Slashdot Mirror
Congressman Steve Scalise Among 5 Shot at Baseball Field (nytimes.com)
From a New York Times report: A lone gunman opened fire on Republican members of the congressional baseball team at a practice field in a Washington suburb Wednesday, using a rifle to shower the field with bullets that struck five people, including Steve Scalise, the majority whip of the House of Representatives. Two members of Mr. Scalise's protective police detail were wounded as they exchanged gunfire with the shooter in what other lawmakers described as a chaotic, terror-filled ten minutes that turned the baseball practice into an early-morning nightmare. Police said a total of five people were shot, two critically. Standing at second base, Mr. Scalise was struck, in the hip, according to witnesses, and collapsed as the shots rang out, one after another, from behind a chain-link fence near the third-base dugout. Witnesses said Mr. Scalise, of Louisiana, "army crawled" his way toward taller grass as the shooting continued. Alternative source: NBC News, CNN, BBC, NPR, WashingtonPost, and WSJ.
Update: 06/14 15:40 GMT: In remarks at the White House, President Trump said the Alexandria shooting suspect has died from injuries.
Update: 06/14 15:40 GMT: In remarks at the White House, President Trump said the Alexandria shooting suspect has died from injuries.
Thoughts and prayers out to the victims and their families. Speedy recovery for the injured.
Gun Free Zones work!
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Fine example of "progressive values" here. Excellent work friend. Keep up the good work, and Democrat/Progressives will continue to lose!
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
That's a good point. Anybody who's planning to commit mass murder will surely stop when he finds out gun ownership is illegal.
Proud neuron in the Slashdot hivemind since 2002.
First the Portland stabber... then Reality Winner, now this shooter... what is it with all of these Bernie Sanders supporters going off the rails? http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/06/james-t-hodgkinson-identified-as-shooter-of-gop-lawmakers.html
What's that? You mean we should wait for all the facts to come in before making blanket judgments? Good idea. Shame that's not what we've been seeing from plenty looking to push for more gun control.
We need to ban cars and trucks instead, a lot more people die in car accidents.
#DeleteFacebook
Now we maybe we'll be get some decent gun control legislation passed.
No good deed goes unpunished.
“My adrenaline is raging,” he told CNN. “It’s not easy to take when you see people around you being shot and you don’t have a weapon yourself.”
Clearly the only sane solution is to allow only Conservative Republicans own guns.
>50-100 shots
>only hit 5 people
more than likely.
Yeah, because clearly the at-least guaranteed multiple life sentences in prison wasn't a good deterrent to unloading multiple magazines worth of ammunition at duly-elected members of Congress, so let's tack on a 6-month felony weapons charge to it. That will make all the difference!
Guess what save his life.
AFAWK... this was not a gun free zone.
If it remains that way, this would be only the second mass shooting with more than 3 casualties to occur in a non-gun free zone in the last 30 years.
While it's not legal to conceal a rifle in Virginia, it is legal to carry a concealed pistol (with permit).
What we do know though... is that a couple of good guys with a gun, stopped a bad guy with a gun.
This is getting out of hand... WAY out of hand. The specific targeting of the right needs to end. I'm not talking about the nut jobs with guns, but those who engage in irresponsible verbal targeting that encourage the nut jobs with guns and provide them targeting.
Come on folks, all this hateful rhetoric needs to come to a full and final stop. Those on the other side of the isle are NOT (in general) trying to do harm to others or the country and it's way past time we stop trying to claim they are. Attach the principles, argue about what the country should do, discuss the issues, but leave the personal attacks and outlandish claims alone.
This shooting illustrates just one of the reasons why this is important..
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
Soap box, ballot box, ammo box. There's nothing happening in the USA right now that can't be fixed by judicious use of the second after some campaigning with the first.
I am curious as to the shooter's personal politics and motivations. Hopefully they're more nuanced than "He's just nuts", because random violence is less predictable and thus less preventable and more frightening than predictable violence.
How so?
Do you actually believe that the guy who shot them would care about gun laws when they're willing to attempt murder? Or are you upset that they used their 2nd Amendment right to shoot back and defend themselves? I mean, you did notice that the attacker was shot, right?
A law can't make guns vanish. You would be more likely to have disarmed the victims than the attacker.
Go back to FauxNoise. There's no place for that here.
I don't understand baseball rules, but he caught the bullet, and since no one can't take the bullet from him (if lodged in hip) he won the point?
He'll have to come to the field again and crawl the bases though, he has infinite time to do that but the sooner he does the sooner the point will be counted.
Early reports say he first walked up to there, unarmed asking "Hey, are these republicans or democrats?"...
Apparently once he found out they were republicans, he came back armed and shooting.
What's the deal with this? It seems as if there is a Left Leaning Fascist group growing out there...using all methods including violence to shut down and shout down anyone that isn't in perfect lockstep with their groupthink of what the world has to be.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
We could just cut out the middleman and declare murder illegal. I'm shocked it hasn't been suggested before now actually.
Indeed. Having to own this is sad, but yes he was a hate filled Bernie Supporter. Now that I have apologized for that, will the GOP all of the violent acts committed by their party?
Place something witty here
Horrible troll. 0/10.
Go back to Reddit. You aren't wanted here.
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
Why is it awkward? Presumably, he knows the risks of both positions (liberal vs conservative gun ownership laws), and has chosen the position he feels is the best trade-off. One of the risks of his choice is that there are more guns around that people could shoot him with.
This is what you get when you engage in hate campaigns. Is it what you wanted? If not, then find something to believe in besides hating people. Find something to talk about besides how much you hate [whomever] and how much your hate is justified because [reasons].
Why is that awkward?
Like many, he supports the right of the people to keep and bear arms.
Like many, he does not support the right of your random person to go out and shoot people they don't like.
Supporting the first, does not mean support of the second.
Which one of those confuses you?
Social media posts from the shooter confirms he was a leftist trump hater.
Exactly. A Left-Wing wacko purposely hunts down Republicans and the answer is "abolish guns."
I used to decry the statement "leftism is a mental disorder" but you know what? Maybe there is something there.
A person hunts down people who disagrees with (whether it's Republicans or Democrats, Christians or Muslims, Gays or Straights, Men or Women) your outrage ought to be at the person and those who promote such cause (Trump being killed and beheaded) as opposed to the availability of an inanimate object.
If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
Sadly, there's a contingent of people that are absolutely certain that every single white male in America is a Nazi, along with white females (who have been declared the enemy of feminism) and a lot of others of other races simply for not supporting their intersectional identity politics (or simply being on the wrong side of the line whenever a new "intersection" is drawn. I hear that there's a movement to declare that married gay people are "privileged" and therefore the enemy now too).
Having decided that these people are Nazis, they think they're entitled to attack and/or kill them because gold tassels on the flag means world war 2 never ended or some bullshit like that.
"Libtard"? Hey kid, do your parents know you're on the Internet?
I don't respond to AC's.
Somehow, the US has more mass shootings than any other country on the planet. I'm sure it's just a coincidence.
I don't respond to AC's.
It's too bad they weren't carrying their guns while playing baseball. Then the gun-man would have only gotten 25-50 shots off and wounded 2-3.
This has the same thing to do with the Oregon train stabber and Reality Winner... all Sanders supporters.
Fortunately... unfortunately... irregardless... they are called Anti-fa, which is a separate group. And for claiming to be anti-fascist, they are remarkably fascists. The black hood & mask are the new brown shirt or white robe.
Welcome to how we feel after having to be afraid of nutty Jesus-y shooters for the past decades. Feels great, huh?
I don't respond to AC's.
b/c that would be "taking advantage of a tragedy" and is "disrespectful" to the victims and their families. Can't that kind of talk wait?
Of course, after a terror attack committed by Jihadis, it's perfectly appropriate to talk and tweet 24x7 nonstop about this proving the need for immigration bans and so forth.
What's the deal with this?
The deal is that people with mental issues, sociopaths, and old-fashioned assholes exist in nearly every group regardless of political position. Many of them only get influence by being very loud. Others are only have influence because they make for easy strawmen for lazy members of an opposing group, so they get held up as an example despite not being representative at all.
There are nut cases and victims on both ends but it seems that they only get motivated to kill when "the other side" is in power.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
I support Gun Control for those who advocate for it. Anyone who registers to vote as a Democrat may not own a gun. That will take care of the problem in the urban areas, right? And it will also keep guns out of the hands of the tolerant, inclusive, loving left who feel the need to shoot up congressmen.
The rest of us will be able to peacefully enjoy responsible gun ownership.
What violent acts by the GOP in any form of recent history?
Even the Tea Party high levels of activity, were quite peaceful at rallies....
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Look at the result of the hatred spread by of the lefty media.
Are you posting from Bizzarro world? Because it ain't the lefty media spreading the hatred, Sparky.
That's a great prepared talking point.
It's not really true considering Paris has has bigger mass shootings in the last 2 years than have ever happened in the U.S. but go ahead and repost what you were told to write.
The bigger issue here is: Every single mass shooting with a high death toll in U.S. history has exactly one thing in common: It happened in a liberal-enforced "gun free zone".
What happened today is tragic, but the fact that there isn't a huge body count piling up has nothing to do with a feel-good-but-do-nothing gun control law and everything to do with the fact that the baseball diamond was not a gun free zone.
AntiFA: An abbreviation for Anti First Amendment.
> .using all methods including violence
and downvotes.
45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
"Anybody who's planning to commit mass murder will surely stop when he finds out gun ownership is illegal."
Murder is illegal. Though it does not stop all murders. By your argument, we should make it perfectly legal. After all, murders are still happening at an alarming rate. If making murder illegal is not stopping murders, then what is the point?
In any form of recent years...what incidents are you speaking of?!?!
I don't know of any people going out trying to kill a mass of people in the name of Christ...please, enumerate them.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
The shooter hasn't even been identified yet, jackass.
Mr. Hu is not a ninja.
It won't be awkward for him, I'm sure. People don't understand what hypocrisy is any more, by and large.
I don't respond to AC's.
He learned it from the President.
I don't respond to AC's.
You need more than a few of these to start a major riot though. So they are no longer an "insignificant but vocal minority" - they are a large, influential group.
45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
Not an "fine example" at all and niether side needs yours or his trolling.
We don't know that this was a libtard. I would not be surprised if it was a tea-tard that is angry that the Republicans are not extreme enough.
Own it.
Clearly, antifa tactics are moving to a new level.
But For the sake of the environment, Hodgkinson did use steel ammunition, rather than lead.
then why is it anytime legislation is proposed that help prevent guns getting into the hands of people who would do something like this, specifically waiting periods to do background checks, the Congressmembers on the NRA payroll block it?
It's not ironic at all. You're just an idiot. The left isn't a monolithic entity with 1 platform and 1 opinion. And furthermore, if you bothered to read the article (I know it's difficult for people like you, but perhaps try next time) the motivation of the gunman is unknown right now, so you're just assuming he's left wing only because Steve Scalise is a Republican. For all you know he's just a lunatic who hates the government. You're more interested in turning this tragic event into a cheer-leading event for your favorite team than understanding what really happened.
There's plenty of sources linked that are part of what you'd probably consider "the lefty media" and none of them are praising the attack.
But go ahead and treat everyone who has a different opinion than you as if they support these deranged, murderous criminals. I'm sure that's what we really need.
Early reports are wrong. It was not the shooter who asked if the players were Republican or Democrats.
Mr. Hu is not a ninja.
...irregardless...
FTFY.
The thing is...this isn't just an isolated nut job here and there acting alone. Just look at the large, violent mobs in past year or so at college universities trying to extinguish any speakers or thoughts that are not in lockstep with their hive mind....mobs of people beating people, destroying property, shouting down any opinions differing from theirs and suppression anyone they see as different.
You saw this for days in the streets after Trump won...
Peaceful protest is one thing, I'm all for it..but this is mob rule violence and destruction trying to intimidate and suppress thought.
It sounds vaguely familiar to groups doing the same things just before WW2.
It just now is left instead of right, and the uniforms have changed.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
It's really terrible when so many people responsible for degrading the country in various ways survive so many gun shots. Oh well crazy guy with a gun, you may not have won this time, but surely some other lunatic will unload on some people who deserve it for once.
Be surprised, fuckwit. He campaigned for Sanders in Iowa and Illinois.
Yes, the SC shooting was by a leftist LGBT rights supporting leftwing communist ofcourse. Was your head in sand all these years or are you trying to somehow make people forget all the other shootings that have happened already in the US.
Only if every auto accident is an argument to ban automobiles...
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
t's not really true considering Paris has has bigger mass shootings in the last 2 years than have ever happened in the U.S.
That's a lie.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Every single mass shooting with a high death toll in U.S. history has exactly one thing in common: It happened in a liberal-enforced "gun free zone".
Also a lie.
Every single mass shooting with a high death toll in U.S. history has exactly one thing in common: It happened in a liberal-enforced "gun free zone".
Stop lying, asshole.
I don't respond to AC's.
You're right! We finally figured it out! This isolated incident proves once and for all that liberals are depraved, violent lunatics intent on gunning down those that disagree with them!
I'm sure you were just as bothered by conservative media's (and Trump's) scare mongering tactics about immigrants and foreigners when you read about the stabbings in Oregon, or the shooting of two Indian engineers in Kansas. Where are the Christian values peace, loving one's neighbors, and of turning the other cheek righties claim to stand for? Ironic, isn't it?
A highly partisan, divided country is a recipe for those on the fringes to start acting violently. But it doesn't help to play sides and mischaracterize everyone you have some political beef with. This needs to stop, from both the left and right, and especially in the wake of such a tragedy.
Our elected members of government were just flippin' shot at! Please don't use this as an excuse to spread hate or to score political points.
Doctors
What we do know though... is that a couple of good guys with a gun, stopped a bad guy with a gun.
No, police stopped a bad guy with a gun. There's a difference. If there stronger gun control, the bad guy might not have had a gun but those police still would have. Of course, it will be spun exactly as you did in order to fight gun control. And I say this as a person who owns multiple firearms, including one that would be classified as an "assault weapon". We do need more gun control, even if it is nothing more than a mandatory, government funded and provided class before you can get a permit that covers gun safety, gun laws, and basic handling/marksmanship.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
False equivalence. Mere existence or possession of a thing such as this does not in and of itself cause harm to others. In fact, the right to harmlessly possess items is a human right. Murder is the ultimate infringement of another's rights.
I know you are being sarcastic. But according to what I've read, firearm murders by Democrats outnumber those from Republicans 2 to 1.
Either way, the guy was a Bernie Sanders supporter. I wonder what he'd have done had he know that it was DNC shenanigans that kept Bernie from getting the nomination - and probably the presidency. (re: Wikileaks)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charleston_church_shooting
Definitely a righty.
From the outside looking in, it appears they have the most overt hatred/racism too. Their electing a leader that thrives on division, and fostering hatred isn't helping heal that country, contrary to his rhetoric.
What violent acts by the GOP in any form of recent history?
Even the Tea Party high levels of activity, were quite peaceful at rallies....
I seem to remember a recently elected Congressman from the Midwest pleading guilty to bodyslamming a reporter. Or by "recent" do you mean only within the last few days?
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
That's a good point. Anybody who's planning to commit mass murder will surely stop when he finds out gun ownership is illegal.
Mass murder is harder without ready access to firearms. You have to steal a truck and plow it into a vulnerable crowd or turn a pressure cooker into improvised bomb and plant it in a crowded place. This requires some degree of planning, eliminating impulsive 'going postal' actions.
It just now is left instead of right, and the uniforms have changed.
Ah, but which one is more fashionable? I mean, look at the Nazis, best looking uniforms ever, they were definitely gay.
oh lost little sheep who thinks in a tweet, lost in hatred you burn the sacred. may pepe have mercy on you for the kek.
When I read and post on these forums, I am disparaged for being conservative. I am called ignorant, racist, and violent...because I disagree with the Bay Area take on tax policy and the way to achieve human dignity. But yet again, here we are with yet another news story where someone from the left is using violence to silence others.
At some point, don't you guys have to look in the mirror and notice there is something wrong with you? ALL these shootings, all violent political protest are coming from your ideology. How quickly you forget shootings like Senator Gabby Giffords came from a leftist. You claim tolerance, but in actuality practice none. Do you not think that those "cute" photos showing the beheading of Trump have an effect on society? Do you not see how all this talk of people who disagree with you as evil, inhuman, and beneath contempt doesn't translate to this?
In these forums, the stench of this ignorance runs rampant. If you post any hate few spew about the president, a republican, or a conservative, it will be modded up. The more dehumanizing, the higher the mod. None of these posts are ever backed with links, or logical arguments. It is enough to hate.
And when the hate is expressed in the inevitable outcome of murder, you will pretend you had nothing to do with it. Instead of preaching calm or making reasoned arguments, you will conveniently forget how you fed the hate machine. The blood of these killings in partly on your hands, and my guess is that most of you are too chicken shit to look in the mirror and ask why is my so called ideology of peace and tolerance producing so much violence?
"Liberalism is a very noble idea, currently controlled by some very bad people. Be sure you do not get the two confused.
Places like Chicago which already have extreme restrictive gun laws account for a majority of gun murders in the US. A vast majority of America is actually quite safe and the numbers are like any other developed country if you remove Liberal controlled large cities with restrictive gun laws.
Funny how that works.
It just now is left instead of right, and the uniforms have changed.
Right, the National Socialist Worker's Party that instituted free education, free healthcare, massive public works projects, nationalized entire industries, that was totally right-wing. All you have to do is take Bernie Sanders' screeds and replace "the 1%" with "the Jews" and he sounds just like Hitler. It's still the same shit: you've got stuff, we want it, and we're going to bust your heads open in the street to get it.
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
He learned it from the El Presidente.
FTFY.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
but we push for an $500M+ underground gov only baseball field with lot's of armed guards
Washington Post is leading the wacko conspiracy theorists on their website. Note the masthead "Democracy Dies in Darkness"
Contact their advertisers and suggest they move their advertising to another news organisation with a more reasonable and realistic outlook.
Huh - well, if we outlaw cars, we can put an end to car accidents. You might be on to something here! This is revolutionary!
Proud neuron in the Slashdot hivemind since 2002.
"disgruntled person on the left"
Suddenly the leftist weenies are dangerous?
Whatever happened to guys like Breitbart warning the left that "we have all the guns & are willing to use them"
"once again resorting to violence" - like Dylann Roof? that disgruntled person on the left?
Peaceful protest is one thing, I'm all for it..but this is mob rule violence and destruction trying to intimidate and suppress thought.
Is it though? Do you have any links for this because the source matters. It's not uncommon for news outlets with a particular... viewpoint... deliberately focus on some minority to discredit the rest. Sometimes it's for their own nefarious purpose... sometimes it's just because that's a more interesting story than "vast majority of protesters act peaceably".
It sounds vaguely familiar to groups doing the same things just before WW2.
It just now is left instead of right, and the uniforms have changed.
Well that escalated quickly.
Amen.
If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
Frazier Glenn Miller Jr.
Robert Lewis Dear
Anders Behring Breivik
Scott Roeder
Wade Michael Page
Just a few names, and hardly exhaustive, I didn't list all of the people who have committed violence against mosques, synagogues and other places in the name of Christ.
Tell me this guy doesn't throw his hat in with the conservatives.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/portland-train-stabbing-suspect-thats-what-liberalism-gets-you-docs/
Well, just outlaw trucks and pressure cookers. Problem solved!
Proud neuron in the Slashdot hivemind since 2002.
Last week in London, a person much like yourself, decided he can't tolerate any difference of opinion. He drove a car into a crowd of people killing several. Like you, he could not tolerate someone having a difference of opinion, and advocated violence against those who disagree.
The thing is, my stupid friend, is that he did not need a gun to silence others. The problem is not guns, but terrible people like yourself who think it is cool, or funny, or righteous to murder those with different opinions.
"Liberalism is a very noble idea, currently controlled by some very bad people. Be sure you do not get the two confused.
Wars and guns for everyone.. even retards.
I know you are being sarcastic. But according to what I've read, firearm murders by Democrats outnumber those from Republicans 2 to 1.
What do you read? Seriously - do you have a source for that? Preferably not Alex Jones or Breitbart...
Stephan
Almost every place in the world has seen gun violence go down in the last 20-30 years. Almost... the USA is the exception as usual (also exceptional in its ass-poor medical coverage and ass-idiot lack of common education as in "the earth is 6k years old, and evolution is 'just a theory', and we do not believe in global warming"). Not the land of the free but the LAND OF THE STUPID.
...die by the sword.
Because it ain't the lefty media spreading the hatred, Sparky.
Yeah, it is...
http://www.newsweek.com/homegr...
https://www.adl.org/news/press...
You are welcome on my lawn.
Hit by perpetrator... Too soon?
I bet he was shooting it sideways like in the movies.
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
Early reports say he first walked up to there, unarmed asking "Hey, are these republicans or democrats?"...
That quote is waay to politically charged to go uncited. So here it is: Rep. Ron DeSantis said he was asked, “Are those Republicans or Democrats out there practicing?”
then why is it anytime legislation is proposed that help prevent guns getting into the hands of people who would do something like this, specifically waiting periods to do background checks, the Congressmembers on the NRA payroll block it?
Because it's a lie.
If you buy a gun from a dealer, there is always a background check. At a store, a gun show, anywhere.
"Universal Background Check" means checks on private transfers. To enforce it requires registration. And that's what we oppose. Democrats talk about the "Gunshow Loophole" like there's some kind of free-for-all at shows, which is an outright lie. They want registration.
By definition, this is not a mass shooting. A mass shooting, by government definition, is 4 or more killed. The liberal media likes to use this term incite hysteria.
I am sure Iraq, Afghanistan, or any other host of unstable countries of a particular religion have more mass shootings then we do. Convenient how the liberal media overlooks this. And don't forget the like for suicide bombers and car bombs too.
Early reports saying the shooter asked if the players were Republican or Democrat WERE wrong. But they were also incomplete. The shooter has a facebook full of Bernie support, and was politically active and educated- he knew they were Republicans without asking, obviously, as he had arrived in town to shoot Republicans.
They learned from the best. The extremely hard right faction of the Right has been forming militias, engaging in taking over federal buildings, or in some cases mass shootings and bombings for the better part of 2 decades. A large number of the home-grown terrorist groups are right-wing in their ideology. They settle down once an R is in the WH and come back with vigor once a D gets in there.
So as a non-american this is wildly unimportant to me. In the past 30 days there have been far more spectacular acts of terrorism that have garnered no attention from slashdot. This post is a long way from the core principles of slashdot.
Gun control or even outright banning guns still won't solve the problem. Criminals have always had easier access to guns than law abiding folk.
He was also white, male, over 60, and plenty of other things. Probably a Christian too based purely on the significant probability that is true. So considering I'm a white male liberal, in your eyes I need to own that white people, males, and liberals are capable of hateful violence. Sure, I can own that. Anything else?
-- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
You, sir, actually made my lips twitch, briefly, while wading through the morass of shit from the extreme sides of the aisle above (both of them). I momentarily regretted not having mod points. Then my customary level of doom, despair, and depression reasserted itself leaving me ready to close the browser window and return to normal life outside of the /. polirantfest, one where indeed it would be simply lovely to declare murder illegal and decriminalize suicide.
Even when the experts all agree, they may well be mistaken. --- Bertrand Russell.
I have no problem with the LGBTQ community's existence, but suggesting the right-wing conservative Republicans' belief that marriage rights shouldn't extend to couples of the same gender is equivalent to or justifies murder? That's absolute nonsense.
The fact is, I'm a Libertarian, so don't identify as part of either of the 2 major parties. But I have plenty of friends who belong to the Republican party, and even my wife is active in the party at the local level. Pretty much NONE of those people I've met count themselves among the ones who want to take away LGBTQ rights. There are some of us who take issue with the recent bathroom controversy -- but hey, I take issue with it myself! The problem there is, you're trying to mess with a real basic status quo that was NEVER perceived as a real issue for anybody throughout all of history, but is suddenly a big deal. I do have a problem with my kid's school deciding, for example, that women can use the men's restroom at will, or vice-versa, without the faculty even being allowed to so much as mention or question it. If you want to go to THAT length, you may as well handle it the right way - making each bathroom unisex and only allowing one person in each one at a time. But why didn't we do that from the start? Because, efficiency! It made good financial sense to let a number of people use stalls at once, in one common restroom, with the (presumably) most basic of stipulations that only the same gender could use a particular one.
Maybe Bernie supporters will arm themselves to protect themselves from people like you
Definitely a Democrat.
Why?
1. Dylan Roof liked to burn the American flag.
2. Was a skinhead, tied to KKK group. KKK founded by Democrats to destroy Republican reconstruction efforts in the south. KKK = Democrats.
3. Dylan Roof prop of choice was Confederate flag. History lesson: Confederate flag = Democrats. Northern states (the Union) led by Republicans.
Maybe it was just another person with a mental health problem and access to firearms? Or are politics the only cause of mass shootings these days?
Log in or piss off.
look into berkeley riots for one
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
We do not need better gun control, unless you define gun control as proper implementation of the laws which currently exist.
The general solution that seems to come up after every shooting incident is "let's make another law".
I'm guessing that once the dust settles on this, this guy probably wasn't legally allowed to own the weapon.
I personally would love the idea of needing to show proof of a mandated class to own a weapon, provided they're free/cheap and easily available.
Check the Chicago police blotter.
We need to ban cars and trucks instead, a lot more people die in car accidents.
If they weren't such an essential part of modern life, we'd probably consider doing so. Fortunately, the folks working on self-driving vehicles will - eventually - result in safer roads.
There are risks in everything. Back in the day, the right of a militia to bear arms had a benefit. These days that's no longer the case, so I fail to see any benefit to society of having civilians with guns.
I get that there's the
- "but, the bad guys have guns too",
- "but, grandpa taught me how. It's my heritage",
- "but, I feel less powerless when I fire a gun"
arguments, but IMO none of these should prevent us moving in the direction of gun control.
He's generally right: they often occur in "gun free zones". Perhaps not all, but the majority.
Own THAT!!!
News reports as I write, on CNN, FOX, and MSNBC, are quoting two congressmen saying both are sure the person they spoke to and asked whether democrats or republicans were playing, is the person whose photo is appearing on the news broadcasts. How are the early reports wrong?
Well, here's a couple in the past decade:
https://prochoice.org/educatio...
Not saying that this nutcase/domestic terrorist should be excused because of what previous nutcase/domestic terrorists have done.
I don't know of any people going out trying to kill a mass of people in the name of Christ...please, enumerate them.
For a start.... And rather recently this event.
Stephan
Guns work.
FTFY.
That won't be possible. Because they will be killed by someone concealed carrying before it can become "mass".
Anti-gun folks always, ALWAYS, forget that given the chance many second amendment advocates would carry guns for their (and their fellow citizens) protection around with them all the time.... And it DOES make a huge difference in being able to defend against an attack.
Gun control or even outright banning guns still won't solve the problem. Criminals have always had easier access to guns than law abiding folk.
Of course it won't completely solve the problem. But reasonable gun control would solve enough of the problem to be worth it. My suggestion would reduce firearm accidents, reduce availability of firearms to criminals (by teaching proper storage) and provide a reasonable but not onerous barrier to entry for firearm possession. Combine that with proper and adequate mental health treatment and diagnosis in this country and a lot of shootings go away. But the NRA has made sure that it is practically impossible to start and discussion on reasonable gun control because they inevitably take any mention of gun control to the extreme "they want to take away all our guns" argument.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
Jared Laughner shot a democratic congresswoman in the face. There have been numerous shootings and bombings at abortion clinics, at least 5 major incidents. Some of these are attributed to the Army of God, which also bombed some gay night clubs. The bombing of the 1996 Atlanta Olympics was carried out by Eric Rudolph who wanted to fight against abortion and the "homosexual agenda." There's the Phineas Priesthood responsible for plotting and sometimes succeeding in blowing up gay night clubs, FBI buildings, abortion clinics, etc. Let's not forget the unabomber's reign of terror. Let's not forget the Oklahoma City bombing. Or the Charleston Church shooting. Or the Sihk temple shooting.
Of course I understand that a few nutcases with right leaning ideology doesn't mean all of those with right leaning ideology are unable to differentiate right from wrong. Surely you know that not everybody on the left is about to start taking pot shots at those on the right, don't you?
Well a mass murderer with a knife is a lot less scary than one with a gun. Worst case you can run away across the baseball field.
Please cite the US Mass shooting with more than 130 dead. You can't, the 49 at the club in Orlando a year ago is the US record.
The GP said mass shooting not terrorist attacks. Thanks to 9/11 nobody comes close to the US, but this is mass shooting events, terrorist or otherwise.
Otherwise you are right, prior to today there have been two mass shootings in the US in the last 50 years that were not in gun-free zones. This is the third.
I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
Well, just outlaw trucks and pressure cookers. Problem solved!
NO, stop the strawmen... Banning something will hinder society to some degree if the reason to ban it is not it's primary function (e.g encryption, transportation, paper, pressure cookers). A gun's primary purpose is to kill, thus banning it will only hinder killing people.
Q1: Do we ever really want an individual citizen to have the power to very easily kill many people arbitrarily without trial? Unless you are living in the world of mad max then this is something you should be moving away from for any forward thinking society.
Q2: does it work? in the UK it's extremely difficult to get guns, result: murderous people have to resort to knives and cars and improvised weapons... this is much better than being able to pick up a semiauto and pepper hundreds of people with bullets at the drop of a hat.
This is not a binary issue. The only people trying to blame this on Democrats are the Republicans.
This is the whole problem with the not so United States of America. If someone does not accept your view, they are your enemy. Back to the days of "If you aren't with us, you're against us."
Stop trying to make everything an us vs. them issue. Bullets don't have political affiliations anymore than they have wealth affiliations. Instead of attacking everyone else, verbally or physically, try listening and understanding.
This last election cycle did more to divide the US than pretty much any time since the not so Civil War. Both Democrats and Republicans acted badly and are equally to blame.
Where is the leadership from anyone that will unite?
There's antifa, but they're jokes and even us left-leaning progressives think they should shut the fuck up and stay at home and OD on heroin.
Here's the difference: I can go to an alt-right "militia" meeting. they're plentiful. I can join the skins and beat up naggers and messicans (where the cops are lax or look the other way), I can go to gun shows that seem to overwhelmingly support right-wing causes, get a card, in fact.
For "left leaning fascists?" I mean, other than maker fairs, book clubs, and the like, there's really nothing comparable. Most gun owning liberals keep an extremely low profile, we don't tend to run around shooting our mouths (or guns) off, or threatening to kill people. All of which I hear, as a Southerner, on a goddamned daily basis when it came to Obama and "goddamned libs, one day we're gonna hunt them down."
So, try again, faggot. Shut the fuck up.
I do have a problem with my kid's school deciding, for example, that women can use the men's restroom at will, or vice-versa
They are deciding that men can use the men's restroom, even if they happen to have been born with a body that looks roughly female at first glance.
Anyone who is likely to feel the need to duck into a bathroom 'at will' for perverted reasons, is going to do so regardless of whether they can try to use a law to explain their actions, and such a defence would likely fail at trial anyhow.
It doesn't take a truck to ram into a crowd at speed. The surprising thing is how seldom this is used. Mass murder is also easier with explosives which can be manufactured at home, pressure cookers are one method, with a little planning a Ryder rental truck was used to kill 168 people 22 years ago. Far more effective than any firearm attack.
I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
Because it was totally the free education, free healthcare, massive public works projects, and nationalized entire industries that people complain about when they complain about the Nazis, not the mass-murder, facism, and persecution of minorities.
It's a shame that there weren't more shooters, and that they weren't going after EVERY congresscritter, "Democrat" or "Republican". They, along with the corrupt Presidential administration, all need to be taken out back and shot. I'd even suggest including the Clinton campaign's folks for good measure. Then the nation needs to split into at least 2-3 smaller independent nations. That way the Christian theocrats can have their version of Sharia Law, the Libertarians can have their minimal-government free-fire zone, and the rest of us can try to move forward.
But no, since the "GOP" was the target, we're stuck with the same bitter divisiveness we've been seeing for the last few Presidential administrations.
Face it, our grand experiment with representative democracy is dead. It failed.
Go on, citizen, stamp the vote card. R or D, your choice.
The shooter didn't vocalize his complaints, so we resort to "left-wing wacko". What if he wasn't? Would we have the same reaction if he was an average guy that thought he had no other options?
The interesting part is its typically Republicans that are pro-2nd Amendment. Now they have been hit (no pun intended) closer to home. I guess we will see if the gun control tune of Republicans moves left a bit.
Yeah, if that's what this is then it's 1-0 for us. Keep up that rate of "revolution" and the problem will be gone all on its own.
I can't wait for the bullshit liberals will use to spin this asshole liberal wanker trying to assassinate Republicans. And yes, it's an assassination attempt, brought on by this inflammatory, hateful, spiteful, whiny ass liberal rhetoric. Somehow, this will all be Trump's fault. As if him winning caused the downfall of all America. It's this kind of benighted, morally bankrupt, anti-patriotism we've come to see in Democrats. They are nothing but small-minded, uneducated, selfish children who probably should have been aborted trying to be 'activists' yet not knowing how to tie their shoes.
Mark my words, this will continue to happen UNTIL a Republican is assassinated, then the sane part of America will rise up and end the threat forever. I don't think these morons understand that the tolerance level of the normal people in America is very quickly reaching the boiling point with these psychotic psuedo-terrorists.
Pax Vobiscum
And then he tried to shoot himself to finish it off, but missed.
But according to what I've read, firearm murders by Democrats outnumber those from Republicans 2 to 1.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. A quick google leads me to calculations based on the race of murderers and statistical racial party affiliation, this seems dubious at best. I seriously doubt there are reliable statistics of party affiliation among murderers (unless possibly if the murder is hate crime related).
2. Was a skinhead, tied to KKK group. KKK founded by Democrats to destroy Republican reconstruction efforts in the south. KKK = Democrats. 3. Dylan Roof prop of choice was Confederate flag. History lesson: Confederate flag = Democrats. Northern states (the Union) led by Republicans.
Mid 1800s Democrats=modern day Republicans in terms of political leanings. Your argument is disingenuous at best.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
By definition, this is not a mass shooting. A mass shooting, by government definition, is 4 or more killed.
So if the people shot end up dying from the wounds then it is a mass shooting, but if they survive it's not?
That sounds a flakey definition. Surely a mass shooting should be based on how many people get hit, not how many people get killed.
If 100 people get shot but only one died it wouldn't be a mass shooting by that definition.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
The shooter had been by the time I posted, I'm sorry that you don't keep up with the new, jackass.
http://time.com/4818165/steve-scalise-shooting-suspect-james-hodgkinson/
http://www.inquisitr.com/4291689/james-t-hodgkinson-facebook-twitter-photos-virginia-shooter-has-bernie-sanders-facebook-profile-pictures/
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/james-t-hodgkinson-illinois-man-identified-suspected-gunman-virginia-shooting-n772271
Pretty sure that will turn out as well as someone robbing a doughnut shop.
It's not what people complain about. It's whether his policies were left or right wing.
Firearms saved his life. Your god given right that nobody on this earth can take away.
Well, just outlaw trucks and pressure cookers. Problem solved!
Guns are much more efficient killing machines. Trucks require a license to be able to rent, and can't easily be reused. Chances of getting away close to 0. With a gun, you can shoot from a distance and the potential to escape is there.
Pressure cookers require some know-how and some sort of explosive device within them. There haven't been many pressure-cooker attacks because the average Joe on the street can't pull it off.
Guns are a much more cowardly way to pull off an attack. Any joker can pick one up cheap. Doesn't require any knowhow. Extremely low chance of accidentally detonating it on yourself setting it up. Can attack from a distance.
Driving a truck into a crowd or mixing explosives up require a small modicum of nerves. Shooting someone from a distance is an easy cowardly way to kill people.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
When do you learn English, little victim of little education?
when did police stop being people??
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
Maybe being shot will convince these retards that they need to take action! Since liberals hate guns and the shooter was a liberal - how about a law that bans liberals (and crazy people, but I repeat myself) from shooting guns? Everybody - liberal and conservative - should be happy that way.
You mean like the guy who shot Gabby Giffords? Or the young southern 'states rights' conservative who killed 8 people including a black Democratic Senator at a prayer meeting in a church?
Yea, real 'leftism mental disorder'. Or all the people that get killed or assaulted by cuckservatives just for being a different skin color. Or maybe they get killed by crazy white nazis just because they stood up for someone on the bus. A veteran at that!
LOL, you need some serious self-reflection.
Really? Are you still doing that?
Did you get your hopes up momentarily only to be disappointed yet again? I would really like to know what compels some people to get all excited when news breaks of a shooting - hoping that maybe this time it will be the tea party. You've only been wrong for like 20 consecutive incidents.
If it ever happens, will it make you happy? Maybe next time will be your lucky break. Keep your hopes up.
no its not, see truck attacks in NYC and europe
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
Except that in the South Republicans and Democrats literally switched parties.
In the 19th Century, the Democrats were all about States Rights and Jesus and the KKK and the Republicans were carpetbagging scum come down from Yankee-land to stir things up with the colored folk and their high-and-mighty Washington Rule.
In the 21sh Century, it's the Republicans who want States Rights and Christian Sharia and to keep the brown people in their place and the Democrats who want Washington Rule.
Weasel.
I know you are being sarcastic. But according to what I've read, firearm murders by Democrats outnumber those from Republicans 2 to 1.
What do you read? Seriously - do you have a source for that? Preferably not Alex Jones or Breitbart...
I suspect it's probably true. Correlation not causation. I'm sure there is a race/economic factor involved. The poor have higher gun crime numbers. The poor are much likely to vote democrat.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
n/t
I personally would love the idea of needing to show proof of a mandated class to own a weapon, provided they're free/cheap and easily available.
Ideal would be a class that provides the basic instruction I outlined above, along with a yearly recurrent training that focuses primarily on anger management and deescalation techniques, along with a refresher on firearm safety and laws, ending with a basic demonstration of firearm maintenance (disassembly/cleaning) marksmanship. All provided for free through local or state law enforcement agencies and funded by the federal goverment (and really groups like the NRA should contribute funding as well, since their whole reason for being was nominally about promoting safe gun ownership-have them put their money where their mouth is).
You can even argue that this limitation is supported by the 2nd Amendment in the phrase "well regulated militia", as historically militia would always gather occasionally to drill/practice (although let's be honest, they probably really just marched around on the town square for an hour or 2, popped off a couple shots at a barrel or bale of hay, then spent the rest of the afternoon down at the local tavern).
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
Your wait was short. The shooter is already a hero to some... To the hate-filled enemies of the Republic — perfectly willing to kill the ideological opponents after losing in debates and elections.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
"I don't know of any people going out trying to kill a mass of people in the name of Christ...please, enumerate them."
Have you had your head up your ass the last 30+ years? You might want to look at all the Christian hate groups that reside in America (and btw, 'Christian' Americans are responsible for most terror attacks in the United States since I was born in 1982.)
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
Thoughts and Prayers to the congressman and his family and to the other victims of the shooter. Wish all a speedy recovery from this sad and senseless tragedy. But does it seem a bit ironic that its very very likely that the congressman, his ball team, and friends at the NRA have vigorously supported the shooters right to own as many guns as he wanted?
Do you mean Jared Loughner, the extreme left-leaning nutcast that shot a Republican in the face, you mean? Jesus, could you be any more fucking wrong right off the bat? Fucking idiot.
Perhaps it was confirmed by a tweet from orange baboon.
Exactly. A Left-Wing wacko purposely hunts down Republicans and the answer is "abolish guns."
I used to decry the statement "leftism is a mental disorder" but you know what? Maybe there is something there.
Simple common-sense measure could have prevented this shooting. Guess who decided not only to block such measures but pull the feed from a protest about them being blocked?
A person hunts down people who disagrees with (whether it's Republicans or Democrats, Christians or Muslims, Gays or Straights, Men or Women) your outrage ought to be at the person and those who promote such cause (Trump being killed and beheaded) as opposed to the availability of an inanimate object.
I'm not outraged because this is something I predicted would happen due to a lack of proper government representation combined with near-zero restrictions on firearm sales. Both need to be fixed, one is just kicking the can down the road.
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
Yes he has dumb fuck. He literally provided a link you moron.
*Now* that Republicans are getting shot, will we finally get some gun laws with teeth?
the left are disgusting animals and will keep on losin
https://twitter.com/tamarakeithNPR/status/875021666732126209
Over the last 20 years, Bernie Sanders is responsible for more political violence than the KKK.
I don't think that the NRA headquarters is a "Gun Free Zone." I may be wrong on this.
"body slamming" as in giving him a light shove
lol at that whiney suck being carried out on a stretcher, holding his glasses like the king of the pussies, wasting emergency services time for his "big jewish scoop of news"
when did police stop being people??
Where did I say they did? I said "good guy with a gun stopping a bad guy with a gun" as an argument against gun control doesn't work with police as the good guy because even with gun control in the US police would remain armed. Unless you are arguing that the US would full on ban all guns and disarm most police at the same time, which any reasonable person would agree would not happen.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
Or did they have one but they're not good people? Because I keep hearing that all it takes to stop a bad man with a gun is a good man with armed with a gun.
Wow body-slamming a reporter. That is as bad as genocide.
... until someone goes on a mass-murder rampage inside the NRA headquarters.
Here's a funny thing with your dream scenario - it'll never happen. Once the first or maybe second victim go down, the "rampage" will end pretty quick. Can't be a "mass" shooting without mass casualties after all.
"When seconds count, the police are only a few minutes away"...
Somehow, the US has more mass shootings than any other country on the planet.
Spectacularly incorrect on the basic facts. I know, irritating, isn't it.
Not to mention, "mass shootings" include, by US standards, things like three drug dealers standing on a corner at night, and someone fires a single pistol shot at one of them AND MISSES. But the bullet hits the brick wall and all three get minor cuts from little chips of flying masonry. But the standards being used to report these stats, THAT is a "mass shooting with multiple victims."
The violent liberal Bernie Bro who attacked people with a rifle this morning? The FBI says that more people are beaten to death every year with pipes, baseball bats, and bare hands then are killed with any sort of long gun (rifles, shotguns, etc) and that includes hunting accidents, suicides and the rest.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
Because it serves the purpose of two REPUBLICAN congressmen to paint the shooter as a crazed liberal.
OK, so there was a shooting. Bad bad. One person was killed (the shooter) and several more injured (two of them pretty seriously. All bad. This has created the usual firestorm of people asserting that gun control would have prevented this and others asserting that if all of the victims were armed it would have prevented this.
Either way it is useful to remember that -- if nobody else dies -- this constitutes 1.2% of the deaths from shootings that will happen (on average) today. If you've actually read any substantial fraction of this (mostly silly) thread, more people died from being shot while you were reading than were killed in this incident (so far). It's also worth remembering that it is better than even odds that one of those two to three deaths wasn't murder, it wasn't self defense, it wasn't even accident, it was somebody using a gun to kill themselves (almost 2/3 of all gun deaths are suicide).
If you've wasted an hour on the article and thread, 1 person and a fraction on average was shot and killed by others as homicide, two killed themselves, and a tiny fraction accidentally shot a friend or their kid or something (or were shot by their child under age six, in one out of 12 cases). A similarly tiny fraction of ordinary citizens actually used a gun to kill somebody "legitimately", that is in self defense.
Don't get me wrong -- I love guns, shot myself accidentally at age 10, defend the right to own guns etc. But the numbers are the numbers. This case is utterly ignorable, except for the small possibility that it was politically motivated instead of motivated by any of the OTHER reasons people use guns to murder people. Politically motivated shootings are, paradoxically enough, more what our founding fathers had in mind when they wrote in our right to bear arms (in a well-regulated militia, which I suppose MIGHT describe a typical drug gang or the Mafia or your local skinhead group). But probably not like this.
Even when the experts all agree, they may well be mistaken. --- Bertrand Russell.
A good gun is a gun used to shoot a evil white male racist fascist republican congressman. This shooter will be remembered fondly and memorialized by the lefties
I understand why arrested people are called "suspected ____" as they are considered innocent until proven guilty but this grammar is so odd to me logically.
There's never media reports of a "suspected shooter" on the loose... nobody at the field considered him a "suspect" and he was caught red handed, then immediately when caught it became LESS definitive that he shot anyone.
I guess the scenario defines the terminology.
Cwm, fjord-bank glyphs vext quiz
We need cop control more than we need gun control.
I know you are being sarcastic. But according to what I've read, firearm murders by Democrats outnumber those from Republicans 2 to 1.
What do you read? Seriously - do you have a source for that? Preferably not Alex Jones or Breitbart...
I suspect it's probably true. Correlation not causation. I'm sure there is a race/economic factor involved. The poor have higher gun crime numbers. The poor are much likely to vote democrat.
It's quite possible that it's true - but it's also possible that it's just based on some unreliable fake news blogger who pulled it out of his (or her) ass. That's why I'm asking for the source. If there is a reliable source, we can next see what it actually says in context.
Stephan
Looked. Havent found any evidence they were the left rioting. Only bussed in people not from the leftist liberal university. So basically 50-50 chance.
Uhh, hello McFly! Republicans are fucking evil. Period. They suck the cock of the rich and powerful in spite of everyday, middle-class working Americans. Yet they know how to advertise themselves as working FOR the middle class. While death may be a little extreme, do you think such evil should go unpunished?
Of course it won't completely solve the problem. But reasonable gun control would solve enough of the problem to be worth it.
1: No it fucking wouldn't.
2: There's no such thing as "reasonable gun control" without amending the constitution. Every "gun control" law is unconstitutional.
In any form of recent years...what incidents are you speaking of?!?!
I don't know of any people going out trying to kill a mass of people in the name of Christ...please, enumerate them.
Anders Behring Breivik killed 77 people and claimed to have carried out the attacks on behalf of an organisation called The Knights Templar fighting a muslim invasion of europe. There are however serious doubts that the organisation he refered to actually exists.
No, police stopped a bad guy with a gun. There's a difference
So, you're not really for "gun control", you're for disarming the populace in favor of armed state, which is pretty much the reason the 2nd Amendment was enshrined in the first place.
OR let me ask a question this way, would you support a law that requires permitting for exercise of free speech?
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
So you dismiss anything said by a person you don't like, just because the speaker is a person you don't like? Wow, talk about an echo chamber. Your head must ring like crazy!
Back in the day, the right of a militia to bear arms had a benefit. These days that's no longer the case
Read the second amendment. Here, I'll help you.
A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
The highest ranking legal document of our nation literally states that a well regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state.
The second part isn't conditional upon you believing the first. There's no "if" in there. They're 2 statements in a single sentence.
You can disagree, but you'd be legally incorrect unless you change the constitution.
Typical liberal post. Perhaps if Kierthos's own party hadn't railroaded Hillary through when Bernie most likely would have one any fair contest, this guy wouldn't have gone off?
How are the early reports wrong?
Because we all know, it was the Russians!
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
That's how it all starts. The idealized right wing is "free market capitalism." People have rights to property, and if you want someone else's property, you need to engage in a voluntary exchange for that property. On the far right you've got anarcho-capitalists, who think the state shouldn't even exist, and "taxation is theft." As a conservative, I sympathize with that, but as Madison said, "If men were angels, no government would be necessary." Unfortunately men are not angels. But since yes, taxation is forcibly taking your shit, and that's wrong, government becomes a necessary evil and so should be limited as much as possible. We're only going to take your shit for things we simply cannot provide any other way, like national defense, police, roads, etc. And even then we're going to feel bad about it.
In the leftist world view, though, the rich don't deserve their property. At the extreme left, property itself is illegitimate, but even the moderate lefties think the rich are evil, they "stole" all their shit, they need the shit, and so forcibly extracting wealth from people is not a necessary evil but a necessary good, and the more the better. And if the evil hated rich don't like it, too fucking bad! """Justice""" will be done! They will never feel bad about what they do the people whose shit they take because they've already decided taking shit is good, and the more the better!
The entire leftist worldview is predicated on violence. That it's good and right and just to take stuff from one group of people and give it to another by force. And once it's okay to do that, and morally justified, you end up with concentration camps, or gulags, or shooting up conservatives at baseball games. The idea that National Socialism is right wing is retarded, because an all-powerful state confiscating the wealth of people (hated minority or not) to provide FREE SHIT to their supporters is not, at all, "right wing." That's the entire leftist handbook.
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
Only if every auto accident is an argument to ban automobiles...
You're comparing an accident with a transportation device with an attempted homicide with a purpose built weapon. Automobiles have plenty of uses besides killing something. Firearms are purpose built weapons. Comparing the two is a false equivalency.
"Apparently once he found out they were republicans, he came back armed and shooting." So I guess he was defending his country from traitors then?
people. Searched for "Portland stabbing". Searched for Portland and there still appeared to be no story.
Some conservative politicians are on the receiving end of an attack and now, all of a sudden, the violence has gotten out of hand.
Think again. There were multiple police officers present at this shooting, and Virginia is an open carry state. Yet the shooter still got off 100 rounds before he was stopped. The idea that good guys with guns will stop bad guys with guns is farcical.
The interesting part is its typically Republicans that are pro-2nd Amendment. Now they have been hit (no pun intended) closer to home. I guess we will see if the gun control tune of Republicans moves left a bit.
If you think that is a possibility you really have NO f**king clue about how we ( pro-Second Amendment people ) think.
I'm not a Republican.
If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
You shouldn't have used the word "crazy". It's triggering for liberals. Accurate, but triggering.
The point is that anyone who commits a murder with a gun is already breaking the law. Further outlawing all use of guns on top of the already-illegal murdery uses therefore necessarily only accomplishes punishing the non-murdery uses.
This is the general issue with this kind of "preventative" banning of anything. Harmful use of whatever is usually already illegal (and if not, it should be). So a blanket ban on that thing then only adds punishment for the non-harmful uses.
I've made the same argument about licensure in general, with drivers licenses as a specific example. Driving recklessly is already a crime, one that you can commit with or without a driver's license. Ostensibly, requiring licensing to operate a vehicle is to prevent reckless driving by untrained drivers. But since reckless driving is already a crime, the only people additional people you punish by having a blanket licensure requirement on top of that law is unlicensed people who were nevertheless driving safely anyway.
If we'd just do the sensible thing and make all punishments proportional to the harm they cause (not saying eye-for-an-eye, but you-pay-for-any-damage-you-cause), that would automatically do away with this kind of punishment of harmless victimless actions "just in case" someone somewhere doing those actions might cause harm. Yes, there are odds at play and I understand the blanket laws are trying to discourage people from doing things likely to cause harm, but if harm translates directly to punishment then likeliness to cause harm automatically translates to likeliness to bring punishment and accomplishes the same thing already.
Note that I'm not saying everyone should be running around with guns or driving without training or anything like that. Those are bad ideas. Because they're likely to harm someone. Which means you're likely to get punished for doing them, when you likely harm someone. So you shouldn't do them. But if someone does manage to do them without harming anyone, they should not be punished for that.
-Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of all Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
I ask this question every time someone tries to say there was a shift. Exactly WHEN did this shift take place, where the KKK became part of the Republicans. I'll bet, you can't actually point to when. Hell even the revered FDR was a fucking Racist pig segregationist. And lets not forget Johnson's "Ni**er" comments.
Hell I'll even say the Modern Democrat party is filled with the real kind of Racism with their "Blacks can't help themselves, we have to help them" attitude. You can see examples in this video - https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
What we do know though... is that a couple of good guys with a gun, stopped a bad guy with a gun.
After he shot all the bullets he had on him so he was pretty much done anyway... but sure, spin it that way if it makes you feel better.
Gabby Giffords was/is a democrat, I don't know what you are talking about. I'm not going into his political leanings, since he is crazy, but Jared Loughner is certainly not "extreme left-wing."
"You saw this for days in the streets after Trump won..."
You also saw a LOT of news about Trump supporters attacking, beating, vandalizing or intimidating people of various ethnicities or ideologies. Of course, they either couldn't be verified or turned out to be out-right fakes by folks on the "other side" who felt they needed to lie or stage fake hate because... TRUMP. Not out of any rational fear based on reality -- just irrational fear of living in their own echo-chambers for so long.
Unfortunately The Daily Wire is a news blog founded in 2015 and with an openly conservative bias. Do you have any more impartial, reliable sources with an established record of reporting established facts?
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Right, how is supporting the NRA even close to this? I've never heard the NRA advocate the shooting of it's political opponents, have you? I haven't.
Then you haven't been listening. The NRA is really a lobby for the gun industry and they are spewing plenty of rhetoric about how the government or "violent leftists" are coming to get them and the only way to protect yourself is to arm yourself. It's complete bullshit of course but scared people do buy lots of guns. They're clever enough to not directly say "shoot the liberals" but that's certainly what they are strongly implying.
No, police stopped a bad guy with a gun. There's a difference
So, you're not really for "gun control", you're for disarming the populace in favor of armed state, which is pretty much the reason the 2nd Amendment was enshrined in the first place.
OR let me ask a question this way, would you support a law that requires permitting for exercise of free speech?
Where did I say disarmament? See, you've proved a comment a made elsewhere on this thread: any comment in favor of gun control is automatically devolved to the base "take away all guns" argument. Did you even read the rest of my post where I argued for a government provided (and therefore free) class that covers basic firearm safety, storage, handling, and laws before getting a permit (a permit not to own, but simply to carry)? If you can't be bothered to sit down for a couple hour class for 1 day out of your busy schedule, then you simply aren't fit to carry around something that can easily kill. This doesn't stop you from owning a gun, or going to the range, or going hunting. But it does stop people who care so little about others that a couple hours is more important to them than the safety of others to walk around in public with a weapon.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
They are Rpublicans supporting gun rights! Why weren't they armed? Why they were unable to shoot back? Why did they have to take cover and wait for the police?
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
This is marked 5, Insightful?
I am sick and tired of false dichotomies peddled by ignorant teamsters in this country. Someone commits a crime and we immediately try to lump them in with a group of people that have nothing to do with the insane criminal's acts.
Today it's someone who targeted republicans.
Yesterday it was someone targeting minorities.
Earlier it was someone targeting journalists.
And so on.
Bad people exist in the world. Mentally unstable people exist in the world. Ignoring this fact and simply painting occurrences as "left" or "right" is doing a disservice to those who really want to address problems in the world.
Step outside of yourself. Look beyond wherever you get your news. Look at people as people. Stop engaging in only two-party discussions. Think critically.
I agree. That election was effin' metal.
This reminded me immediately of the Gabby Gifford's shooting. Wacko targeting politician. This guy was a Bernie so maybe he got tired of being called "snowflake" during Facebook rants. I don't think there's a solution here. Whether or not you're for or against gun control (full disclosure: against for the most part) that is the genie already out of the bottle approach. Said genie is very well armed so keep your hands in plain sight if you're bringing the bottle around.
The Republicans started this preach violence for political gain thing after Reagan lost, it seems the far left recreational rioters have been getting lots of press for it lately and the six month Hillary Dreams hissy fits and tantrums after the election probably haven't helped.
There's gonna be more shootings for a while, maybe even some armed violence. If Antifa want to shoot it out occasionally with some right wing cosplay militia types let's hope that the fewest cops and civilians get injured. No one said this civil society thing was always gonna be MTV and Netflix and chill. This has been coming since the Civil Rights Act at least. We'd be seeing even more of it earlier if Hillary had won but it's a boil starting to burst.
"That's a good point. Anybody who's planning to commit mass murder will surely stop when he finds out gun ownership is illegal."
Way off topic, but there's an awesome account of a push during the Constitutional Convention of 1787 to limit a standing army to 3000 men. Washington, known for keeping his opinions to himself for the most part -- put on his sarcasm hat and said something to the effect: "I will support this providing we include the following: 'no nation shall invade with a force greater than 5000 men'".
Do you mean Jared Loughner, the extreme left-leaning nutcast that shot a Republican in the face, you mean? Jesus, could you be any more fucking wrong right off the bat? Fucking idiot.
Fucking idiot, it was a different Jared Loughner, the one who believed in right-wing conspiracy theories with a dislike of government {read Republican here}, who voted as an independent in 2006 and 2008. The one who was trying to assassinate a Democratic congresswoman.
What is your definition of mass shooting? It sounds like you have a relatively unusual one, since there have been hundreds of shootings not in "gun-free zones", mostly in private residences.
Today, we have liberals like DogDude who lap up this slop with total ignorance about where it came from or how meaningless "gun deaths" are, and then you come here and regurgitate this crap to try and infect others with your ignorance...
The CDC also counts the dirt bag shooter today as a "gun death" Guns are the best tools designed to project force and kill people. How they are used determines if it is good or bad. The capitol police today also used guns to save lives and kill the shooter (definitely a good thing). 1000 years ago, the idiot gun grabbers at the CDC would have said the same thing about the long bow or knives.
The problem is that the CDC has no fucking business looking at intentional deaths (99% of gun deaths are intentional) without differentiating more details about the situation and outcome (murder/suicide/homicide/accidental/unintentional/self defense/defense of the innocent/etc). The problem that the Dims had was these stats were already collected by the FBI, the tool used is not as important as the actual action to rational human beings, and further, the stats didn't justify their gun grabbing agenda, so they decided to enlist the CDC to collect a new stat "gun deaths" and ignore the intent and the outcome of the situation, and they did it for purely partisan political purposes.
Criminals (like the shooter today, home invaders, rapists, murderers, etc.) deserve to be shot and/or killed in the commission of their crime. The CDC is intentionally ignorant of the difference between intentionally, (often justifiably) ending a life and an accident, and it is exclusively for purely political, partisan purposes to further the gun grabbing agenda do the Dims and the alt-Left.
Every "gun control" law is unconstitutional.
How so? The Constitution only specifies that we have a right to bear arms. It's doesn't specify the type of arms covered. A very strict but logical argument for the 2nd Amendment would be that it only allows single shot muzzleloaders, since that was what was in common usage at the time. But, since that is obviously both unreasonable and impracticable, you already agree that the amendment requires some form of interpretation. Either that, or you are going to go off the deep end and agree that private citizens should be allowed to own operational tanks, nukes, fighters, etc. I could totally see someone like Steve Bannon or Roger Ailes sitting off the coast of DC in their privately owned battleship.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
So to co-opt the right's tired argument, why wasn't the congressman armed to protect himself? The political right are the ones who think everyone should have a firearm on them at all times even though most of the time it is a plainly absurd argument.
Sigh... it's a damn shame anyone has to be hurt by a gun. I hope all the victims of this horrible act of violence are ok.
He was using a rifle. Holding a rifle sideways would make even less sense than with a pistol.
He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
Perhaps you missed my question at the end. Do we require any training, permits etc for First Amendment rights?
then you simply aren't fit to carry around something that can easily kill.
Yeah, because a 2 ton vehicle can't kill easily ... right? Or a Pressure Cooker ....
Freedom is messy, perhaps it is best if we go the Fascist route, because at least the trains are on time!
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Fair enough.
The parent has declared himself 'a rock', not worth responding to.
I'm here for ya, bro.
We don't know that this was a libtard.
Actually we do. Hodgkinson was a Berniac that wrote letters to the editor for years citing Maddow, Reich and all the other usual libtard suspects. The archetypal hate filled leftist.
Just turn off the Internet for the day. Colbert will be on tonight to mollify you with another dose of Trump derangement. Just stay clear of the news till then.
Maw! Fire up the karma burner!
We need cop control more than we need gun control.
In a way you are right. I always get worried whenever I see a sheriff or a police chief say their most important goal is making sure all their people get home safely. I'm sorry, but that is wrong. The ultimate goal of law enforcement is to make sure citizens get home safely. I understand that you feared for your life when you shot that guy sitting in the front seat of a car, but unless he was actively threatening other people, you shouldn't have shot him. Unless a weapon is already out and being pointed at/threatening people, there is no reason for police to be shooting first. Cops need to stop being law enforcement officers and go back to being peace officers.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
Except that nut job was a leftist...
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Pretty much anyone who cares to count comes up with the same conclusion. In fact, looking through the articles, you'll see that the ratio is even more skewed than 2:1.
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=firearm+m...
That won't be possible. Because they will be killed by someone concealed carrying before it can become "mass".
The classic fantasy behind so many gun advocates. You're seriously going to argue that a bunch of untrained people carrying around concealed firearms is going to be a deterrence against a determined shooter? Gang violence is a thing even thought they know the targets are armed. They just wait for a moment to attack when their guard is down. Representative Scalise evidently even had a security detail and that didn't stop the attack. The simple fact is that concealed carry doesn't stop the violence. I understand the appeal of the idea but there is no evidence that it actually works and even if it did, the vast majority of people simply are not going to carry a firearm with them most of the time. Frankly I have no interest in living around a bunch of paranoid people who are constantly on the lookout for a shootout.
Anti-gun folks always, ALWAYS, forget that given the chance many second amendment advocates would carry guns for their (and their fellow citizens) protection around with them all the time.... And it DOES make a huge difference in being able to defend against an attack.
Bullshit. The attacker pretty much always gets to attack first and you had better hope they miss. Furthermore it is demonstrably ridiculous to carry a weapon on you at all times. These people were playing a game and had a security detail and it STILL didn't stop the attack.
There are not "near-zero restrictions on firearm sales." As a gun-owner I know first hand. I live in NYS. I cannot even touch a side arm without showing my license. The gun store owner will not even take it out of the case.
If you want to be respected please take the time to learn about the subject else you sound like those recruiters who don't know the difference between Java and Javascript.
If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
He was also white, male, over 60, and plenty of other things. Probably a Christian too based purely on the significant probability that is true. So considering I'm a white male liberal, in your eyes I need to own that white people, males, and liberals are capable of hateful violence. Sure, I can own that. Anything else?
Sanders supporter?
https://www.theatlantic.com/po...
you were saying????
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
Good news. The NRA already provides the classes.
So the good part of your suggestion is done. Fuck the government mandates and tracking though, right in the ear.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Technology has solved that problem. It will take 20 years for cop culture to change reflecting 'always on cameras', but they're on the path.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Did you capture the guy, interrogate him and figure out why he acted the way that he did and institute the changes necessary to prevent in the future? Executing without learning motivations is an unproductive use as well. Never mind that their use would be less necessary if they were less controlled.
you are kidding right??? antifa isnt left wing????
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
Fox says lefties don't own guns and are easy targets.
Palin encouraged it and resulted in the shooting of a Democratic senator during her candidacy. If you representative is not going to listen to you because you don't have money, and you think you can't vote them out because voting machines appear to be compromised, what are the options?
That group is called the Mainstream Media.
Of course, a violent Sanders supporter shooting at people is part of a political movement because college students protested an Internet Troll being invited to speak on their campus.
Of course, every single time a Republican leaning person does anything it's an isolated act, with the response of mumble mumble mental health.
Lack of 'knowhow' prevented this moron from killing anyone outright. About a 10% hit rate. Obviously a liberal, 'spray and pray'.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
"No, police stopped a bad guy with a gun. There's a difference. If there stronger gun control, the bad guy might not have had a gun but those police still would have."
Let's live in the real world. Gun ownership is a constitutional right. That's not going away without a constitutional amendment.
So, right now, it is an actual reality that if you make gun ownership illegal only criminals will have guns. It's a trope, but it is true. Most people follow the law. During prohibition, drinking alcohol dramatically went down. It worked. It had many unintended consequences as well.
So, lets live in the real world where bad guys can get guns and chew on the idea that "when seconds count, the police are minutes away".
btw... I don't own a gun. I don't like them and I don't want one. I also believe that George Mason got it right with the 2nd amendment.
Exactly. It could be Russia payed off and killed the suspect so no one would tallk about what horiffic crime happened. He is an escape goat if the facts come in. These are therefore more than likely Russian warning shots to the Republicans to keep them in line.
There are not "near-zero restrictions on firearm sales." As a gun-owner I know first hand. I live in NYS. I cannot even touch a side arm without showing my license. The gun store owner will not even take it out of the case.
Prime examples of things that are irrelevant to keep guns out of the wrong hands. Congratulations on being...
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
Not an American, so I may be missing something.
Why is gun registration such a big deal while car registration is A-OK?
It is indeed a flaky definition and it's almost certainly intentional. There are websites that track mass shooting as defined by people injured and they paint a very different picture of gun violence in America than the government's official statistics. That is the reach and power of the NRA at work.
Yeah, because right wing people never go crazy and try to kill people, or start talking about violence when it doesn't look like their candidate will win.
They totally weren't saying things like "it might be gun time" when it looked like Trump might lose the election, for instance.
Knock of your fucking bullshit trying to pin everything wrong with the world on the left you motherfucking tard. It's assholes like you that caused this mess, fuckhead.
50% of murders in the USA are committed by a demographic group that consistently votes over 90% democrat (FBI crime stats).
The remaining 50% are going to be fairly evenly divided.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Good news. The NRA already provides the classes.
So the good part of your suggestion is done. Fuck the government mandates and tracking though, right in the ear.
What tracking? You take the class, you get a certificate which is shown when you apply for a carry permit. The permit shows the date of your class. You then have to take a recurrent class every 10-14 months, the date of which is noted on your permit as well. If a cop pulls you over and stops you in the street and they ask for your ID, you show them the permit that has the class dates on it. Coming up on your window, they remind you to take the class. If the last date on your permit is outside 14 months, then you inelligble to carry the firearm. My proposal is in regards to carrying permits, not ownership permits. If you have a CCL you are probably in a database already,so why are you worried about tracking in the first place?
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
It only 'seems dubious' to you because you don't like the conclusion. As you say, they don't collect the data directly.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
You saw it during the campaign, in places like /r/The_Donald. Oh sure, that was online and not in a major city, but what do you expect? Cities are liberal enclaves and republicans are more spread out and have less opportunity to form mobs. But give them internet access and they'll get together and talk openly and loudly about how Hillary winning might mean it's time to grab their guns.
The guy who shot Giffords was a leftist nutcase.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Keep point to understand is that an ability to do "a little planning" and tendency to engage in mass murders is inversely correlated for individuals acting alone.
The shooter didn't vocalize his complaints, so we resort to "left-wing wacko". What if he wasn't?
Well, maybe not vocalize, but here's a picture of one of his complaints.
He was a member of several anti-GOP Facebook groups, including "Terminate the Republican Party" and "The Road to Hell is Paved with Republicans."
And here's one of his facebook postings
Trump is a Traitor. Trump Has Destroyed Our Democracy. It's Time to Destroy Trump & Co.,
He also volunteered for the Sander's campaign. It seems pretty clear he steers a little toward the left on the political spectrum, but judge for yourself...
Would we have the same reaction if he was an average guy that thought he had no other options?
Maybe, maybe not, but I don't engage in hypotheticals..
You're trying to censor their call for a free press? Wow.
Note that that has been their masthead for some time, not as a response to this incident.
*cough* It disgusts me that Republicans (Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) comes to mind) would say: "America has been divided,” he said, “and the center of America is disappearing, and the violence is appearing in the streets, and it’s coming from the left." We have divisiveness, and he wants to just add fuel to the fire. There's violence coming from both sides of the spectrum and both sides should be working to stop it, not justify their "self-defense" or whatever bullshit they come up with to justify these heinous acts by claiming it's *really* the other side.
It's not a left or right thing. It's a left and right thing. And both parties (which don't really represent the left or right) will milk it to their own advantage. Expect more laws? More crackdowns? No real solutions? 100% When you're an incumbent, doing stuff that solves problems might get you replaced next election cycle. But doing nothing? That's almost a guaranteed win. Unless you're not being "tough on crime". Like another poster suggested, we really just need to make murder illegal. Clearly that's the problem and more laws upon that line are the solution.
*puke*
Alternatively, it could also be the incessant anti-Trump/GOP rhetoric that the Left has been spewing.
Are you even trying? In other news, the sky is lime green.
tell that to the guy that was almost bullet proof, full of vests and protective suit, many years ago (sorry, cant recall the name nor location)... normal guns were useless and it took several polices with higher energy guns to kill him... during that time, we was free to shot anyone that come close
Higuita
Although I'm somewhat pro-gun I have to say that clearly the hassles of obtaining an automatic weapon prevent them from being used in these shootings. Often times such weapons are even reasonably available to the shooter who has enough time and money to obtain them. Instead they often deck themselves out with drum magazines and other fake-tac bullshit.. tactical vests with no armor, etc.
Barriers to obtaining certain guns appear to be too much work for your average mentally unstable mass murderer
No, it will not happen then, either. And not a one of these Congressmen is going to change their minds, either. We have these things called "rights," and lots and lots of people have already died for them. You may have heard about it, a little thing called WORLD WAR AMERICAN REVOLUTION 2. Nobody's giving up their rights over a few more shootings. That's what "cold dead hands" means.
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
my argument was that eventhough he was a cop, he was a good guy with a gun. he didnt have to be a cop to be a good guy with a gun but he was.
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
The Constitution says NOTHING about restricting the right to murder. Why do you hate our freedoms?
I can think of several where that isnt the case recently that are situated in rather arid climates.
Keep pretending to yourself that you know what you're talking about. There are plenty of laws out there. More than enough to regulate the legal ownership of guns. You're not simply interested in making certain that felons and mentally ill people don't purchase guns. What you truly want is to remove guns from the society.
Ain't gonna happen.
If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
Lack of 'knowhow' prevented this moron from killing anyone outright. About a 10% hit rate. Obviously a liberal, 'spray and pray'.
He knew what to do, just lacked the skill or the steady hand. You're probably right about him being a liberal, if he were a right winger he would have had more practice killing innocent people and would have got a higher hit rate.
I don't think he was doing much praying though if he's a leftie. Not to American God anyway. Probably French God or something like that. - that's how it works isn't it?
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
The problem with that theory is that every person in "NRA Headquarters" is probably carrying a gun, which would make a "mass" murder rampage quite difficult.
Of course it is left leaning!!! lol what a moron. It is some whack job that would have been locked up in some mental institution But since budget cuts are the wave (and have been for years) mental health isn't something important. Except now we see the consequences of stupid thinking. One month after another we get these sorts of events.
He learned it from the President.
Learned WHAT from the president? How to send people to rallies to start fights? Oh, right, that's liberals. How to stage plays and public relations stunts with corporate sponsorship that depict the murder of political opponents? Oh, right, that's liberals. Encouraging the writing of editorials that cheer on things like Berkeley liberals literally beating people bloody for the sin of not being in perfect groupthink sync? Oh, right, that's liberals. Egging on multiple media networks to spend 24x7 on utterly unhinged phony narratives to distract from a growing series of election losses, rather than face why they lost? Oh, right - liberals!
The only fascists here are on the left. They're the ones using and - as a large, organized movement, praising the use of violence to suppress free speech and to try to undo election results. It doesn't GET any more brownshirty than the way progressive activists conduct themselves. The wannabe tyrants - the ones who say the First Amendment is dangerous, and that their political opponents should be silenced with systematic violence and oppression - are on the left. They're proud of it. They LIKE violence when it's their own pet thugs doing it.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
Whatever it takes to get them to crack their eyes open is good. They'll mostly grow out of their political stupidity.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Do you have any links for this
There's simply no way you are that out of touch, so you have to be pretending to be. Why? Who do you think you're fooling?
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
What's a Gun Free Zone? You mean like when you enter the Capitol, you have to put your bag through the x-ray? Should we have one of those security lines to enter the park?
So is it your argument that having firearm safety, storage, handling, and permitting laws will stop criminals from shooting people? I mean, I'm all for preventing accidental shootings, but anyone with intent to kill using a weapon will go through whatever hoops the government puts up to make it more difficult to obtain a weapon.
Yes it's an anecdote! Were you expecting original research in a Slashdot comment?
It's assholes like you that caused this mess
"If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun"
-- Barack Hussein Obama
Maw! Fire up the karma burner!
Murder is illegal because it deprives a person of their natural rights (life, liberty, and/or property). The fact that somebody, somewhere owns a gun does not deprive you of any rights.
my argument was that eventhough he was a cop, he was a good guy with a gun. he didnt have to be a cop to be a good guy with a gun but he was.
I agree, but you can't use this situation in that argument because, gun control or not, the cops would already have been armed. If it was a case of a guy taking his dog for a walk in the park engaging with the shooter and taking him down then it would be a perfect case to use in that argument.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
Or rent a truck.
Or use a Pressure Cooker
Or fly an airplane into a building
Or Burn an Apartment complex down
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Strict yes, logical no. The Constitution allowing only single shot muzzle loaders is akin to every law only applying to 1787 technology. The logical course is that the Constitution allowed for private citizens to own the latest and greatest military technology available. Nukes might be an exception, but I'd argue that the government shouldn't even have control of those... What's wrong with a citizen owning a tank or a fighter aircraft?
Yes it's an anecdote! Were you expecting original research in a Slashdot comment?
It varies by state. In South Carolina, the class is eight hours for a concealed carry permit and includes a marksmanship test.
There needs to be a process for legitimate suicide. I mean getting documents in order and getting your body disposed of properly. We can't just have people offing themselves wherever they feel like it and investigators being tied up trying to figure out where these corpses came from.
Let's live in the real world. Gun ownership is a constitutional right. That's not going away without a constitutional amendment.
So, right now, it is an actual reality that if you make gun ownership illegal only criminals will have guns.
I'm a gun owner. I love guns, and I collect them. I don't want to ban them. The simple truth is that most guns either aren't owned by criminals, or were stolen from people that did legally own them. Train people how to own and use them safely and shootings will go down. The likelihood of getting shot by someone you don't know outside your own home is very small, but that is what people focus on. By supporting safe gun ownership and anger management you greatly reduce the likelihood of accidents or domestic violence which accounts for a large part of gun deaths. Throw in reasonable mental health support and you can cut down on the incidences of suicide too.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
basic gun safety training should be part of the highschool civics curriculum.
have the right to own a gun == have the responsibility to have some idea how to use one resposibly.
Just because he said something happened doesn't mean it did. Cite an actual news source that has at least the slightest shred of credibility. The update in this summary, that cites Trump, only serves to discredit itself in so doing.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
+4 insightful and yet entirely wrong...
Look up liberalism and anarchy. You're just parroting whatever you've read on social media apparently.
What violent acts by the GOP in any form of recent history?
Even the Tea Party high levels of activity, were quite peaceful at rallies....
I seem to remember a recently elected Congressman from the Midwest pleading guilty to bodyslamming a reporter. Or by "recent" do you mean only within the last few days?
On the right one person body slams another. On the left a mass shooting at baseball practice.
Clearly the right are more evil.
Registration is the first step toward confiscation.
Technically, guns in the U.S. are registered when the sales and background check information is reported to the government. It's illegal for them to keep the data, but they do it anyways.
But that's only for the first sale. If a ban is enacted and they come to my door to collect my AR15, I can tell them I sold it to someone else and I don't remember the name. There will be nothing anyone can do about it. If private transfers are regulated then I'll either have the gun to give up, proof of who has it now, or I'm clearly guilty of a crime.
That's why it's a big deal. I know it may sound strange to a non-American, but it's just in our nature to not trust our government.
Also, if they can't even keep drugs out of prisons then they're not going to keep guns away from criminals. Laws, bans, registrations only affect law abiding citizens.
Senator Rand Paul was there but he is not recorded as having done anything useful. He's an MD but he let others treat the wounded. He is not recorded as having done anything to attempt to stop the gunman or report the incident to emergency personnel.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
Oh, of course -- don't go into his leanings when it offends your confirmation bias.
There's a republican congressional baseball team? I had no idea.
We now know the identity of the shooter. Choice quotes from FB: "The road to hell is paved with dead republicans"
no. it makes the same amount of sense. absolutely none.
Maybe the casing wasn't ejecting properly so he needed gravity to help.
50% of murders in the USA are committed by a demographic group that consistently votes over 90% democrat (FBI crime stats).
The remaining 50% are going to be fairly evenly divided.
"FBI crime stats" is not a proper citation, it's another unsubstantiated claim. And while you are dog whistling, that does not make your argument any more sound. So you suggest that blacks commit about 50% of murders (may be in the statistics, but it's questionable how good they are) and that 90% of blacks vote democratic (which is reasonable at least on the national level). But then you seem to suggest that these two are statistically independent, so you can infer (or at least suggest) that 90% of the 50% vote democratic. That's quite an assumption. I'd suspect that many of the 50% are convicted felons who don't vote at all. And, less hair-splittingly, I would assume that most of the 50% are from very much socially disadvantaged groups that rarely vote at all.
Stephan
You're not simply interested in making certain that felons and mentally ill people don't purchase guns.
And yet that's exactly what the bills were trying to regulate and what 85% of people think should be laws.
What you truly want is to remove guns from the society.
A) That's not what I want.
B) That would require a constitutional amendment.
Ain't gonna happen.
I realize this and many people will continue to die on a daily basis from gunshot wounds.
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
Lets remember Sarah Palin getting blamed for Gabby Giffords shooting by a deranged person because of target symbols on a map. Now we have Kathy Griffin holding Trump's severed head, artsy plays in NYC assassinating Trump, and a deranged left wing person trying to kill republicans. Lets see if the media goes in the same connect-the-dots direction here. I doubt it.
But that's irrelevant since he had plenty of right wing policies which were destructive compared to the left wing ones that helped the country.
Shootings involving more than 2 people are, by definition, mass shootings.
Well. You understand that 2% of the US counties have something like 33% - 50% of the gun violence.
If you're interested in gun violence we ought to apply the Pareto principle. Let's focus there.
The problem is not the availability of guns as there are many counties with a far greater concentration of guns but less gun violence. Therefore the solution is not the removal of guns.
It would also help if gun control advocates didn't keep distorting things and fooling themselves that they have a grasp of the statistics.
Here's the big one - the bait and switch: Talk about murders and how horrible it is and then say there are over 30,000 gun deaths in the US per year. Notice the bait and switch? Gun deaths includes suicides and they account for 2/3 of the total. If countries without guns had a lower suicide rate you would have a case. But, unfortunately for the argument, other countries do not have a lower suicide rate.
If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
In the days leading up to WWIi the thugs on the street were not just of the right or the left. There was a real mix of adventurist nuts. The NAZIs even used this as an excuse to justify their extremes to the public. They considered themselves righteous anti Communists.
There are even a few shitbags even in this thread with comments cheering on leftist thug violence.
Of course it won't completely solve the problem. But reasonable gun control would solve enough of the problem to be worth it.
1: No it fucking wouldn't. 2: There's no such thing as "reasonable gun control" without amending the constitution. Every "gun control" law is unconstitutional.
I completely agree with #2. That's why we shouldn't restrict the rights of convicted felons to have firearms. That's why the criminals should be allowed to carry around fully automatic weapons and wheel around cannons.
Whenever crap like this happens it's always the same stupid argument. Gun Control! When are we going to start addressing the real threat to this nation. Sports Violence!
Care killed the cat, but satisfaction brought it back.
Kids these days, lol. What grade do they start teaching civics these days?
link
The article doesn't specify if the "folks" that initially fired back were police. I'm not familiar with the Daily Wire, but this CBS story seems to corroborate Michigan Rep. Mike Bishop's quote.
How does this in any way relate to why you oppose the commonsense gun bills?
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
The general solution that seems to come up after every shooting incident is "let's make another law".
What actually happens is in democratic states they make another gun law, and in republican states they make it easier for people to carry around guns, because "armed good guys beat armed bad guys"
Check his party affiliation. Yep
Will they support gun restrictions
or will they
Stop backing russia?
Stop passing laws that will result in the death's of people, their children, their parents, and their spouses?
The shooter was violent but not crazy.
There are a LOT of violent but not crazy gun owners in the U.S.
Laws are not passed in a vacuum.
Ignoring russian efforts to destroy the u.s. isn't happening in a vacuum.
Actively obstructing efforts to investigate russian efforts to destroy the u.s. isn't happening in a vacuum.
I'm betting now that republican congressional representatives are being shot that they will fold on their support for the 2nd amendment.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
the leftists, marxists, islamists and put them in the oven.
and none of these prevented todays shooting.
This is a common brain dead fallacious argument bandied about. Murder is inherently wrong, which is why we make laws against it, to punish those who murder. Owning a gun is not inherently wrong. Making gun ownership illegal would not do anything to convince a would-be murderer to not commit murder. All it does is prevent law-abiding people from utilizing them for legitimate uses, such as sporting and self defense.
He was a Bernie campaigner.
Those videos from Trump supporters getting bloodied in San Jose and the anti-Trump pro-Mexican immigrants fighting police are seared in my mind. linky
I don't like Republicans, but young Democrats, much of "the media", and many celebrities these days are just pathetic.
I seem to remember a recently elected Congressman from the Midwest pleading guilty to bodyslamming a reporter. Or by "recent" do you mean only within the last few days?
Body slam a reporter vs shoot as many baseball players as possible.
By God, you're right! It's the exact same thing. Damned homicidal Republicans!!
Peace is easy to achieve, just surrender. Liberty is much harder get/keep.
So if the people shot at end up injured then it is a mass shooting, but if they're missed it's not?
That sounds a flakey definition. Surely a mass shooting should be based on how many rounds are fired, not how many people get hit.
If 100 rounds get shot but only one hit it wouldn't be a mass shooting by that definition.
Spectacularly incorrect on the basic facts. I know, irritating, isn't it.
Spectacularly lacking in cited sources to back up said claims. Being called out on it - I know, irritating, isn't it.
In the leftist world view, property is a collective agreement. Ownership of property can only exist within the structure of a well-functioning society. In Mad Max anarchy, you have no right to property beyond what you can personally defend. You might be able to personally defend your own small homestead, but property beyond that is yours only by virtue of the state that you live in. So, to the leftist, the question is not about who "deserves their property" or not, its about allocation of resources to maintain and sustain the social order that make ownership of property possible in the first place.
Keep point to understand is that an ability to do "a little planning" and tendency to engage in mass murders is inversely correlated for individuals acting alone.
Cite?
It appears to me that most mass murderers do extensive planning. The fetishize it and dream about it for months, if not years. If you'd like, I can provide a long list of examples of this type. But I doubt you need me to.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
Can't change history. KKK = Democrats. Founded by Democrats. Lovers of Dixie flag.
Hell, Bill Clinton and Al Gore had a bumper sticker with it.
And his argument is that only cops should have guns, so in his ideal world any non-cop with a gun isn't a good guy.
The key phase is "well regulated". This is an old Masonic term. In part it means "well behaved" but it has other connotations in Masonic tradition with regards to obedience to established hierarchies of authority, etc... Mason's don't have to be Christian, but they do have to believe in some kind of creator. Without some semblance of a creator, there's no final arbiter of right and wrong.
Because we have many "common sense" gun bills on the books as it is.
You decry gun violence. Well the overwhelming majority of the violence is in 2 percent of the counties. Focus your attention there.
How does preventing me from having a 10 round clip help us in lowering gun violence in those 2 counties? It doesn't.
Commonsense is this:
- Pass a background check.
- Pass a gun safety course.
- Each time I buy a gun you run a check to see that I not a felon who has there gun rights temporarily suspended.
- At that point I can buy any semi-automatic weapon of my choice regardless of color, or after market add ons such as grips or silencers (guns are very loud and movies are BS silencers do not reduce the sound to a whisper)
- As long as I do not convert the semi-automatic to fully automatic the weapon is legal.
- My license is valid in all 50 states.
I can travel with my arms in all 50 states (subject to differing storage and carrying laws) Meaning, for instance, that they have to be unloaded and stored in a locked bag.
The above would be common sense gun laws.
If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
Take guns from liberals?
It doesn't say that we have the right to bear arms, it says that the right to bear arms shall not be infringed. Those phrases have very different meanings: one is granting a right to the people and the other is restricting the power of the government. It's no surprise that you see the Constitution as granting rights to the citizens...
The interpretation should be over the definitions of "arms" and "infringe".
I think there is some confusion because most reports had the shooter wearing blue jeans while the guy who asked about Republicans or Democrats was apparently wearing shorts.
That could be a matter of not really paying attention to some stranger walking by asking an odd question or maybe he pulled on some pants when he went to get his gun(s).
Of course that's just my opinion...... you could be wrong!
Oh, the Right will happily own "bodyslamming" an intrusive and trespassing reporter. In fact, at least 42% of Republicans approve of shoving such reporters to the ground.
Of course, since those "violent acts" consisted of some bruises, they are absolutely equal to the attempted mass murder of Republican politicians by a Bernie Bro, or the rioting and looting in DC, Portland, San Diego, Berkeley, Baltimore, Charlotte, Seattle, etc.
That's a great prepared talking point.
It's not really true considering Paris has has bigger mass shootings in the last 2 years than have ever happened in the U.S. but go ahead and repost what you were told to write.
Homicides in France:. About 1,000 a year
US? 15,000. Hmm, we don't have 15 times the population of France.
Get off your prepared talking points, and face the fact that an organized terrorist strike is pretty rare, to the point where you are just wasting effort pretending to care.
You might as well be fuming over deaths due to heat exhaustion.
The bigger issue here is: Every single mass shooting with a high death toll in U.S. history has exactly one thing in common: It happened in a liberal-enforced "gun free zone".
Funny that you say this after we just got done memorializing the shooting at a nightclub, a place where private security was in place, and the reason for not having guns in the hands of the public would be obvious.
Add in the shooting at Luby's, Fort Hood, and others which make your false claim even more obvious, makes your attempt to blame it on liberals rings clearly as nothing more than partisan bias.
What happened today is tragic, but the fact that there isn't a huge body count piling up has nothing to do with a feel-good-but-do-nothing gun control law and everything to do with the fact that the baseball diamond was not a gun free zone.
Capitol Police as law enforcement officers and trained security personnel on duty would be armed even in the "gun-free zones" you are so frenetically against. They would, in fact, be responsible for such tasks, not liberals.
Of course, they have had no less than three incidents of improperly handling firearms in the past few years, so...
Just about all gun homicides are committed by Democrats.
Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
Can you read? He said 'bigger mass shootings" "Than ever happened in the US"
The largest in the US is the Pulse Nightclub, at 50 dead. Your links prove that France's attack was 130 dead, and while some of those were bombing victims, more than 50 died of gunfire.
As for the other, he is incorrect. There have been high death toll shootings in places outside of 'gun-free' zones. However, the top 3 mass shootings in the US were in Gun-Free zones. And 8 of the top 10.
You're a vitriolic ideologue who can't read, and a perfect example of the real problem.
The difference between guns and cars is that a car is designed to efficiently move people around while most guns are specifically designed to kill people. The vast majority of guns have no other usefull purpose to society.
I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
How much carnage will it take before something is done about the problem?
Ooooo, do share your sources. Right wing echo chambers like Breitbart don't count.
Just because someone can't/doesn't bother voting, doesn't change their political affiliation. Show me any statistics that shows 90%+ of blacks are not democrats.
The crime stats speak for themselves.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
the creator isn't necessarily the garbage collector of the universe. they might not care or even be there at the end.
How often do you start a script and then let it run its course and forget about it as long as it doesn't pop up an error message?
it's however has to come along to clean up the mess that you need to worry about.
That's about what I assume where you were getting the data from. The statistic may indeed be true, but it is far from meaningful.
Unless you compared republicans vs democrats within the same socio-economic group the data doesn't really tell you anything.
It's like saying eating Ice Cream makes you drown because in months when Ice Cream sales are highest more people drown. This is a true statistic but it's because hot weather makes you eat more ice cream and swim more. Ice Cream doesn't cause drowning.
Being a democrat has nothing to do with being a murderer via gun.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
I think we should take any "social media" analysis very carefully. I.e. What proof do we have that his is not hacked/planted information about this person?
Right now I am calling "FALSE FLAG" on this. Not because I believe he himself was necessarily motivated to do this to "smear the left" but that his motives may be just being a "crazy person with unfathomable motives", but someone else has hacked him or directed him to do this for their own reasons. Past him just being batsh*t crazy who else would benefit from these acts?
Yeah, cops do tend to carry those
YES! I expect all you Democrats to change your Facebook Profile Pictures to include the GOP Elephant to show your SUPPORT after this horrible shooting. Considering YOU PEOPLE caused it by spewing your hatred and conspiracy theories that STILL have NOT been proven.
just another crazy leftist liberal gun nut
I used to decry the statement "leftism is a mental disorder" but you know what? Maybe there is something there.
A thread full of people decrying dehumanization of right-wingers, and here you are right on time to dehumanize the left.
Murder is illegal. Though it does not stop all murders. By your argument, we should make it perfectly legal. After all, murders are still happening at an alarming rate. If making murder illegal is not stopping murders, then what is the point?
Because laws don't exist to stop someone from committing a crime; they exist to punish those who commit them, and to remove them from society.
Which, of course, means that a hypothetical law banning guns won't actually stop criminals from owning guns; it will merely punish those who get caught. It will, however, stop millions of law abiding citizens from owning guns. So, if you advocate a gun ban, what you're really saying is you want to take away the legal right of millions of innocent people, for the sole purpose of having one extra law to punish those whom you could have just arrested for robbery/assault/murder instead.
Seems pretty stupid to me.
You mean the DNC, when they elected Hillary to run for presidents office?
> Fortunately... unfortunately... irregardless... they are called Anti-fa, which
? is a separate group. And for claiming to be anti-fascist, they are remarkably
> fascists. The black hood & mask are the new brown shirt or white robe.
They are anti-free speech. Just try to book a conservative speaker into Oakland.
I'm not repeating myself
I'm an X window user; I'm an ex-Windows user
We don't have to go to far back in history to see what demonizing one group of people can do . Rwanda 1994, the government and media demonized the Tutsi people fanning the flames of hatred ending with more than 800,000 people being murdered
Well that's just smart thinking. Care to try again?
It's just another shooting. Some were shot and killed in San Fran this morning.
You don't hear them going on about it
What a bunch of snowflakes. Get desensitized already!
...
I don't even need a permit to lawfully carry a concealed firearm. Boy, it's tough dodging all those bullets. Seriously, I can lawfully carry a concealed weapon without a permit. Right now, I have that right. You want to take that right from me, why?
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
And yet whatever is passing for "sociopolitical violence" these days seems to pale in comparison to the 1960s/early 1970s when we had a lot more domestic politically oriented violence -- civil rights protests, the many civil rights riots, riots against the war in Viet Nam, and several home grown domestic terror groups planting bombs, robbing banks and so on. Not to mention the huge number of airline hijackings.
When was the last time the US had a serious riot that lasted more than a day and required the services of the National Guard to suppress? The Rodney King riots in the 1990s?
Wait, once again? Care to name the last time a leftist shot up a right winger before this one?
When was the last time a shooter was a liberal? By my count, they’re all reactionary Republicans.
I seem to remember a recently elected Congressman from the Midwest pleading guilty to bodyslamming a reporter. Or by "recent" do you mean only within the last few days?
Everyone on the right agrees that what he did was wrong. He himself apologized for it, donated a bunch of cash, and then turned down a plea bargain which would have let him off with a slap on the wrist and elected to be tried in court. The guy made a mistake in a moment of passion, but all of his actions since then have demonstrated that he has more integrity and honour than the entire Democrat party put together.
What a bunch of Fox News bullshit. How many of those “violent” college protests resulted in gunfire? In deaths? Last I checked, Milo and Ann were still walking around spewing their lies.
The true evil in this country is the right, not the left. The left wants peace, education for all, healthcare for all, an end to climate change, and a universal basic income. The right wants guns, restrictions on women’s rights, no taxes on the top one percent, restrictions on gay rights, corporate personhood, unlimited pollution with everyone else bearing the costs, a bellicose military to launch unnecessary wars to enrich defense contractors, authoritarian rule. The list goes on, and on, and on.
Do you really think the US has more mass shootings than Mexico?
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
Society is only one method of enforcing property claims.
"His name was James Damore."
You decry gun violence. Well the overwhelming majority of the violence is in 2 percent of the counties. Focus your attention there.
But 100% of guns related to gun violence come from people selling guns.
Commonsense is this: ....
The background check bill got canned immediately.
I do not believe opening the market to more military hardware is a good idea.
I think you are talking about suppressors rather than silencers but I understand your point.
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
Jared Laughner shot a democratic congresswoman in the face.
"His name was James Damore."
You will not like my answer.
Yes. I accept that firearms will continue to be used to cause harm. Yes. I am okay with that. No. No number of deaths will change my views.
I enjoy a free society. My answer will remain the same, even if a loved one is the victim.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
Hence "Third Way"
Yes, let's find a single incident and focus on it. How many Tea Party rallies were violent? About zero. How many libtard rallies have turned to violence in the last six month? Half? More?
Let's see, the USSR murdered something like sixty million of its own citizens. China - how many? I'd argue that the left is WAY ahead of murder of people. Ban the left.
Do you think owning a gun is comparable to murder?
I'm terribly afraid the useful idiots won't ever see this. Those who are idiots, are usually useful ones, and will end up dying , too, after groveling and screaming "I didn't expect THIS to happen"
Most cops now have 223s in their cars, just because of those two.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
This reminded me immediately of the Gabby Gifford's shooting. Wacko targeting politician. This guy was a Bernie so maybe he got tired of being called "snowflake" during Facebook rants. I don't think there's a solution here. Whether or not you're for or against gun control (full disclosure: against for the most part) that is the genie already out of the bottle approach. Said genie is very well armed so keep your hands in plain sight if you're bringing the bottle around.
The Republicans started this preach violence for political gain thing after Reagan lost, it seems the far left recreational rioters have been getting lots of press for it lately and the six month Hillary Dreams hissy fits and tantrums after the election probably haven't helped.
There's gonna be more shootings for a while, maybe even some armed violence. If Antifa want to shoot it out occasionally with some right wing cosplay militia types let's hope that the fewest cops and civilians get injured. No one said this civil society thing was always gonna be MTV and Netflix and chill. This has been coming since the Civil Rights Act at least. We'd be seeing even more of it earlier if Hillary had won but it's a boil starting to burst.
Name others.
In 2007 - he was leftist. But by the time of the shooting.... https://www.theguardian.com/wo...
Incorrect.
If someone is already planning to grossly break one law (mass murder), they will not be deterred by the addition of a lesser law (illegal gun ownership)
That doesn't mean we should make murder legal. It means piling on extra minor offenses doesn't help. "Also, in addition to the murders, I'm going to charge you with littering because you didn't police your brass."
Suppressors and silencers are interchangeable words. :)
However I don't think clip and magazine are. Not that it matters to this conversation.
Re selling guns. I, as a law-abiding gun owne,r face numerous restrictions, many arbitrary and completely foolish.
There is a background check in existence. The Orlando shooter was reported by the gun store and still passed the FBI check. (Was it for politically correct reasons? Don't know.)
Military is fully automatic. Not semi-automatic. That's what makes it military. Fully automatic weapons have been illegal since the 1930s.
If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
70% of the people in prison RIGHT NOW. identify as democrat.
They're just prone to violence when they don't get their way.
It does not seem to be that extraordinary of a claim. We know that blacks accounts for a disproportionately high number of murderers at 40%. We also know that blacks support Democrats at rates around 87%:7% for D:R. Those are the two component facts that make the claim fairly believable because that gives you one third of all murderers right off the bat. Hispanics are roughly 20% of the white population and support Democrats at rate of 63%:27% D:R. Non-hispanic whites are support Democrats at a rate of about 26%:36% D:R. The other minorities are basically a non-factor at this point.
If we assume 5,000 murders then we should expect 1740 done by Democrat blacks, 624 by Democrat whites, and 378 by Democrat hispanics with 140 done by Republican blacks, 864 by Republican whites, and 162 by Republican hispanics. This brings our totals to 2742 murders by Democrats and 1166 murders by Republicans with 1092 murders by individuals who would be considered independent or affiliated with a non-major party. Those figures do show a 2.35:1 ratio of D:R murderers.
This is what we should expect given national demographics. The question to ask at this point then is what factors would cause the murderer population to veer away from the national distribution for party affiliation in order to drop the ratio from 2.35:1 to below 2:1. One big factor would be income level which is a factor that would lead one to believe that it would increase the number of Democrat murderers and decrease the number of Republicans. What factors can you think of that might cause it to swing towards Republicans?
"Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
No.. No you didn't.
There were a lot of people charged for filing false police reports though.
Yeah I'll just leave this here...
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
Sevral of those congressmen are military vets with combat experience who could have quickly stopped this... except that in DC it's nearly impossible for law-abiding people to carry guns and protect themselves.
Yet again, we see it demonstrated that "gun free zones" are only places where good people are disarmed while evil people bent upon murder are not deterred in the slightest from breaking one more law and illegally carrying.
This Bernie supporter was determined to murder Republicans in congress. The fact that a local law in DC made it illegal for him to carry a gun was no deterrent since he already planned to break the local law against murdering somebody.
Some people simply refuse to face life in the REAL WORLD (sigh)
Like the New York Times?
Maybe they have some articles about how Trump is under investigation?
Faggot?
But there is no evidence of any treason committed by any Republican of note today. A hate-filled enemy of the Republic is you, pal...
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
successful or not, has been to the political LEFT of the target, or was an apolitical nutjob diagnosed as insane (like Hinkley and the jerk who shot Gabby Giffords).
This is an undeniable FACT.
President Lincoln- Killed by a Democrat.
President Garfield - Killed by insane guy (assissin did not kill for political reasons but because he delusionally believed president owed him a job)
President McKinley - Killed by an anarchist
President Kennedy - Killed by a Democrat-turned-communist
Look up the rest (Senators,congressmen, governors, etc), INCLUDING even the attemped assassins like "squeaky" Fromme(sp?) who shot at, but did not hit, President Ford. Squeaky was a lefty "flower child" of the sixties.
With a pistol you're making a statement: "I'm such a bad ass gunslinger that I don't need to aim!"
With a rifle it'd be, "I can't find my shoulder."
He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
Right, the National Socialist Worker's Party that instituted free education, free healthcare, massive public works projects, nationalized entire industries, that was totally right-wing. All you have to do is take Bernie Sanders' screeds and replace "the 1%" with "the Jews" and he sounds just like Hitler. It's still the same shit: you've got stuff, we want it, and we're going to bust your heads open in the street to get it.
Wow !! Did Bernie actually say he wanted to put "the 1%" in camps of some sort? How extraordinary!
> But traditional Ku Klux Klan chapters operate differently than skinhead groups,
Yes, because "traditional" KKK chapters operated as DEMOCRATS.
Classic bullshit. They asked about the GOP. You trot out some racist shitheads that committed ideological murders, not political murders. In no way whatsoever does anyone in any official GOP capacity condone killing based on race, but since you've decided an association is convenient for your political purposes, you make shit up and let it bounce around inside your head. No.
I know. I know. You'll find some Republican that went off the rails and SAID something inappropriate and pretend that validates you point. You'll say that this idiot was a lone wolf and not representative of the left. The only problem is you are finding some assholes spewing some idiotic shit in moments of frustration. I on the other hand can start a long list of leftists that have been shooting up politicians and innocents over the last decade.
you mean the 3 million illegal votes, and every OTHER lie the president has uttered in the last 6 monthjs alone?
It seems to be mostly liberals that are dangerous right now. I would definitely support adding a political test to the background forms for guns.
The congressman PLEADED "NO CONTEST" and accepted responsibility for is one-time bad act which was not even a very serious act of violence. Also, at the time of that act he was only a little-known candidate and his actions were NOT embraced by the GOP. Many GOP leaders rean to the nearest microphones and cameras to denounce him. Furthermore, NOBODY in the GOP was advocating for "body slamming" members of the press before the guy did it.
Your TEA Party example is total bovine excrement - TEA Party people famously did not even leave trash behind after their rallies, unlike the eco-warriors who trashed the indian reservation while trying to "save the planet" from a pipeline...
Now, let's compare this to today's shooter:
The guy worked for the Bernie campaign and on social media he expressed his support for his fave TV host, Rachel Madcow. He was a member of many online anti-Republican and anti-Trump hate sites with names like "Terminate the GOP". He spouted all the common progressive hashtags and slogans about Trump and the Republicans being illegitimate, evil, deserving death, etc. Leading progressive voices on the internet and TV fuelled this guy with messages he clearly injested including all the crap about Trump being a traitor for Russia and stooge of Putin and about Trumps imminent impeachment, etc. His social media pages would probably be plastered with Kath Griffin beheading Trump and the circus clowns (aka actors) in NYC stabbing Trump to death, except that the dude was in DC for the past couple of weeks preparing to kill Republicans rather than surfing the web at hios home in Illinois.
Where were you during the election when your conservative brethren were claiming that if Hilary Clinton won the election they may have to resort to "2nd Amendment Solutions"? The right have been pushing gun ownership as an alternative for the vote not going your way for as far back as I can remember... and I've been politically aware since the 80's. You should be celebrating the fact that this loon is taking your arguments seriously, shouldn't you?
This Time
Ballot or Bullet
Musket Solution
In 2012, Ted Nugent said in front of a crowd of revelers that Barack Obama should "suck on my machine gun". He added: "Hey Hillary, you might want to ride one of these into the sunset, you worthless bitch!"
You really have selective attention, don't you? How about just realizing that this behavior is inappropriate on either side of the aisle instead of your tribal myopathy?
Bring it halfwit.
I don't believe in karma, I just call it like I see it.
"Escape goat"? "Should of"? Really? Is this 'bring your kid to Slashdot' day?
English motherfucker, do any of you speak it?
Irrelevant argument: there is already gun control, and it didn't stop the murder.
Also, you apparently didn't understand the argument.
When murder is illegal, it is designed to punish murderers.
They are the ones who feel the burden of the law.
Gun control is the other way around.
Guns are not only used by criminals, the overwhelming majority are owned by law-abiding citizens.
Gun control is mostly designed to harass law-abiding citizens for daring to have different cultural values, meanwhile criminals have been shown to constantly simply ignore the laws.
For example, most deaths by shooting are not due to news-friendly mass shootings.
They're mostly poverty, gang, and drug related crimes, where these three factors are often interwoven.
If gangs smuggle and peddle drugs (and even human trafficking) from across the border, what makes you think they won't protect their merchandise with guns that are also smuggled? (Hint: they already do.)
Stop being brainwashed into thinking of "gun violence".
The real problem is "violence", no matter what the tool.
If you want to solve that, then look to solve the real causes: poverty, gangs, drugs, media, miseducation, etc.
First, Montana is NOT the middle west, it's the intermountain west. Second, since it was at the election, that's completely unreasonable to make as a commentary. No, it's the left that is the source of all the violence in the country.
So a left wing organization says 'there's a growing threat of right wing extremist terrorism!' and that is the same as ACTUAL terrorism that the left is doing? Really? On what planet do you live? That of George Orwell? As for these folks: Seventy-four percent of these murders came at the hands of right-wing extremists such as white supremacists, sovereign citizens and militia adherents. 1. If this is true why wasn't it reported in national news? Is it because...it didn't happen? 2. I cannot imagine a more diverse group of people that dislike each other, other than white supremecists, sovereign citizens, and militia adherants. Now, the left wingers that hate everyone who isn't twisted just like themselves, yeah, those I can see doing just about anything.
Funny, all his friends reported he was extremely left wing.
No Republican has ever owned slaves. That is not true of Democrats even today, who try and make people slaves. Bzzt. Your argument is wrong.
1. The parties COULD NOT POSSIBLY have "switched" in the 19th century... the Republican party was first created in time for Lincoln to be its first candidate in 1860 and the party was little-changed in its positions through to the turn of the century inder Teddy Roosevelt. (it was AGAINST segregation and slavery and FOR a strong federal military through the entire 40 years).
2. The Democrats were the party of slave owners from the time the nation was founded until Lincoln took all their slaves away in the civil war... then they formed the KKK and their southern governors enforced Jim Crow laws and segregation all the way up into the 1960s. The Democrats in the '60s switched to a different method of "owning" blacks - putting them on poverty-level entitlments making most of them dependent on the Democrats and unable to get free. It was The Democrats who segregated the federal government in the first place (Google: (democrat hero) President Woodrow Wilson). Democrats to this very day consider skin color to be one of the most important things about a human being, whereas the Republican party has been for its entire history philosophically opposed to considering skin color.
You were supposed to follow your party's cleverly constructed and deceitful dishonest talking points and claim that the parties switched places in the 1960s (NOT in the 19th century). It's still wrong, but you would have at least been consistent with your fellow leftists. That "the parties swapped in the 1960s" meme only works on idiots --- it depends on the idea that LBJ gave blacks their civil rights and then Nixon won on a "southern strategy". There are several problems with this:
1. LBJ privately bragged that he was ensnaring blacks with that action; he claimed the n*****s would be eating out of the Democrats hands for at least a century.
2. LBJ could not pass his civil rights bill with Democrat votes in congress; he had to turn to the GOP to get it to pass.
3. People are supposed to belive that southern racist Democrats were SO MAD at the passage of the civil rights bill (which Democrats in congress would not pass) that they punished the Democrats by changing parties to vote for the Republicans (who provided the needed votes to pass it). DOH!
4. Nixon's "southern strategy" was about sweeping-up southern states with more-traditional social views at a time when hippies were burning flags, bombing police stations and occupying college offices and protesting against soldiers. Nixon was a Quaker who had NO problem with blacks and was actually far to the left within the Republican party on everything but having a strong military and opposing the Soviets. Nixon created the damned EPAm and imposed wage and price controls like FDR had!
That was a screed that made no sense whatsoever. As a person who is not a redneck, but knows some, I can tell you with a knowledge sure and complete, that this is totally spurious. Now, about the hipster bozos being useful idiots, that's true.
Woah clam down there, I know it's a doggy dog world out there but you're like a bowl in a china shop.
I ask this question every time someone tries to say there was a shift. Exactly WHEN did this shift take place, where the KKK became part of the Republicans. I'll bet, you can't actually point to when.
Oh my, Archangel Michael seems to think he can create a false standard by requiring a particular and exact moment, as if anybody would be inane enough to be fooled by such a requirement. Sorry, but all you accomplished was to demonstrate, as you often do, how biased, flawed, and partisan your argumentation is. It's similar to the one Zeno used to point out sophistry, thus you are way too obvious.
So thanks, once again, you show us yourself, for the wretched fraud of a human being you are.
But I'd say that the Republican party turned its backs on blacks no later than 1876. Possibly sooner, depends on how you count NOT prosecuting the traitors in the South. Or Lincoln's willingness to talk peace.
Hell even the revered FDR was a fucking Racist pig segregationist.
Facts speak otherwise
And lets not forget Johnson's "Ni**er" comments.
You mean the one that's made-up?
If you can do that, why not make up quotes about anybody?
Hell I'll even say the Modern Democrat party is filled with the real kind of Racism with their "Blacks can't help themselves, we have to help them" attitude.
You say a lot of things, most of them fallacious, so what? You seem to think that nobody remembers the bullshit you say, but you shovel it enough that people catch on.
You can see examples in this video - https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Here's a nice video for you or this one or this or this one.
Maybe you should get a license before you exercise your First Amendment rights. Or at least attend a training course. You might not shoot your mouth off so easily.
The reason so many on the right oppose these "common sense" laws to "reform" gun regulations is in several parts:
(a) They know that ANY mental health clause will be used to ban all guns - under Obama progressives were openly claiming all over the internet and in the press that it was a mental disorder to be Conservative, or a Republican, or to want a gun. This blather was even converted into position papers passed around within parts of the government.
(b) Under Obama, the Democrats got so dishonest on guns that they tried a couple of back-door approaches to attacking the 2nd amendment: having the feds buy-up massive quantities of ammo for EVERY federal agency to cause shortages and price spikes, and having the EPA try to ban bullets by classifying bullets as pollution due to the lead content.
(c) Every single proposal the Democrats make on this subject imposes limits and costs and inconveniences upon the law abiding while Democrats alway refuse to clamp down on the law breakers. This makes it VERY CLEAR that the entire subject is about gun-grabbing and has NOTHING to do with safety.
Hell, for 8 years the Obama administration has refused to enforce immigration laws and allowed illegal aliens to openly parade (yeah, even LITERALLY) around in the streets with the claim that it was the LAWS that were the problem and that these laws needed to be changed to allow the bad behavior because too many people were violating them. Well, GOLLY, if that's the standard, then our gun laws are "broken" and all of us gun owners should be free to own ANY sort of gun up to and including fully-automatic weapons of all calibres and magazine capacities on the theory that there's nothing wrong with our "undocumented" guns and ammo...
When the left is that dishonest and hypocritical on the entire subject of a basic human and Constitutional right (the right to self defense), the only proper response is to fight them on ANY related action.
Huh - well, if we outlaw cars, we can put an end to car accidents. You might be on to something here! This is revolutionary!
I'm confused. Are you intentionally trying to look like an idiot to cover for your original moronic logical fallacy with yet another or did you think you were being clever? That's the trouble today. People are just naturally so damn stupid it's hard to tell the difference.
He thought he was witty, but he's only half-right. ;)
Of course it won't completely solve the problem. But reasonable gun control would solve enough of the problem to be worth it.
1: No it fucking wouldn't.
2: There's no such thing as "reasonable gun control" without amending the constitution. Every "gun control" law is unconstitutional.
1. i agree
2. you are wrong. not every gun control law is unconstitutional.
Example? restricting fire arms to anyone that has been disenfranchised (the constitutional supportable version here folks) by legal statute. very constitutional.
restricting sales of weapons to anyone that by the strict legal definition does not have a valid standing to be present in the country at the time of purchase? also constitutional. There are probably tons more examples that can be found.
whenever you toss out absolutes you are usually going to make yourself be wrong.
Well. You understand that 2% of the US counties have something like 33% - 50% of the gun violence.
Those wouldn't happen to be the 2% of counties that have a majority of the country's population, would they?
Anders Behring Breivik is a socialist freemason (templar), not a "far right person". His pictures with his freemason robes on is interesting.
LOL @ "once again resorting to violence." Alexander Bissonnette, Dylann Roof and Jeremy Christian were totally leftists!
The guy who shot up the church was just a raging racist loser, NOT a so-called "states rights" conservative. The idiot would not know the details of the commerce clause if his life depended on it, and he was NOT some Charlton Heston loving, NRA member, Tea Party sort. He did NOT have a bunch of social medai pages championing smaller government and supporting conservative politicians and TV hosts.
Today's congress shooter had social meadia pages showing his love for Rachel Maddow and Bernie Sanders and his love of high taxes and big wealth-redistributing government and his hatred of Trump and Republicans.
there are 86 people in france that would like to discuss that point....they cant of course because they were run over by a fucktard in a truck...
Lame concern troll la-la-la. The fascists are as bad as the liberals who are as bad as the commies who are bad as the fascists. I reckon it must be the outside agitators. Or the inside instigators. How about the intergalactic annoyances? Professional anarchists at any rate. So much for the tolerant left. This message was brought to you by George Soros. Paid for by Robert Mercer.
Must be a lot more than vehicle deaths given the attention and funding that terror achieves.
When living in the US, I was surprised how little media coverage road deaths get. Here in oz, each one is reported, and there is a big safety push. That said, I do not know if the stats are much different when one considers we do not have ice and snow here.
Why is this comment at -1?
"Apparently once he found out they were republicans, he came back armed and shooting." So I guess he was defending his country from traitors then?
Nah, just your typical everyday murdering Leftist attempting a political assassination as Leftists are wont to do whenever they are defeated in fair elections, just as Leftists have always done down through history.
Leftists ALWAYS resort to violence and murder. Force is the core of collectivist ideologies like socialism, communism, and fascism. They take from some under threat of force and give to others.
It is only natural that violence is an instinctive reaction from those on the Left to opposition. They are incapable of winning the battle on the field of competing ideas, hence why things like the Berkeley riots happen to suppress speech and ideas they cannot win against.
The Left are the ultimate Losers, proven today by Hodgkinson taking the Loser way out, and even screwing *that* up!
Australia 5
Canada 6 (They have ice and snow)
USA 11
Looks like the USA should be paying attention to something other than terror.
gun control != gun ownership
talk about triggered...
Have you ever wondered what would happen if a bad guy with a gun opened fire in the middle of a packed convention hall with tens of thousands of good guys with guns surrounding him? You have two possibilities: Everyone opens fire to stop the shooter, many miss (statistically), and the friendly fire is counted in the scores or hundreds. Nobody opens fire, recognizing that there is no clean shot with so many spectators around the shooter and it's simply not a safe place to discharge a firearm. In that case the shooter gets of a few dozen rounds and kills or injures a similar number before some brave soul tackles and disarms him.
In either case, many people are killed and/or injured. In a similar situation where nobody in the hall has a gun except the attacker, the same Samaritan takes him down and disarms him.
The presence of "good guys with guns" preventing death and injury in mass shootings is a myth and a Hollywood fantasy. There are times and places where a ggwag might make a difference, but these are not it.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
The police were already on the scene and at least one of the aids, if reports are true, was legally concealed carry with a firearm on site. Why he was so irresponsible as to not have his weapon on him as he played 2nd base, I'm not sure, but if you're going to be a GGWAG you really need to have your piece on you at all times. It like they think today was some kind of game. Sad.
"What's the deal with this? It seems as if there is a Left Leaning Fascist group growing out there...using all methods including violence to shut down and shout down anyone that isn't in perfect lockstep with their groupthink of what the world has to be."
Modeled right after the right wing militia groups, the authoritarian Orange president in power, and conservative nativists. Don't suddenly pretend to be surprised when NWO and anarchist groups show up as counterweights. Conservative groups have been doing this proudly for many, many years in the US, vilying those on the left as animals, subhuman, while carrying on death laws and policies here and abroad as well as supporting direct means of political disenfranchisement like preventing people from voting.
"We" called your deplorables. "You" called us snakes, excrement, and monkeys, called for a political candidate to be killed, and supported people that beat a man nearly to death. But yeah, your party forgave and voted in a member in Congress who body slammed s reporter for asking a question and hailed him repeatedly on conservative radio as a "man's man" for doing so.
Your hands are most certainly clean. Just place your hand on the good book when you swear that oath. You are good people not full of group think because you say so.
Jared Laughner was a Leftist as were most of the others you mentioned. You fail again and again.
When did Hitler, during his ascendancy (or ever, really) say he wanted to put the Jews in camps? The camps came way, way, way after dehumanizing them and blaming them for all the Germans' problems.
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
Or maybe even a patriot.
Who knows.
With all this Russian backchannel action going on there are a few people pissed off for a few reasons.
Mistake?
More integrity and honour?
WTF is it with the partisan shit here these days?
You're next, fucker
Bring a lot of ammo, snowflake.
This has nothing to do with the "Civil Rights Act", you racist fuck. People are just fine with treating each other equally. Except communists, who always think they need to enforce their ways upon everyone else at the barrel of a gun.
Hodgkinson was a Berniac
I believe the preferred term is "bern-out".
It's not a growing "threat". It's a growing list of actual terror attacks from the right.
There are three times as many right-wing terror incidents causing death since 9/11 than from any other group.
https://theintercept.com/2017/...
You are welcome on my lawn.
the creator isn't necessarily the garbage collector of the universe.
Wasn't my point at all. Masons won't let you join if you can't swear an oath to a higher authority. That's the mindset of the people that wrote "a well regulated millitia..." They believed in rules, and good conduct, and a hierarchy of authority that ends with some higher level of moral authority. You get rid of all that and there no absolute authority to say murder isn't wrong. I just wanted to point out that the 2nd isn't absolute, you have to behave yourself to secure it. Our shooter today clearly didn't meet that standard.
[code](void) main(void){ ][/code]
A void casted main() is perfectly legal C, but only embedded guys call main like that.
Nope. You, citizen, are responsible for getting your own ass, carcass still attached, home safely, should you be so inclined. This is why you are allowed under the Constitution to carry a weapon. This is also why you should be circumspect with your actions when under the direct scrutiny of law enforcement.
People who do not realize this and do not act accordingly leads to sad and frequently tragic ends. from my perspective it is just predictable. Disorientation to authority, combined with misapprehensions concerning the place of law enforcement, conflated with a healthy dose of human nature, and finished off with an exacerbating dose of violence or threat and, well...you get what you ordered.
Just so you understand this I will restate it. It is not now, nor has it ever been, the responsibility of the government or law enforcement to provide you with a chaperone, a shepherd, or a nanny. It is their responsibility, at a certain point, to provide you with a lawyer, but if you have reached this point you have probably made some very poor choices already.
But never, ever make the mistake again of thinking that another person is responsible for your safety. It is the stupidest fucking thing I have ever heard a suspected human being utter in my entire life. No one cares about your life as much as you do. Some do not care at all. Not only do they care more about themselves, but they also possesses an ingrained mechanism that forces them to err on the side of their own survival. It operates at a level of consciousness that is pre-lingual. They don't even get to think in words before it kicks in. And you are relying on that tenuous crap shoot of every damn thing lining up for you to make it home safely?
I'm surprised you have made it this far.
When the only tool you have is a claw hammer every problem starts to look like the back of someone's skull.
By definition, this is not a mass shooting. A mass shooting, by government definition, is 4 or more killed.
Actually by definition, this is terrorism. It was violence used to make a political statement. That is practically the dictionary definition of terrorism:
terrorism
noun
the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.
Wait a minute, let me just check something. Oh, he's white. Nevermind. Mass shooting it is.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
"The Republicans started this preach violence for political gain thing after Reagan lost"
Citations, please.
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
That's what you get when any idiot has the right to have guns.
And you are we get when any idiot has a right to free speech.
Are we talking about liberal gun control or conservative abortion laws? I'm so confused.
Yes, there might be a left-leaning fascist group growing but that's only in response to the multiple right-leaning fascist groups that already exist.
My question was quite specific.
Why don't I hear the same outrage about the mandatory licence plate on your vehicle?
Somebody is confused. Four or more killed makes a mass murder.
In another word: Communism.
You have no idea if this guy wasn't a paid repub false flag trump lover. Both sides can play this game.
No. Millions of people protested in the streets in the wake of Trump. A handful were bad. It's not the left that is bad, but the right continues their hate. Just look at what you've said here. Hate.
Republican preaching violence? There has been kooks on both sides but I've read that most mass shooters are left wing or one of the "identifies" that the Democratic party cater to.
And we KEEP TELLING you when. Passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. That whole Dixiecrat thing, ya know? Of course you've never heard of it...
Holy Crap! I nominate you for a Nobel Peace Prize!
In fact, in 1792, constitutional gun control meant requiring able-bodied men to purchase a gun and present it for inspection.
The violent liberal Bernie Bro who attacked people with a rifle this morning? The FBI says that more people are beaten to death every year with pipes, baseball bats, and bare hands then are killed with any sort of long gun (rifles, shotguns, etc) and that includes hunting accidents, suicides and the rest.
What scares them about long-guns is that a guy with a rifle can kill a VIP from a distance with no warning from a concealed position. They could care less about blacks killing each other with pistols in the inner-cities.
It would be nearly impossible to get near enough to a high-level VIP with a competent security detail to use a pistol effectively. Someone could be 300-400 yards or more distant and have an excellent chance for a kill-shot on a VIP with a security detail, using a 'scoped rifle. Soros must sweat like a pig every time he has to be outside in the open.
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
"You have no idea if this guy wasn't a paid repub false flag trump lover."
Makes perfect sense. He knew decades ago Trump would become President one day! How could I have not seen it! And he PRETENDED to vote D in election after election! And years of social media supporting far left ideology! Those darn "repubs" are so smart!
who else commonly posts but avoided this one?
With all of the gerrymandered republican districts, it's really the only way left to get republicans out of office.
While it's convenient for gun clubs to pretend that the Amendment was about something other than the National Guard it's really just a convenient lie.
The guy was over 60 as well - take a look at the 2nd Amendment and you'll see he's outside the age range defined.
Indeed, it's explicitly there to arm the State.
Oh you meant something else? Some sort of self-destruct button for the State? How about you actually read the thing and keep the National Guard in mind instead of whatever lies Oliver North at the NRA is telling you.
For one you seem to assume voter statistics as significant for the whole population. With voter turn ut as low as it is, and I would assume voter turnout amongst murderers are even lower as I think your assumption of lower than average income is correct, then the statistical significance of the numbers are dubious at best.
Australian Shooter here with my humble opinion (take it or leave it!)
The gun laws here keep the honest guys honest, but it won't solve the problem America has that all these rifles are still out there in circulation, and easy to get.
Our gun laws prevent a lot of rifles that could do this from entering circulation. This has only happened through a massive buy back and gun control over the past 20 years, as well as making it just enough of a pain to go through the hoops to gun ownership, especially for automatic rifles.
With the reluctance of US citizens handing them over due to your second amendment, I really think it wont work... well not for decades at best.
Having so many gun owners with concealed carry permits etc. means there are other things that don't happen over there. I would say that any major terrorism plot would be cut down a lot due to the high level of personal gun ownership, as well as carry/concealed carry permits. Knowing full well that (in some states) one in 10 people could shoot you if you tried something, would make it hardly worthwhile.
So what is wrong with the people committing these acts? What drives people to go that crazy that they will take another life? The gun enables them to do it easily, but the crazy is always there. I wish here was an easy solution.
You also saw a LOT of news about Trump supporters attacking, beating, vandalizing or intimidating people of various ethnicities or ideologies.
Your memory is not serving you correctly. To prove this to yourself you could try to come up with a list of incidents. When you start googling around, you will notice that most incidents are, in fact, against Trump supporters. The real question is, why memories such as yours are so prevalent.
How is this absolute garbage-fire of a comment marked as Insightful? Are you really that fucking stupid as to try and draw parallels between Sanders and the Nazis? Holy shit, this is possibly one of the -stupidest- comments I have ever seen on this site, and that's a really, really high bar to clear.
It has more to do with the estrogen content if the water, from widespread use of birth control medications,not the availability of weapons.
So roll your sleeves up.
Join the reserves.
And leave the gun in the army barracks. You don't need it unless you're currently in the millita training.
Google "Second amendment solutions"
Rat-tat-tat-tat-tat ASSHOLE!
LOL
Death to all cops, death to all military, death to all politicians and anyone who supports these people should be fucking SHOT DEAD!
This should only be the first shots of MANY!
FUCKING DIE ASSHOLES! TIME FOR YOUR ARROGANCE, GREED AND CRUELTY AND YOUR WARS ON THE POOR TO COME BACK AND SHOOT YOU IN THE FACE!
FUCKING DIE!
I wish it were antifa, we need more political assassinations! I hope the next bullet gets YOU next, scumbag! Death to every bootlicker! Fuck every klansman piece of shit like him and like you!
Rat-tat-tat-tat-tat dickface!
A person hunts down people who disagrees with ... your outrage ought to be at the person and those who promote such cause ...
But that would take a non-zero amount of humanity.
Uh, where is the proof they were antifa?
And, no, other moron, skeptic asking for proof is not spellt r o c k.
There's a web site that lists them.
Some of the stories turned out to be real though, but I don't know which ones. That's one of the problems with crying wolf.
Oh you American idiot monkeys.
Everyone outside of the US knows the Nazis were right-wing fascists, not socialists by anything other than two letters. They MURDERED the communists, socialists, and people like Sanders.
Go read a fucking history book.
Sincerely, a German.
So, what are you suggesting, that we should further divide ourselves by pointing our fingers at the left and blaming it on them?
Yeah, that ought to help.
NRA formed by the North post Civil War and was all about training the men of their rights. Im not sure the liberals fully understand their own history.
This. For once, maybe look at how other civilised countries deal with guns. Ireland, for example, makes it extremely difficult for a civilian to own a gun, so nobody does. There are still murders carried out using illegally-held guns, and many people in Ireland would be of the opinion that there is a gun problem there. Yet, the number of gun-related deaths per capita is ten times lower in Ireland than the US. Could it be that the difficulty in obtaining firearms has some sort of effect on their availability to criminals? Crazy thought, I know.
Yup, actually I believe ALL mass shooters since the 60's who have had a political affiliation have turned out to be Democrat supporters in one way or another.
Plus, the exact figure has never been researched but something like over 95% of gun murders are committed by Democrat voters or likely Democrat voters.
As Scott Adams pointed out the reason Democrats and Republicans are on opposite sides of the gun debate is obvious -- when a Democrat sees another Democrat with a gun he sees someone likely to shoot him, but when a Republican sees another Republican with a gun he sees someone likely to protect him.
Then why isn't it reported on national news? Because it didnt' happen?
Shocking, socialist thieves murdering other socialist thieves!
Like you would know anything, at all about history. You're just a Russian rape-baby who's been fed propaganda your entire life.
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
When did Hitler, during his ascendancy (or ever, really) say he wanted to put the Jews in camps? The camps came way, way, way after dehumanizing them and blaming them for all the Germans' problems.
So are you saying Trump will eventually put the Mexicans (sorry, illegal immigrants), Muslims (sorry, terrorists), the media (sorry, fake news) in camps?
He hasn't said he would put any of them in camps, but he sure loves blaming them for everything. Ok, those and those "sad" "haters"... maybe he wants to be haters and sad people in camps too?
And while we at it, are you implying that conservatives would one day want to put "liberals" and "the left" into camps? Conservatives love to dehumanize and blame liberals just as much as the other way around.
Personally, I do think conservatives are much better at dehumanizing the opposition. Generally, the left loves to call the right stupid, while the right loves to call the left down right evil.
The left thinks the right is Jar Jar. The right thinks the left is Emperor Palpatine (not Vader, Vader was redeemed at the end, while godless commies are irredeemable, what with them not believing in god to forgive them!)
In response to threats, actual assaults, and encouragements from the Left for the Left to instigate and expand
Nice.
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
When did Hitler, during his ascendancy (or ever, really) say he wanted to put the Jews in camps?
In Mein Kampf, published 1925. So...no later than 18 July 1925. The New York Times, however, has an article about his Anti-Semitism in 1922, and there are letters from just after World War I.
The camps came way, way, way after dehumanizing them and blaming them for all the Germans' problems.
Well, yes, but that's because such anti-Semitism began during the Roman Empire, and the Germans were practicing such violence in the Middle Ages. That Nazi Germany's first camps were started in 1933, immediately after he took power, is not going to change that fact, but it's kinda pointless to assert, isn't it?
Seriously though, what kind of denialist propaganda have you been drinking?
That kind of attack is just as easy when you also have idiots running around with firearms. It's just that when you allow that, you have to deal with both kinds of attacks.
And the 1st amendment only covers ink and quill, manual print presses, and post via horse and carriage, right? The fourth also doesn't cover any technology newer than circa 1760. Afterall, newer, faster printers, delivery via automobile or electronic means only promotes incidents of mass media.
"To prove this to yourself you could try to come up with a list of incidents."
Here's an old post of mine contemporary to the 2016 election. It's not excursively fake reports -- but it includes them. My memory is fine.
https://slashdot.org/comments....
Kohath's "fakehatecrimes" citation lists others.
"most incidents are, in fact, against Trump supporters. "
What did you say before? Oh yeah... "Your memory is not serving you correctly. To prove this to yourself you could try to come up with a list of incidents." I haven't heard of any trump supporters falsely reporting attacks or intimidation by Clinton supporters.. Maybe you can refresh your memory and list some?
It has been reported on national news. It just didn't make it to Fox or Infowars, so I can understand your confusion.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Since I don't watch or read Fox or Infowars, I'd not have seen it there anyway. NY Times, Washtington Post, Washington Times, Denver Post - phhht. Not to mention UK"s telegraph, times, The Jerusalem Post, the Toronto Globe and Mail - no I couldn't possibly have missed it. But wait, a policeman stopped a car doing 120 mph in a 70mph, it must be sexism that caused this! News at 11. Meanwhile you creatures have been advocating assasinating the President. But that's perfectly okay because after all, you people just FEEL so strongly. Crawl back under a rock, please, and stay there.
True. However there have been many instances abroad where people go nuts (terrorists and otherwise) using knives. Do you think this was because they like to use knives, or was it because they couldn't easily get their hands on a gun in that particular country due to gun control laws? Now do you think if those afore mentioned crazies were able to get their hands on guns, would the carnage be more, or less?
There has been a couple recent cases of this in England. Did their stricter laws prevent more incidents from happening? Who knows, maybe not. However it is pretty hard to argue that the severity of the incident wasn't lower as a result.
Obviously the pregnant teens were causing all the violent crime... A pregnant teen with a gun is dangerous indeed! Target them for gun control, and boom, problem solved!
Though seriously, there could be a link economically where many pregnant teens lack support, and probably poor desperate people might be more inclined to turn to violence when they perceive they have no other alternatives...
Then I'll try again.
You don't have to register a car. If you want to use it on a public road then it has to be registered. My gun is on private property and used on private property.
Nobody wants to take away my car. Registering a gun is step 1 of confiscation.
There is no constitutional right to own a car but the founders of the U.S. felt that free speech and gun ownership were so important that they are #1 and #2 in the Bill of Rights.
Thank dog for liberal incompetence!
I bet he was praying about the time he realized the cops were ready to blow his little pea-brains out. No atheists in foxholes.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Yeah, nevermind the conservatives that recently shot up Planned Parenthood and Jewish Community Centers, or stabbed Muslims. Nope, no political motivations there.
You might want you check your definition of "ALL".
You got modded up for this, but it is completely nonsensical to the actual discussion. The point is, taking guns away does not stop mass murderers. They just adapt to using cars, trucks, bombs and other weapons like they do now in the UK and EU. You're taking a sarcastic statement at face value, even though you KNOW that is not what he meant. Then other people latched on because they want to be right and heard despite the fact that you're intentionally misreading the statement. Keeping guns legal is not keeping the use of gun in a crime legal. It is keeping law abiding citizen's right to use their guns legally instead of removing them because some people abuse their rights.
No atheists in foxholes.
Actually, there are atheists in foxholes. Statistically, religious conviction in the US military is about the same as the general population. Some studies even suggest the military is LESS religious (you can read wiki and follow the sources if you want)
Also, the "no atheists in foxholes" statement can be interpreted as saying that religious belief is irrational, and that only under extreme stress and calamity (like in a foxhole) would otherwise rational people convert. Sitting here comfortably, I would agree with that idea. If I ever get into a stressful situation, I may consider praying to Joe Pesci, as the late George Carlin suggested. Or pray to Superman to come save me, like Homer Simpson.
So if you're going to bash liberals, it would be much better if you suggest that liberals are the religious loons, like the KKK from which the Democratic was founded upon, or those who worship communist figures like Stalin and Mao like gods.
After Reagan lost what, exactly?
Why wasn't this called "terrorism"? At this point, I suspect a number of the attacks that ISIS or large terrorist organizations take credit for are lone nuts. Taking credit doesn't require proof, and raises their infamy and appearance of power.
Bolt action rifles For all! Regulate the assault rifles. We don't let random people buy dynamite either.
Why don't I hear the same outrage about the mandatory licence plate on your vehicle?
Sovereign Citizens are known for making up their own license plates, driver's licenses, and otherwise objecting to that system as well.
http://www.foxla.com/news/local-news/255331221-story
https://www.adl.org/sites/default/files/documents/assets/pdf/combating-hate/Lawless-Ones-2012-Edition-WEB-final.pdf
http://www.knoxnews.com/story/news/crime/2017/06/14/self-proclaimed-sovereign-hebrew-israelite-bites-off-end-kpd-officers-thumb/397736001/
I have no way to be certain why you don't hear about it, that is beyond my ability to assess, but perhaps you don't hang out in the right forums?
Favorite thing for you people to drag out, but that is not the case. Societal woes of the day were different. Despite the left trying desperately to make conservatives out to be racists, it's actually far from the truth. Liberals have hamstrung minorities for decades by telling them they need help to get into college, need scores dropped so they can pass, etc. Conservatives attempt to treat them as equals. Republicans today would still have been Republicans in the 1800s. The difference is that during the 60's, liberals realized if they convinced minorities they were permanent victims, and that THEY had the only answers, they could garner votes. What was liberal then is not what is liberal now. One is about rights and equality, another is about forcing ones own ideology beliefs (or lack thereof) on others.
So you get it. Good.
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
Automobiles didn't exist when they were alive, but more importantly, they specifically said that they didn't list every right anyway, and the right to travel is well established in law.
AFAWK... this was not a gun free zone.
If it remains that way, this would be only the second mass shooting with more than 3 casualties to occur in a non-gun free zone in the last 30 years.
While it's not legal to conceal a rifle in Virginia, it is legal to carry a concealed pistol (with permit).
What we do know though... is that a couple of good guys with a gun, stopped a bad guy with a gun.
DC has no reciprocity with Virginia and the Safe Passage part of the misnamed Firearm Owners Protection Act does not apply. Further under federal law, open carry without a permit issued by the state of Virginia is unlawful in Virginia no matter what Virginia law says.
So this event in Virginia was effectively a gun free zone. The only way a civilian could have had a firearm legally would be if they had a Virginia carry permit and had not left or planned to travel into DC.
Seriously? Out of the last hundred shootings coming from insane right wingers, you want to take the ONE coming from an insane left winger to validate your biases? This is why we can't have nice things.
The cynic in me says it's always politics, unless the shooter agrees with my politics, then it must a different reason.
Fanatically anti-fanatical
will the GOP [apologize for] all of the violent acts committed by their party
Body slam a reporter vs shoot as many baseball players as possible. By God, you're right! It's the exact same thing
Nice attempt at shifting the goal posts.
While posting about my disappointment with Trudeau's abandonment of electoral reform, a successful and wealthy 45 year old family friend started interjecting with off-topic anti-Trudeau memes. He referred to anyone at all who responded to a libtard. It is frankly amazing how some people's IQ can drop 30 points when politics comes up.
You seem to be part of the problem, not the solution.
WHAT shootings from insane right-wingers? Really?
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
looks like about 1964, when they were supporting Barry Goldwater.
We're discussing " people going out trying to kill a mass of people in the name of Christ.." so your objection is irrelevant, not that it isn't wrong, but it is irrelevant.
LOL !! This comment needs more attention! NAOW PEOPLE! mod this shit up.
Would that be one of the friends who thought he was disturbed or on drugs? Or one of the friends who thought he was apolitical? Or one of the friends who thought he had a sudden change in personality? Which is it?
Instead of relying on an alleged friend, let's try an examination we can review. Hmm. Lots of stuff there, but you know what? It's more indicative of disjointed thinking than any particular ideology.
Of course, we could also consider the medical doctors who treated him, at court order, and put him on anti-psychotics, and consider that maybe your partisan bias is leading you astray.
Iconically, that's a position the left and the right both agree on.
Log in or piss off.
Fakenews much? 22 of the post election attacks were false flags by liberals, many have been arrested for filing false police reports. http://www.breitbart.com/big-g...
Sure keep trying that none-sense that democrats and republicans switched sides to cover up the fact that Democrats have been on the wrong side of history the majority of the time for their entire existence.
Isn't that effectively what I said?
Everybody no matter who in life should be armed. if EVERYONE had guns, the few people like this guy would think twice about their actions
Had you added that with the amount of bureaucratic filing time needed, it would give somebody the time needed to figure out whether they truly wanted to kill their self or not, this could have been the best suicide advocacy argument ever.
Despite the left trying desperately to make conservatives out to be racists, it's actually far from the truth.
Despite the right desperately trying to make liberals out to be racists, it's actually far from the truth.
Liberals have hamstrung minorities for decades by telling them they need help to get into college, need scores dropped so they can pass, etc.
Liberals have worked for decades to try to ensure that college is open and accessible, as well as affordable, and rejected biased testing and other forms of discrimination.
Conservatives attempt to treat them as equals.
Conservatives attempt to blame minorities for everything, and use them as scapegoats.
Republicans today would still have been Republicans in the 1800s.
Republicans today would repudiate the vast majority of Lincoln's 1860 platform. They go into fits even reading it.
The difference is that during the 60's, liberals realized if they convinced minorities they were permanent victims, and that THEY had the only answers, they could garner votes.
The difference is that during the 60s, Republicans realized that Democrats were getting around to forcing the White Southern Conservatives to behave, and realized they could garner votes from these disaffected bigots.
What was liberal then is not what is liberal now.
Actually, liberals were treated the same way back then as they are now, blamed for everything, condescended towards, and attacked by Conservatives.
One is about rights and equality, another is about forcing ones own ideology beliefs (or lack thereof) on others.
Yes, that is what conservatives are about, forcing their beliefs on others. That's exactly what they do.
Since we share our alma mater, I would say that when Jesse Helms switched from Democrat to Republican would be a good timeframe for when Democrats and Republicans fully switched. But it wasn't overnight and you know it. It was a gradual transition.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
That is a bunch of nonsense, there is nothing to do with the GOP there.
Fascists and Nazis get listed, but those are Left ideologies - socialists, national socialists. Oh sure, they're to the "right" of Communism, but still in the progressive camp. White Supremacists doesn't get you very far away from the Nazis so there is nothing much anywhere close to the GOP. It is actually kind of funny to think that someone is trying to pin "racism" on the party formed to free the slaves, and that fought segregation. Not even the "anti-government" stuff gets close. The GOP is for limited government, fiscal responsibility (at least officially), and personal liberty, not an absence of government.
Misconstruing Mussolini
Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian
Hitler, Mussolini, Roosevelt
British Fascists To the Left
More on the BNP’s success at stealing labor votes. Here are some wonderful posts about the BNP by Daniel Hannan. For instance:
Incidentally, any BBC presenters reading this, why do you keep calling the party “far Right”? Weren’t you listening to Nick Griffin’s acceptance speech? He wasn’t going to talk about immigration policy he said, since everyone knew where he stood on the subject. No, his priority was to expose the way in which public assets had been privatised. Look at the BNP’s manifesto: it wants nationalisation, subsidy, higher taxes, protectionism and (sotto voce) the abolition of the monarchy. And look at where its votes came from. The BNP is a symptom of Labour’s collapse.
Plus readers might remember his interview with Vox Day:
VD:One thing that tends to confuse Americans is that the British National Party is not very popular despite holding what appear to be populist views on immigration and the European Union. Why do they enjoy so little support compared to the three major parties?
DH:Because they are, contrary to the way they are described in the BBC, a party of the far left. They’re in favor of nationalization, they’re in favor of protectionism, they want workers’ councils to run industry, they want a massive state program of rebuilding manufacture. Like Hayek said about the socialist roots of Nazism, they are a national socialist party and the socialist bit is very important to them. Plus, there is a line, a very important line in politics, between being anti-immigration and anti-immigrant. And they’ve crossed that line.
VD: In a certain respect, they really are fascists, but in the Italian Fascist sense.
DH: Yeah. I think most of these so-called “far right” parties are on the left by any normal definition. It’s a brilliant media trick in Europe to always refer to them as “the far right”. The target of that is the mainstream right. Every time you read about the BNP in the press, it’s always prefaced with “the far right BNP”, as though they were like us, but more so, which is the opposite of the case. When somebody reads that, it doesn’t make them think any worse of the BNP, it makes them think worse of the right. Which, of course, is why they do it.
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
Right, the National Socialist Worker's Party that instituted free education, free healthcare, massive public works projects, nationalized entire industries, that was totally right-wing
Everyone outside of the US knows the Nazis were right-wing fascists, not socialists by anything other than two letters. Go read a fucking history book.
Sincerely, a German.
Everybody with a bad education "knows" this, the result of decades of propaganda. Many of the policies the Nazi's supported are not, however, right wing. Economically, it is more accurate to view them as left wing. For example, fixing prices and wages (as the Nazis did in 1936) is something you expect to find in left wing societies that do not believe in a free market.
The same reasoning applies to many other Nazi policies, which were extremely left wing by both historical standards, and the standards of today.
Perhaps you might benefit from reading three or four economics books?
If a socialist kills another socialist does that somehow magically make the first person not socialist?
The Nazi's killed their opponents - which included many of the other self-labelled socialists - but that's actually something we would expect from real world socialism. Socialism doesn't translate well to the real world, as history has repeatedly shown, leading to tyranny and violence as well as economic disaster (over the long term). This sort of thing is why successful modern nations are not socialist. Even Western EU nations of today are properly described as capitalist welfare states, not socialist, despite a lot of propaganda to the contrary.
Being a German does not excuse ignorance today any more than it did in the 1930's. Perhaps you should try reading Marx and Engels so you'll know what real socialism is.
"No Nazi. Not a Nazi. You're the Nazi, for pointing out my goddamn swastika flag."
You are welcome on my lawn.
Your claim is a lie, and a stupid one at that even if it is commonly attempted by some parts of the political spectrum. How did you come to believe such nonsense? .
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
I would never point out anything so obvious, .... or your love for theatre. ;)
You're probably a beer and pretzel man.
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
"You also saw a LOT of news about Trump supporters attacking, beating, vandalizing or intimidating people of various ethnicities or ideologies."
News Flash: 99% of these stories, yes 99% turned out to be people being PAID by the DNC to be violent at Trump rallies. #fake_news #fake_news #fake_news from you Sir.
Was I that unclear? Isn't that pretty much exactly what I said?
Doesn't this statement indicate that:
" they either couldn't be verified or turned out to be out-right fakes by folks on the "other side" who felt they needed to lie or stage fake hate because... TRUMP."
I'm thinking people are just reading like a single sentence and then stop: "You also saw a LOT of news about Trump supporters attacking, beating, vandalizing or intimidating people of various ethnicities or ideologies"
" #fake_news #fake_news #fake_news from you Sir."
Sigh... #read_everything_before_spouting_off to you sir.
The unilateral war that was initiated on a lie pushed through congress against the international concerns that got ~300,000 civilians killed, destabilized the region, and lead to a power vacuum and the rise of ISIS (but hey, that was the after the GOP lost control).
You know. IRAQ.
Your entire party were literally war-mongering. It got a whole bunch of people killed. 3,000 dead troopers are on your hands. Trillions wasted. Political capital burned to the ground. Arguably it emboldened Russia to invade Georgia and Ukraine.
The war was planned for PRIOR to 9/11 and they used that tragedy as an excuse.
"In response to threats, actual assaults, and encouragements from the Left for the Left to instigate and expand" Citations please.
This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.
http://mobile.wnd.com/2017/01/...
http://www.nationalreview.com/...
For two. More?
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
antifa planned it and admitted it was them??? this isnt hard
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
And then the cop that went to take him down slipped on a banana peel, and tipped over a bin of marbles.
I seem to remember a recently elected Congressman from the Midwest pleading guilty to bodyslamming a reporter. Or by "recent" do you mean only within the last few days?
To be fair, the reporter was physically fine, and was being a dick, so my take is that it was hilarious. The reporter walked into an office uninvited, was asked to leave, started badgering Gianforte with questions while shoving a recorder in his face, was asked to lower the recorder and leave, and, upon his continued refusals, was body slammed. When you refuse polite requests after invading someone's personal space then escalating it to a physical altercation seems pretty normal, no?
There's a difference between reacting physically to someone that's in your face and goading you and going out and indiscriminately shooting people with a different ideology. I never saw public figures casually talk about beheading Obama like Kathy Griffin did recently, call for blowing up the White House (Madonna), shoot a clown that looks like him (Snoop Dog)... though that last one is particularly interesting because when a rodeo clown donned an Obama mask he received a lifetime performance ban. Anyway, the point is that, this might be a single nutcase, but with half of Twitter (including journalists) saying he deserved it and then trying to say that it's Trump's fault, it's effectively nothing less than a call for violence against the democratically elected administration.
... you Amerians have a serious social problem with firearms, I post this (parent) comment and get tons of "foes" on slashdot and not a single argumentative response, are you lot completely incapable of engaging in rational discussion of this topic? Or do you settle everything with guns instead... oh there's no guns here so FOE button me to death like I give a shit.
If I interpret your argument correctly you are saying firearms preserve your freedoms and undesirable deaths are the price? But how can you explain the massive erosion of freedoms in your country over the last century? Surely that's not attributed to what little gun control there is? I'm not saying my county is any more free but I don't see how guns would help in all but the worst and most unstable state of governance.
No, I am not saying that - but they can help preserve your freedom, or cost you your freedom.
I don't know if you're a native English speaker and most native speakers don't get this right.
You live, most likely, in a free society. Your movements aren't restricted. You can do anything you want, for the most part. However, there are penalties.
You are free to kill me. You are not at liberty to do so. If you try to kill me, I have the right to defend myself.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."