Jump to content

Another Mass Shooting


Recommended Posts

Trump proposed raising age limits for gun buys after Parkland

In February 2018, days after 17 people were killed by a mass shooter in Parkland, Florida, then-President Donald Trump shared a rare moment of agreement with liberal lawmakers around a single, specific policy proposal: raising the national minimum age to purchase rifles from 18 to 21.

“You have a case right now where somebody can buy a handgun at 21,” Trump said in a February 2018 televised meeting with lawmakers. “But you can buy the kind of weapon used in the school shooting at 18.”

 

https://www.grid.news/story/politics/2022/05/27/trump-proposed-raising-age-limits-for-gun-buys-after-parkland/

 

But he then flip-flopped and refused to acknowledge what he previously said. Just like he did when he proposed banning bump-stocks after the Las Vegas massacre. Or releasing his tax returns for that matter. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

he then flip-flopped and refused to acknowledge what he previously said. Just like he did when he proposed banning bump-stocks after the Las Vegas massacre. 

That's because those with true power - ie. not the people who vote - explained to him afterwards that they would not support the party.  The cycle following Parkland saw $33M from the NRA directly, not counting weapons companies, spent on political influence to all sources:

https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/national-rifle-assn/summary?id=d000000082

Freedom of Speech - am I right ?

Again - the Gallup poll I posted earlier said ELEVEN percent of Americans supported weakening gun laws.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Infidel Dog said:

Fentanyl isn't illegal.

Wrong. 

https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/substance-use/controlled-illegal-drugs/fentanyl.html

Quote

Fentanyl and its equivalents (analogues) are controlled under Schedule I of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act. Activities such as sale, possession and production are illegal, unless authorized for medical, scientific or industrial purposes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/25/2022 at 3:17 PM, Infidel Dog said:

Yes on handguns. In Texas. The article I posted tells us Federal background check laws can be adjusted by the state.

Texas did that. 

New York and California didn't. They still have mass shootings. Don't you want to save them too? Go ahead then. You've saved Texas XpJwS5u.png. Now save New York and California. Tell us how you're going to do that.

Firearms deaths per 100K population. Texas 14.2, California 8.5, New York 5.3

Only New Jersey, Massachusetts  and Hawaii had lower rates than California and New York. Connecticut was in between at 6.

Source: U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

Edited by Aristides
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Its a good start. It'll tie Biden's hands and muffle the Progressive influence on things.

I doubt the Deep-state will be fazed - it'll  just keep laughing it's commie ass off and carry on with impurifying and sapping America's bodily fluids.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Now that's a childish statement.

"Earth, where all living things go to die."

Don't be so silly...

It's reality. About time you recognized it.

Are you so indoctrinated that you think a kid getting shot in their school is a natural way to die?

Edited by Aristides
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Boges said:

There were far fewer mass shootings when Assault weapons were banned than there are now. 

Kind of, but now the rest of the story...

The ban didn't actually have any effect on what had happened up to that point. The sale of AR 15 style rifles actually increased. Manufacturers found work arounds. There's an argument that mass shootings increased after the ban died. The theory is it was the increased magazine size that is blamed for the increase in deadliness in attacks. However, I hear it is also easy for the type of people who would break a law to find work arounds for magazine size.

Quote

Gun makers quickly figured out how to make similar weapons without the prohibited features, such as the bayonet mount. A frequent joke in the gun world was that the ban greatly reduced the number of drive-by bayonettings. Prohibiting Colt’s AR-15 by name didn’t deter gun makers from selling AR-15 style weapons under different names; Colt called its post-ban rifle the Match Target. The post-ban guns looked a little different, and they were sold with 10-round magazines instead of 30-round magazines. But they still fired the same bullets as fast as a shooter could pull the trigger. By 1999, multiple gun makers were producing more AR-15s than ever before.

Before the 1994 ban, Americans owned approximately 400,000 AR-15s, according to government estimates; today, there are approximately 20 million AR-15 style rifles or similar weapons in private hands.

A 2004 report for the Justice Department found that the ban’s “effects on gun violence are likely to be small at best and perhaps too small for reliable measurement.” That year Congress let the ban lapse without much debate. Since then sales of weapons prohibited under the ban have soared, spurred by periodic calls to ban them again, and in the past year by fears over the pandemic and rioting. Before the 1994 ban, Americans owned approximately 400,000 AR-15s, according to government estimates; today, there are approximately 20 million AR-15 style rifles or similar weapons in private hands, according to the National Shooting Sports Foundation, which represents the gun industry.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/americas-failed-attempt-to-ban-assault-weapons-11617285945

And even if you could control that, effectiveness of such a ban would depend on your definition of "mass shootings."

Broadly defined, "assault rifles" are used in less than 3% of mass shootings.

Also how are you going to grab America's existing 20 million AR-15 style rifles?

So if that's all you've got to save America from mass shootings, try again. What's your specific solution that could actually work? You don't actually have one, do you? You've got some talking points handed down from the Biden regime and their secretarial pool in the MSM, and a posture of bogus, morally superior insights that under closer scrutiny are all pretty much useless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Infidel Dog said:

Kind of, but now the rest of the story...

The ban didn't actually have any effect on what had happened up to that point. The sale of AR 15 style rifles actually increased. Manufacturers found work arounds. There's an argument that mass shootings increased after the ban died. The theory is it was the increased magazine size that is blamed for the increase in deadliness in attacks. However, I hear it is also easy for the type of people who would break a law to find work arounds for magazine size.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/americas-failed-attempt-to-ban-assault-weapons-11617285945

And even if you could control that, effectiveness of such a ban would depend on your definition of "mass shootings."

Broadly defined, "assault rifles" are used in less than 3% of mass shootings.

Also how are you going to grab America's existing 20 million AR-15 style rifles?

So if that's all you've got to save America from mass shootings, try again. What's your specific solution that could actually work? You don't actually have one, do you? You've got some talking points handed down from the Biden regime and their secretarial pool in the MSM, and a posture of bogus, morally superior insights that under closer scrutiny are all pretty much useless.

So you are happy with the continuing body count and being slightly better than Yemen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Infidel Dog said:

Kind of, but now the rest of the story...

The ban didn't actually have any effect on what had happened up to that point. The sale of AR 15 style rifles actually increased. Manufacturers found work arounds. There's an argument that mass shootings increased after the ban died. The theory is it was the increased magazine size that is blamed for the increase in deadliness in attacks. However, I hear it is also easy for the type of people who would break a law to find work arounds for magazine size.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/americas-failed-attempt-to-ban-assault-weapons-11617285945

And even if you could control that, effectiveness of such a ban would depend on your definition of "mass shootings."

Broadly defined, "assault rifles" are used in less than 3% of mass shootings.

Also how are you going to grab America's existing 20 million AR-15 style rifles?

So if that's all you've got to save America from mass shootings, try again. What's your specific solution that could actually work? You don't actually have one, do you? You've got some talking points handed down from the Biden regime and their secretarial pool in the MSM, and a posture of bogus, morally superior insights that under closer scrutiny are all pretty much useless.

Well in Canada there are also restrictions on Hand Guns. But that's pie in the sky in the US. 

Not sure why one needs a military style rifle like the AR-15, but whatevs. The issue I'm more perplexed on is the ease at which an 18 year old was able to purchase such a weapon. Actually 2 of them with 400 rounds. 

When someone buy lots of fertilizer or too many drugs that could be used to make Meth, Red Flags are raised. Why not with Guns?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Aristides said:

It's reality. About time you recognized it.

Are you so indoctrinated that you think a kid getting shot in their school is a natural way to die?

Indoctrinated?

Stating the painfully obvious and insinuating such is a common occurrence is...silly.!

Indoctrinated? With what doctrine?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Indoctrinated?

Stating the painfully obvious and insinuating such is a common occurrence is...silly.!

Indoctrinated? With what doctrine?

It's painfully obvious you can't separate a death from natural causes from murder, so why no legalize murder. 

Whatever Kool Aid you drink that makes you unable to know the difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, ExFlyer said:

Yup, bankrupt to prevent getting their asses sued LOL

Still able to give millions to their selected candidates this year though.

Bankrupt because of massive and pervasive fraud and mismanagement amd financial scandal. For a couple of decades now the organization has been treated as nothing more than  slush fund for its top leaders who live lavishly at the expense of their simple and gullible members and donors  who open their wallets without question any time a leader comes to town gives the old canned “cold dead hands” speech. Or whenever a Republican lawmaker screams alarmingly that a Jewish horde of Muslim Atheist transexuals is coming to take their guns and forcibly administer mandatory free prostate exams without lube and anyone under age 20 will be exterminated via mandatory 80th Trimester abortions for as required by Obamacare 

Being offered a seat on the NRA board  to gorge at the trough was simply a reward offered to  gun executves and Republican politicians and lobbyists with the right connections and they ran it into the ground with their greed

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Rogdodge2020 said:

Scared, confused kids with military assault weapons: that’s the police!

The latest timeline was given at a news conference by Texas Ranger Victor Escalon
Ramos crashed his vehicle nearby at 11:28, with the first emergency call coming two minutes later as witnesses reported a man carrying a gun. Ramos then shot at members of the public, roamed the school premises, and entered freely through an unlocked door at 11:40.
Police arrived on site four minutes later, Mr Escalon said. But it is unclear how close they got to the gunman or whether they attempted to enter the classroom where the shooting took place. 

Police initially said the officers were "inside making entry" and took cover after coming under heavy fire. This was revised on Thursday by Mr Escalon. "They [didn't] make entry immediately because of the gunfire they were receiving," he said.

At 12:45, the gunman was shot dead by a team led by an elite Border Patrol tactical unit. Mr Escalon played down previous statements by police that there had been ongoing exchanges of gunfire during the previous hour. "The majority of the gunfire was in the beginning," he told reporters.

Why Uvalde Cops Were Too Cowardly to Charge a Mass Shooter

American police are taught first and foremost to fear for their own lives.
 

Angeli Rose Gomez told The Wall Street Journal that she drove 40 miles to the school, which her two children attended, and begged police on the scene to intervene. Instead, federal marshals arrested her for “intervening in an active investigation.” After talking some local cops into letting her out of the cuffs, watching a second parent get tackled by police, and a third get pepper-sprayed, she snuck around the crowd, sprinted into the school, and brought out her kids.

 

By and large, cops are taught to be in quaking terror at all times, to view the local citizenry as infested with violent criminals, and to prioritize their own safety above all else. The overwhelming focus is on threats to the police themselves, not the public. There is virtually no time spent on diplomacy, de-escalation, or remaining calm under fire. (Living in constant self-imposed fear is a big reason why police have killed 406 people so far this year, which is in line with the trend from previous years.)

This message is powerfully reinforced by Supreme Court precedent. As Ramenda Cyrus recently wrote for the Prospect, in the 2005 case Town of Castle Rock v. Gonzales, a woman sued the local police department for “failing to arrest her husband, who had violated a protective order, resulting in the murder of her three children.” In an opinion written by Antonin Scalia, the Court ruled against her, holding that police have no duty to protect the public unless they have specifically promised to in writing. That impossible standard is why a New York City man lost a lawsuit against the NYPD when an officer failed to help him while he grappled with a knife-wielding assailant. As Cyrus writes, “the police do not have to act if someone is actively being harmed, they do not have to arrest someone who has violated orders, and they do not have any obligation to protect you from others.”

There’s a word for someone who walks around terrified of dangers that are almost entirely imaginary, obsessively fixated on being ready to kill people who appear threatening—but only to reduce the risk to himself. The word is coward…

 

https://prospect.org/justice/why-uvalde-cops-were-too-cowardly-to-charge-a-mass-shooter/
 

A really interesting read at how policing in the USA has gone sideways in recent decades. As for the top policing trainer who promises cops across the country that “you will have the best sex you’ve ever had” after you kill another human being….that dude needs to go. But unfortunately in ‘Merka sociopaths like that are admired by a large chunk of the population 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/14/2022 at 5:43 PM, BeaverFever said:

No developed country has mass shooting and school shootings the way the US does. There are several reasons for this and widespread easy access to guns is obviously one of them. Just like widespread easy access to cars will lead to more car accidents. 
 

The Buffalo mass killer was right-wing racist nut nut who targeted Blacks and left a long manifesto repeating conservatives “white replacement theory” an especially favourite topic of Tucker Carlson among othe right wing pundits. 
 

America is a politically and socially toxic shithole and is beyond anyones saving. It’s only going to get worse. I realized that 20 years ago when I lived there and nobody believed me then but they sure do these days. 

Glad I don't live in your totalitarian world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,712
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    nyralucas
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Jeary earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Venandi went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Gaétan earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Dictatords earned a badge
      First Post
    • babetteteets earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...