Let's talk about guns, shootings, solutions and idiotic suggestions

Yes...let's break this down shall we...

1) You are automatically a Fascist if you support either an individual or a policy promoted by a Fascist. There is no grey here.

No, "Hitler had a dog too" doesn't automatically make dog owners Nazis. What are you 5?? There is an age limit on this place you know.....

You have openly supported anarchist ideals here...

Oh look you forgot to mark #2..... and no I haven't.

Also, if I did that would make me NOT a fascist.

Anarchy is a stepping stone towards implementation of a Fascist state. History proves this.

A potential one yes, because authoritarianism is the go-to backlash against anarchy.... they are opposites, you can't be both at the same time.

2) the typical I am not a Republican argument. Yet you openly support every statement and policy promoted by the Party. Sorry....it doesn't work like that. Actions speak...not your empty words.

I don't openly support every statement and policy by the party. Sorry... you're just full of shit.

I'm pro-choice, not in the strictly pro-abortion and fuck your choice everywhere and anywhere else as Democrats/lefties use the term but actual pro-choice.... consenting adults should be able to whatever they want with their bodies, public/safety/privacy restrictions apply of course but the rest of it is none of the governments bidnizz in my opinion.

I'm anti-prohibition.

I support gun control regulations.

I support environmental protection and continued research into alternative energy technologies.

I support public education.

I support public HC.

These are all things the vast majority of the GOP doesn't support.
3) Traitor...100%. You again have openly supported the Jan 6th coup attempt.

No, I haven't, I just don't consider a riot a coup attempt.... because I've actually seen coups and that was nothing of the sort.

And you make excuses for those that participated. Simple....just like Point One for making a Fascist. Anyone supporting a traitor...is a traitor. Again...no grey area here.

Not buying into your hysteria and leftist histrionics isn't supporting any traitors.

Take some bars.... have some tea.... maybe smoke a joint and calm yourself.

I have no problem with people being a Fascist traitor....if they have the balls to admit it. Grow some balls bobo

Admit to your absolutely psychotic delusions??

Why would I do any such thing??
 
“It’s funny,” said a comedian. Did Bill Maher mention that any entertainment containing gun violence carries a content warning or rating to encourage parental engagement? Or that screening services and devices have lockable settings to moderate violent content? Parents who ignore these features do a disservice to their children.
That doesn't make the anti-gun leftist of Hollywood who make mega-billions glamorizing gun violence any less hypocritical.
 
WALNUT CREEK — In an effort to keep guns out of the wrong hands, the city will begin fining residents who are found not to be storing their firearms safely.

Under an ordinance unanimously approved Tuesday by the City Council, firearm owners who keep their weapons at home must stow them in a locked container or disable them with a safety device.
Several other Bay Area cities have established similar laws, including San Francisco, Oakland, Berkeley, Alameda, Antioch, Dublin and Pleasanton. With the new ordinance, Walnut Creek officials hope to pre-empt a situation where a certified gun owner’s weapons are stolen by someone who intends to commit violence with them.
“There’s a carelessness and cavalier-ness about guns in some people that really scares me and makes me uncomfortable,” Councilwoman Cindy Darling said at the meeting. She recounted growing up in a gun-friendly family but more recently speaking to her mother about taking away her father’s guns as his dementia worsens.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/w...pc=U531&cvid=bb8c7f9961ab4459ecd9eb674d84df8d
 
The Rhode Island House has approved a ban on firearm magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition, after beating back efforts to "grandfather in'' large-capacity feeding devices already owned by Rhode Islanders.

In a night of acrimonious debate over gun-safety proposals, the House also voted to raise from 18 to 21 the minimum age for buying firearms, and to prohibit the open carrying of loaded rifles and shotguns in public.
Bennett's amendment was the first in a series of anticipated attempts to raise the size limit and/or "grandfather in" any high-capacity ammunition feeding devices already owned by Rhode Islanders.

And it failed on a 45-to-23 vote that set the tone for the night and clearly defined the Democrats who side with the House's outnumbered Republicans on gun issues.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/worl...pc=U531&cvid=15cdad1abd8c41049be4b4d4e162da1d

piecemeal, but things are happening to protect the public
 
The Bay Area doesn't have a lot of credibility outside the Bay Area.
 
MADISON, Wis. (WMTV) - Unwanted guns were dismantled and made into garden tools Saturday in the Midvale Community Lutheran Church parking lot.
During the Church’s Gun to Gardens event, any member of the public was able to turn in their unwanted and unloaded guns.

Following six weeks of training, members of the Church’s congregation assisted during the event, removing firearms from vehicles, and transferring them to a chop saw station where they were then dismantled.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/m...sedgntp&cvid=51a1a43bd3cb4d36ae7fe22e9e2dd324
 
it will be hailed as an 'historic bipartisan agreement', but what's being reached by the Senate is not nearly anywhere close to enough. What it will do is (perhaps) pump some much-needed money into the arena of mental health and the non-binding 'encouraging' of red flag laws, and beef up school security (sighs), but it fails totally when it comes to restricting sales of the assault-style weapons, doesn't up the age to buy a rifle, ban high-capacity ammo holders and so on and so forth. Doesn't even look as if it's going to make background checks a federally required thing though there's talk of it looking into juvenile court histories when background checks are being required.

it's a small step forward, but not close to dealing with the problem... and yet the senators will boast broadly over their achievements pre mid-term elections.

why should kids' schools have to be turned into forts and teachers be expected to carry firearms when a school should be a welcoming, safe environment free of the worries that–due to governmental inaction–some disgruntled, murderous, entitled bastard can get whatever assault weapon he fancies and come to kill them? why should teachers be expected to lay their lives on the line protecting their pupils (with no body armour or s.w.a.t/police training) when many are struggling to even provide the basic school equipment for their students? (and cops refusing to enter locked classrooms full of kids being executed because they were waiting for safety equipment, afraid for their own lives)

a breakthrough point, yes, but so watered down it makes me disgusted.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...pc=U531&cvid=25a5e581e85c493591ef05f11e651422
 
What it shows is that some Republicans have a brain. See...it is always better to regulate yourself than it is to be regulated by others. They see the inevitable
 
I typically refer to the unconstitutional "Gun Free Zones" as "Government mandated murder zones", but the unconstitutional laws identify these areas as Gun Free Zones I am well aware that the criminals and police are exempt and carry with impunity, and the oath violators will enforce the "gun free zone", to ensure the innocent citizens are disarmed, which they will democide, false arrest, and other "police state" powers to ensure that it remains that way, so for the innocent it is a gun free zone.
 
Last edited:
why should kids' schools have to be turned into forts and teachers be expected to carry firearms when a school should be a welcoming, safe environment...
I agree with you.

However, unlike you I'd prefer our kids not to be sitting ducks in a wide open shooting gallery in the event that the red indians** come to town with murder in their hearts and eyes on the weak and defenseless.



*This offensive term used specifically so that butterbrains can hopefully figure out that what I'm talking about is that there will always be someone who wants to kill you and if you don't harden your perimeter you're dead when they decide to do it. Disarming the townspeople won't stop the natives from an uprising or killing whomever they please. Anyone who thinks it will is fucking crazy and not worth listening to about anything.
 
I typically refer to the unconstitutional "Gun Free Zones" as "Government mandated murder zones", but the unconstitutional laws identify these areas as Gun Free Zones I am well aware that the criminals and police are exempt and carry with impunity, and the oath violators will enforce the "gun free zone", to ensure the innocent citizens are disarmed, which they will democide, false arrest, and other "police state" powers to ensure that it remains that way, so for the innocent it is a gun free zone.
so you have problems you voice to authority figures when entering a courthouse or school or government building? how do you feel about all jurors being allowed to carry arms at trials? do you complain to security as you enter the courthouse to get your vehicle tags? have you experienced any gun violence in any of these settings?

:rolleyes:
 
when i was a child, my biggest concern on a school day was whether or not i'd learned my spelling test list well enough or if the milk would be too warm
 
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/o...pc=U531&cvid=c9a03dd88ceb46a6a54943aaa8483ceb
If you are a bad guy and come into our schools with a gun, or any other kind of weapon, with the intention of causing harm to our faculty or children, our Deputies will eliminate you immediately.
Our Deputies are trained to run towards the threat / violence no matter the cost – even if it costs them their own lives in order to keep our children safe. We will not wait on backup, including other law enforcement or SWAT. If we have not eliminated the threat by the time other law enforcement arrives, then we have failed at what we're trained to do.

Let me be clear: there is nothing more important [than] our children's safety and we will take whatever action necessary to accomplish this task.”
 
Not much stuns mortician Hari Close after embalming more than 12,000 bodies over 30 years.

But Close was left speechless last spring when he was tasked with preparing the body of a man who had been shot in the head with an assault-style weapon.
poor guy was tasked with prepping the body of a man whose entire top half of his head was missing, like an egg with its top half sliced clean off.

“They’re made for devastation,” said Close, 61, who is also the president of the National Funeral Directors & Morticians Association. “It tears a body apart.”
As a surge in gun violence over the last two years of the pandemic has led more bodies to their preparation-room tables, Close and other morticians are joining a nationwide call for federal lawmakers to enact change.

"I would love them to come into my funeral home and try to justify that type of death to a family," Close said. “They need to see the reality of these guns.”
so much for keeping racoons away
“With all due respect and no disrespect, the funeral directors can no longer stand back when they see the results of all of this," Close said.

"We see the reality of it every day," he added. "How can you not be moved?"
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/m...pc=U531&cvid=d5eb736c0ed9438fb04f6f818b335218
 

"A 'good guy with a gun' doesn't stand much of a chance against an AR-15 style rifle and body armor"​

Good guys with guns do not provide a safe harbor. In Tops Grocery, former police officer and armed security guard Aaron Salter fired at the killer multiple times, hitting him once in the chest. A bulletproof vest protected the murderer’s torso, however, while a ballistic helmet shielded his head. Salter wore his summer-style security uniform.
Ten days later, in Robb Elementary School for second, third, and fourth graders, multiple officers hesitated rather than rushing to face the mass murderer’s AR-15 style weapon. As the police spokesperson explained, the officers “are hearing gunshots, they are receiving gunshots. At that point, if they proceed further without knowing where this suspect was at, they could have been shot, they could have been killed.”
To cut to the chase: Would the Uvalde commander have kept the 19 officers huddled in the hallway if the killer had a handgun or hunting rifle?

Salter, the grocery store armed guard, died when he took on an assault weapon carried by a killer with body armor. Ten days later, Uvalde officers faced the same type of weapon and another murderer wearing tactical gear (albeit, it turned out, without the needed ballistic plates installed). They hesitated and lived.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/a...pc=U531&cvid=d5eb736c0ed9438fb04f6f818b335218
 
from the same article:

why should we force police and armed security guards to face weapons of mass murder? Justice Antonin Scalia cautioned in his well-known District of Columbia v. Heller opinion, “the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited.” He went on to note the “historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of ‘dangerous and unusual weapons.’” Indeed, Justice Scalia anticipated his reasoning might allow the banning of weapons that are most useful in military service — “M-16 rifles and the like . . .”
 
Back
Top