Another shooting spree...
- Thread starter GK4Herd
- Start date
What are we supposed to say? These topics become political at the drop of a hat. No amount of shooting sprees will change the fact that gun ownership can not be impeded, per our constitution. You simply don’t punish the law abiding for things that criminals do.
Not discussed because it’ll go political. Immediately goes political.
Are you talking about the black kid shooting it up at the football game in Alabama?
My point exactly. You made this post for political purposes, knowing full well that nobody is going to move one inch from their beliefs.
Of course not. There’s virtually no chance the black guy was a conservative. Wouldn’t help their cause to mention him.
In that case, we should be allowed to bring knives, guns, and bombs onto an airplane.
No...just miniature horses. Service animals of course...
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/17/travel/mini-horse-service-plane.html
Weren’t the last three (two in TX and one in Dayton) all perpetrated by guys who had legally purchased their firearms?
Those aren't the last three, just the last three you want to talk about. The last three were the Warren supporter in Dayton, the black kid in Alabama and the the one in Odessa yesterday.
fortunately beta o'rourke is a boob and will never be president. But, dudes like him are the reason we have the 2nd amendment because they would try to do what he just said. it is all about power for them.
Cut the babble this is Trump's fault. Sounds stupid this time. No it sounds stupid every time. Move along.
Since it's every citizen's right to own an assault weapon, I assume, per the second amendment, they must be part of the "well-regulated militia" discussed in that amendment. Bozos going into schools and shooting our children could be an indication the "militia" doesn't appear to be all that "well regulated".
Doing nothing isn't an answer.
Doing nothing isn't an answer.
Well...whatever form of "regulation" we're using......ain't workin' too good.
why isn't there an outcry to determine the root cause of these shootings? never had this shit going on 20 years to however far back you want look ago. were these horrible guns just recently invented and made available to the public? no, they were introduced over 50 years ago. so, what's the issue and why isn't there an outcry to resolve it?
my thoughts are go ahead and ban them. remove them completely from the public. then, we can start the ban on semi-auto and double action hand guns. then, single action hand guns. then, let's get rid of bolt action rifles, pump shotguns gotta go.
you can ban whatever you want and this shit isn't going to stop. these freaks will still find a way to accomplish their goal of killing people in mass (not catholic mass, ha). no ban is going to stop, nor slow them. give someone to gloc 9's and they'll do just as much damage, if not more, than someone with one "assault rifle".
the real issue is slapping us all right in the face, but nobody wants to tackle it. it's much more self gratifying pointing at something people KNOW are going to rile up others all to hell and it's become akin to the arguments that constantly occur on this website . . . neither side is going to admit they're wrong, neither side is going to give an inch.
so, until the real issue is dealt with, we can keep trying to piss farther than the other side, the issue will never be resolved and people will continue to be shot en masse.
just for shits and grins, from the wiki website on mass shootings in USA (this list is probably incomplete but will work just to throw information on mass shootings out for discussion):
- total of 27 mass shootings listed
- in approximately half of the shootings, the shooter(s) utilized a semi automatic rifle (i.e. assault rifle - assuming all of them looked like an "assault rifle" as i understand that if they don't appear to be militaristic, they don't count. i have multiple semi auto rifles that don't appear as such)
- 18 of the 27 shootings occurred within the past 20 years; 16 of the 27 shootings (60%) occurred within the past 10 years
- in 11 of the previus 16 shootings over the past 10 years, a semi auto rifle was used.
- in 7 of the top 10 of most people killed, the semi auto rifle was used.
my thoughts are go ahead and ban them. remove them completely from the public. then, we can start the ban on semi-auto and double action hand guns. then, single action hand guns. then, let's get rid of bolt action rifles, pump shotguns gotta go.
you can ban whatever you want and this shit isn't going to stop. these freaks will still find a way to accomplish their goal of killing people in mass (not catholic mass, ha). no ban is going to stop, nor slow them. give someone to gloc 9's and they'll do just as much damage, if not more, than someone with one "assault rifle".
the real issue is slapping us all right in the face, but nobody wants to tackle it. it's much more self gratifying pointing at something people KNOW are going to rile up others all to hell and it's become akin to the arguments that constantly occur on this website . . . neither side is going to admit they're wrong, neither side is going to give an inch.
so, until the real issue is dealt with, we can keep trying to piss farther than the other side, the issue will never be resolved and people will continue to be shot en masse.
just for shits and grins, from the wiki website on mass shootings in USA (this list is probably incomplete but will work just to throw information on mass shootings out for discussion):
- total of 27 mass shootings listed
- in approximately half of the shootings, the shooter(s) utilized a semi automatic rifle (i.e. assault rifle - assuming all of them looked like an "assault rifle" as i understand that if they don't appear to be militaristic, they don't count. i have multiple semi auto rifles that don't appear as such)
- 18 of the 27 shootings occurred within the past 20 years; 16 of the 27 shootings (60%) occurred within the past 10 years
- in 11 of the previus 16 shootings over the past 10 years, a semi auto rifle was used.
- in 7 of the top 10 of most people killed, the semi auto rifle was used.
Last edited:
I own a sexual assault weapon. Actually, I was born with it. I'll be damned if I let the Leftists take it away.
we all know? no, just those of us with a bit of common sense. the issue is drug abuse, not guns. the USA has one of, if not the, worst drug abuse issues in the world, and, it's gotten worse and worse over the past decade. as i previously indicated, these guns have been around for over 50 years and mass shootings haven't been nearly as prevalent until the last decade. am i saying all the shooters have drug abuse issues? no, but rest assured they have a mental imbalance probably caused by either drug abuse at some point of their life or because their parents did when the shooters were conceived and/or their mothers were prego with them.
i'm a firm believer that drug abuse is the number one cause of our society's issues . . . from mass shootings to murder to single parent families to many other issues we have. and, until we somehow get a handle on that issue, shit's only gonna get worse. you can ban everything you want and the mentally fukt will find a way to wreak havoc at will, and you'll be standing there with your dick in your hand trying to figure out what you're going to ban next.
now, forgive my absence while i go do a bong hit.
Dear goodness you are ignorant.
A higher velocity round will absolutely not leave a bigger hole or cause more damage and are definitely not more lethal.
Ask any hunter who has killed a deer with a .243 round at 3180 fps vs. a 30-06 at 2820 fps.
I killed a doe in 2017 with the former and a doe last year with the later. There was barely any hole with the .243, just a clean shot through and through. The doe I shot last year had her face blown off.
Also see the reports of Marines that used an M-14 in Vietnam vs. the M-16.
A higher velocity round will absolutely not leave a bigger hole or cause more damage and are definitely not more lethal.
Ask any hunter who has killed a deer with a .243 round at 3180 fps vs. a 30-06 at 2820 fps.
I killed a doe in 2017 with the former and a doe last year with the later. There was barely any hole with the .243, just a clean shot through and through. The doe I shot last year had her face blown off.
Also see the reports of Marines that used an M-14 in Vietnam vs. the M-16.
Last edited:
He did. Don't worry, he has an extended magazine of user names, so he can keep shooting.
That’s a weapon you can take on a plane.
TSA doesn’t have detection methods to find something that small.
Yes, we have a few school shootings. But, the other countries have started two world wars, killed 7 million Jews, killed million in Cambodia, and practice racial genocide in places like the Sudan.
SO, let's talk about the rest of the world as compared to the USA.
So would you rather be shot with a 5.56mm(.223) or a 50 caliber bullet? Would you rather be shot with a .22 pistol or .45 or a .22 or a .357? I would rather not be shot by anything, but think about what you are saying. Why are crew served weapons in a platoon 7.62mm and not 5.56? How about a .22 vs a 12 gauge slug?
Also, you do know the US military is looking at going away from the 5.56 don't you? Guess one reason why? 50 years of data showing what happens when things/people are shot.
Last edited:
Ummm...I receive weapons training from an instructor who used both in Vietnam. He repeatedly complained about the weakness of the 5.56mm bullet to deal with the underbrush and general cover in Vietnam, likewise the need to fire multiple rounds to stop a determined VC.
Whereas the round the M-14 fired would cut through the bush and would also cut down the enemy with more force, i.e. -stopping power.
US Army and Marine Infantry brought back the M14 in Iraq and Afghanistan. Not every troop but they would put them in the squads to lay down heavier fire.
What does that have to so with random nutjobs killing our kids while they attend public school? That was gov't sponsored homocide. If the govt came after us with arms, do you really believe some good ol' boys with their ARs are going to do well against drones, cluster bombs, cruise missiles, artillery rounds, laser bombs, Abrams tanks etc. Ask the Taliban, ISIS and Al Qaeda how that's worked out for them.
best name yet.
my glocks both came with 16 round clips for 32 rounds total to fire off in 2 directions, albeit without aiming.... in a crowded area, that wouldn't matter much. my AR came with one 5 or 6 round mag; I purchased three 30 round mags separately, so, no, an AR doesn't come standard with a 30 round mag. in a crowded area spraying bullets, two glocks could do far more damage. not difficult to holster one while reloading the other which would take seconds. from a distance, I'd agree.
your thoughts on the root cause of mass shootings, if you can still respond? and, what are you banning after a ban on ARs doesn't solve the problem?
actually, yore obviously the clueless one when it comes to damage done by a smaller versus larger caliber. damage to the target depends on so much more than caliber. a .300 win mag will blow a bowling ball size hole through a deer whereas you very well could be tracking a deer for a mile if shot with a 5.56. smaller caliber, higher velocity bullets tend to pass straight through whereas larger caliber just tears shit completely up. that's from experience...you keep reading your precious leftist articles.
