Great idea. Now all we need is a method to predict who is going to be law-abiding or not.
OT this is how things are handled in WV....
- Thread starter s1uggo72
- Start date
dammed if you do dammed if you dont....
Aviral video on social media shows a woman being harassed on a New York City subway train as bystanders keep a safe distance away from the scene.
The video shows an individual acting out on the subway. As other passengers move away from the individual, the individual pulls one passenger down onto a seat by her hair.
The woman can be seen mouthing, "Somebody help me," as the individual continues holding on to her hair while they are seated. None of the other passengers assist her as the individual holds on to her hair and, eventually, lifts her from the seat.
"Get up!" the individual yells as he pulls the woman by her hair to the back of the train car before letting her go.
Toward the end of the video, the individual can be seen kicking the train car's windows while it is still in motion and then eventually exiting the car at the next stop.
Aviral video on social media shows a woman being harassed on a New York City subway train as bystanders keep a safe distance away from the scene.
The video shows an individual acting out on the subway. As other passengers move away from the individual, the individual pulls one passenger down onto a seat by her hair.
The woman can be seen mouthing, "Somebody help me," as the individual continues holding on to her hair while they are seated. None of the other passengers assist her as the individual holds on to her hair and, eventually, lifts her from the seat.
"Get up!" the individual yells as he pulls the woman by her hair to the back of the train car before letting her go.
Toward the end of the video, the individual can be seen kicking the train car's windows while it is still in motion and then eventually exiting the car at the next stop.
Idk I think it would depend on who I was with. Just me n my wife, and they weren’t messing w my wife, I’d be hesitant. Me and a bunch of male buddies, probably be more aggressive toward the situation
and you ??
After the incident on the Portland light rail in 2017 (3 good samaritans stabbed, two died), I would almost never physically intervene in any situation. Neither situation (girl getting verbally abused by a racist, or women getting hair pulled) would be worth risking my wife becoming a widow and my kids without a father. I don't blame any of those folks for not intervening.
What I would have done is record it on my phone and notify authorities immediately. I would even consider following them from a distance to track him for police.
The complaints about no definition of assault weapon are simply an excuse for inaction. It's like, "Oh well. There's no definition so there's nothing anyone can do."
As for my mention of mass casualty events, good job with your attempt to ignore the context. I wrote there's a reason revolvers aren't the weapon of choice. People who use firearms opt principally for high capacity long guns. Please give me some examples of mass casualty events in which someone blew up a truck. I'll start - Oklahoma City. You can take it from there and give me a ratio of firearms incidents vs. explosives incidents. I'm always amused by the diversionary tactic of mentioning rental trucks as if they're responsible for deaths at synagogues, supermarkets, and elementary schools. If you think it's such a problem, maybe background checks should be done on anyone who wants to rent a vehicle.
Did you forget Nice, France? 86 dead and over 450 injured by someone driving a truck through crowds of people? Think that would be impossible here? Charles Whitman killed 18 in one event with a bolt action rifle.
You seem to be fixated that mass casualty events can only happen by way of a semi-auto rifles and only in schools and synagogues. Take away the semi-auto rifles and they will occur in other ways.
today it doesn’t matter. Commit felonies and progressive DAs will refuse to prosecute and let free. Fail a background check (a felony) and it is likely no law enforcement will investigate. If the do, it’s a fraction less than 1% that one will be prosecuted. But hey, you want to have the means to defend yourself, then you are the problem.
And millions of people die from Cancer in the world every year and we can't do anything about it. F*ck it, quit Cancer research.
Here's how you move goalposts. Right?
Another nut job with an AR15, go figure.CHARLESTON, WV (WOWK) – Charleston Police are releasing new details on a Wednesday night shooting investigation.
According to CPD around 10:45 on Wednesday night officers arrived outside of 1300 Renaissance Circle apartment complex for a report of a shooting. When police got there, they found the victim, 37 year-old Dennis Butler of Charleston, with multiple gunshot wounds. Butler later died.
Police say they discovered that earlier in that night Butler was approached about speeding in the apartment complex while children were playing. Police say Butler then left the complex and returned a short time later when he parked his vehicle in front of the apartment, pulled out a AR15 style rifle and started firing at people attending a party. Police say a bystander attending the party quickly pulled out their pistol and fired at Butler, fatally injuring him.
Charleston police say several witnesses and the person who fired the gun waited on police to get there and fully cooperated with the investigation. At this time no one has been charged in the shooting. The investigation now goes to the Kanawha County Prosecutors office for review.
‘Good gal with a gun’: Woman with pistol kills gunman at party
Charleston Police are releasing new details on a Wednesday night shooting investigation.www.wboy.com
I beg to differ with you. If the 18 year old was unable to purchase two AR 15's (as would be the case in virtually every other "civilized" country in the world), the carnage might have been lessened dramatically. Advocates of change in gun laws are focused on two key things --- better universal gun registration checks and waiting periods, and the outlawing of sales of war type rapid fire automatic weapons such as AK 47's and AR 15's to the general public. It isn't as much "taking your guns away" as it is taking at least two positive steps to at least HELP (not completely solve) this complex issue. I call it sanity.
Last edited:
If I heard correctly at the press conference today the shooter had 52 magazines with over 1,600 rounds of bullets. Firearms don't work without bullets just like bongs don't work without weed. Here's a link that sites state laws involving ammo. Here in Pennsylvania the State has all control of hard liquor sales. Why not do that with ammo across the country. No brainer.
Last edited:
Oh yeah, France. A place with strict guns laws. You came up with one example. Good on you.
Of course I'm speaking of mass casualties. That's been the topic of conversation since the mass murder a few days ago. It's so apathetic to say, "If we regulate guns, people will simply die in some other way. That means there's no point in regulating guns." It seems your attitude is, "Those 19 kids and 2 adults in Texas were going to die one way or another, so what's the point in trying to prevent it?"
1. Do you know a lot of non-criminal "gang bangers"? If not, why the additional mention? Why not just say "criminals"?
2. Yes. Why do you ask?
No … they’re BOTH big problems but people don’t get all lathered up about the hundreds of killings in the big cities. It appears you consider this acceptable.
Sounds like people are fed up. Has anyone seen the Rush Chairman?
Last edited:
Of course more guns will lead to more gun violence.
trying to argue against that is the same as the idiots who argue that a 3 star recruit is better than a 5 star recruit.
Sure, there will be a few outliers, but over a large enough sample sI’ve, more of anything is more.
it’s astounding how many people here don’t understand simple concepts.
I have no narrative. I'm an outdoorsman and at one point owned 10+ various firearms for hunting. I've harvested hundreds of animals since I was legal to hunt at 12 years old in PA. I can get into tit for tat bush*t arguments that end up in heated arguments but please tell me this. Why should anyone in our country own 52 clips of 1,600 rounds unless they are law enforcement? Nevermind body armor. Are you good with citizens owning body armor and 1,600 rounds?
You asked me a question ... I answered, and asked you questions in return. You have been unable or unwilling to answer said questions. The only one with a narrative issue here is you. Are you texting Tucker Carlson or Dana Loesch to see what you should say next, because they didn't tell you what to say when the "but Chicago!" (or a derivative thereof) attempted diversion doesn't work?
That when a nut job breaks into a school with a rifle gun control is ineffective. With the sales of certain types of rifles no longer allowed, and stiff penalties for the private ownership and use of them, those two rifles (hopefully) would not have been either owned or utilized. I think your point is that once the shooter was engaged, gun control in and of itself didn't matter anymore, and my point is that effective gun control might have at least altered the makeup of his arsenal once he was engaged. Violence in the United States is a complex issue --- gun control in and of itself won't solve the issue --- but it might be a first positive step that at least helps. To me that's a lot better than no effort at all because the NRA campaign funding money is buying the Senate's rejection of even discussing the issue. As Steve Kerr said so well on Wednesday "pathetic".
Last edited:
I don’t think that differs with me. Once the guy enters the school with the rifle the regulations about that rifle are irrelevant. He’s already in the school with a rifle shooting kids. I’m all for keeping guns away from whack jobs, but that ship sailed a long, long time ago and it’s going to take a long, long time to bring that ship back to dock. In the meantime, there is not a whole that can be done about those already out there with the guns.
Regardless of what you think about gun control, do people not fully understand how allowing this to run rampant actually makes people want guns more?
You want to know what's really sh!tty? If you and I sat down on barstools next to each other and started talking we would have a great time talking all things PSU without political garbage. Without saying too much, it blows we can't here.
Thank you for illustrating how the emotional insecurities of each individual can end up effing over an entire civilization, multiplying their own risk of deadly harm, and that of others, in the process. That's EXACTLY what we need to overcome.
Meanwhile, the guys with guns who are supposed to protect our kids are hanging out in the hallway while said kids get blown away, as the rest of the guys who are supposed to protect our kids are assaulting parents who want them to do something to protect our children.
It's BEYOND time to destroy the commercial terrorist organization known as the NRA. WAY effing beyond time.
You failing to understand the point doesn’t surprise me one bit.You coming to that conclusion doesn't surprise me one bit.
You completely missed the point. School shootings are horrific, but so is the carnage in the big cities like Philly. But one gets tons of attention and one does not.
My mother in laws Leukemia diagnosis is horrible, but breast cancer gets much more attention. F*ck it and move on?
And I'd buy you those beers. I don't consider this (and several other) topic(s) political, just some complex topics that we can discuss in a little more detail. I don't really understand why this topic (and others) is viewed through such a political lens. For whatever reason this really seems like it's become an all or nothing proposition for some people. As other posters have pointed out, nothing will be done because of this.
Last edited:
I am fully aware of the emotional responses all around. It's also important to remember that strongly emotional responses often trump a reason based argument. You calling the NRA a bunch of terrorists isn't changing anyone's opinion, it's only hardening views, and whether you like it or not you're going to need some of those people to make any change.
The terrorism claim is logic-based. If you don't agree with it, you're acting out of emotion. If those voices are needed, we'll wait for them to come around to logic and reason, or convince others so that we don't need them. I'm not going to change the message to kowtow to people acting irrationally, and putting our citizenry (including small children who can't defend themselves, you mothereffin' a-holes) at risk. That time is over. No one is holding your hand while you try to figure out how to adult any longer ... it's time to move on and do what's right.
No I'd buy those beers.
I believe I came up with a reasonable option. Maybe it's flawed but you and I know it would be to$$Ed to the side because.. ..Get unlimited access today.