection. like this one for example....
That’s the only part that I’m referring to.
 
That’s the only part that I’m referring to.
and that's the point I'm referring to that giving people freedom to carry guns without any limitations in public on a normal day could increase the potential of fatal incidents that could arise from normal arguments or people that you don't like. people are just unpredictable. there is no guarantee that every single person would carry their guns responsibly.
 
and that's the point I'm referring to that giving people freedom to carry guns without any limitations in public on a normal day could increase the potential of fatal incidents that could arise from normal arguments or people that you don't like. people are just unpredictable. there is no guarantee that every single person would carry their guns responsibly.
I’m only speak about you and what you said. You don’t carry a gun because you wouldn’t be responsible with it, thank you for not tainting the waters for responsible gun owners.
 
I’m only speak about you and what you said. You don’t carry a gun because you wouldn’t be responsible with it, thank you for not tainting the waters for responsible gun owners.
so you got personal. thank you for proving my point, I could only imagine if we are having this discussion in person with you carrying a gun. I feel much safer already behind my computer.
 
so you got personal. thank you for proving my point, I could only imagine if we are having this discussion in person with you carrying a gun. I feel much safer already behind my computer.
? Have a good rest of your Sunday, young man.
 
and that's the point I'm referring to that giving people freedom to carry guns without any limitations in public on a normal day could increase the potential of fatal incidents that could arise from normal arguments or people that you don't like. people are just unpredictable. there is no guarantee that every single person would carry their guns responsibly.

It definitely would. Americans by and large are narcissistic, pretty dumb and extremely prone to violence.
 
Not a mass shooter but :

you can find the vid of it on wshh if your morbidly curious.

why in the world do these kids have access to glocks with drums on it??
 
So now that there are more imminent threats of danger the people are to be trusted and youre good with that? Good.
Sounds like you're arguing against a point that was never made.

Lithuania borders Russia, which has invaded Georgia and Ukraine in the last 14 years. Mexico and Canada have not shown any intent to take pieces of the US for themselves.

You're taking the gun control argument out of the domestic context and applying it to issues of national security.

Theres just alot of scared uneducated folk that ride these leftist talking points hard.

This is an interesting comment considering that if you go far enough to the left (where leftists are), you will find plenty of pro-gun sentiment.
 
Sounds like you're arguing against a point that was never made.

Lithuania borders Russia, which has invaded Georgia and Ukraine in the last 14 years. Mexico and Canada have not shown any intent to take pieces of the US for themselves.

You're taking the gun control argument out of the domestic context and applying it to issues of national security.



This is an interesting comment considering that if you go far enough to the left (where leftists are), you will find plenty of pro-gun sentiment.
no im entrapping you to make you see the foolishness of your ways....

you jus stated gun ownership is a matter of national security.... but only if you perceive a big enough threat I suppose

what if I told you its also a matter of domestic security....
 
no im entrapping you to make you see the foolishness of your ways....

you jus stated gun ownership is a matter of national security.... but only if you perceive a big enough threat I suppose

what if I told you its also a matter of domestic security....
Are you the kind of person who uses a household budget (microeconomics) to explain national budgets (macroeconomics)?

Because this is what you're trying to do here wrt gun ownership.

It is generally understood that people living in the same country recognize the authority of their legal system on regulating the use of force; individuals do not get to decide that their use of force is justifiable outside of what the legal system has deemed so (can't shoot your neighbor's dog because it's destroying your plants since you'll get charged).

There is no such legal system in international affairs, which means the ways in which force may be justifiably used vary from state to state, and the validity of those ways is dependent on the power dynamics that exist at the time of conflict (you shouldn't shoot your neighbor's dog, but if you do, how that decision hurts you is dependent on who's siding with you: if the big neighborhood bully hates the dog, he might protect you against retaliation, or he might not intervene because he'll gain from the conflict).

You can't just grab one set of rules from a context and try to apply it in a different context just because.
 

what if I told you its also a matter of domestic security....
and what do we need the police force for? taking matters in your own hands is even more dangerous. I doubt that domestic terrorism can be handled by the common civilian. the only times that are prevalent that had issues with using guns are on domestic disputes/arguments, suicides, accidental shooting that ended in fatalities.
 
Sounds like you're arguing against a point that was never made.

Lithuania borders Russia, which has invaded Georgia and Ukraine in the last 14 years. Mexico and Canada have not shown any intent to take pieces of the US for themselves.

You're taking the gun control argument out of the domestic context and applying it to issues of national security.



This is an interesting comment considering that if you go far enough to the left (where leftists are), you will find plenty of pro-gun sentiment.
I agree. this has been the talking point for the Republicans for over half the century. fear-mongering and telling the supporters that the left are out there to take their guns away. if that were true, we should have a much stable and gun control policies by now. this is no thanks to the republican party who claims that they made it possible, but the left also supported it. nobody wanted to take your guns because it is big business for politicians (either side). however, what would be nice is to create a much stronger responsibility and culpability for gun control instead, we are dealt with more leniency as to getting guns. gun lovers and hardcore right wingers are the most paranoid people when it comes to that issue and tried every argument even if it's nonsensical.
 
Video of the kids is frustrating
2am and they are on Instagram playing with a gun

Literally emulating what they see on TV and the internet and went one step too far
 
Back
Top Bottom