Prayers for University of Virginia

[horshack.sixpack]

For that to really be the case, there would have to be a lot of mass shooters that were apparently on the fence, and decided to not commit mass murder because the gun didn't look cool enough. That's certainly not impossible. I do think "aesthetics" plays a role in how these messed up individuals act out. I'm just skeptical that that many would be schools shooters decided a regular semiautomatic rifle just wasn't cool enough.

Things that I consider as an owner of many guns and someone who enjoys shooting. 1) AR15 is a very efficient weapon for killing/wounding a lot of people at a time 2) It more often than not looks military and seems to be appealing to people of the mindset to do this kind of harm 3) I like shooting them on the range because it is just fun to put a lot rounds downrange 4) I would gladly give up 3) to go back to the AR ban and see what happens. My quality of life/rights/whatever will not suffer in any substantive way compared to what people continuously inflict on others using those weapons. Those kinds of folks might still go off the rails and kill but it probably wouldn't have the same impact (i.e. fewer lives lost). I'd take that at this point.

I will also add that contrary to another poster above, I do not plan to ever use my guns and ammunition to kill anyone, much less those who implement policies that I don't agree with using our political system to get them passed. Killing people who legislate policy you disagree with is not patriotic, nor brave, nor freedom loving.

 

[Boom Boom]

Let’s just cut to the chase. Liberal left politicians and many liberal individuals could not care less about the victims of shootings. They are afraid of conservatives with guns. They are afraid that if they push their liberal woke agenda too far conservatives will come down on them hard. Can you imagine what their agenda would be if the right was unarmed? Hopefully it never comes to violence but it is always in the back of their mind. I am a law abiding citizen and have quiet a few legally owned guns. I use them for hunting, target shooting, and just in case I ever need one for self defense. I also have enough ammo to last a lifetime. If the liberal left wants to try to take my guns they are welcome to try, but I wouldn’t recommend it.

Actually, its that liberals see a problem that could be made better with better policy. Take your ridiculous ivermectin-level explanation and shove it back up your @SS from whence it came.

 

[horshack.sixpack]

I guarantee you this football player did not have an assault rifle.

No idea. I was just following the thread drift toward more general gun rights discussion. My point on AR stands.

 

[OG Goat Holder]

From the people that were convinced in a red wave....

Ivermectin all the way down. That's all conservatism is anymore.

As long as there are enough of them to fund the NRA, it doesn't really matter what you or them think.

I don't know if you are truly concerned about the well-being of society or not. I 'kinda' think you are, but most liberals are not. They are concerned with themselves. That's the biggest difference in red and blue, red wants to be left alone to do whatever perverted stuff they want to do, blue wants everyone else to come help them and praise them for it.

Lead the sheep to slaughter. Unfortunately we all die too.

 

[IBleedMaroonDawg]

From the people that were convinced in a red wave....

Ivermectin all the way down. That's all conservatism is anymore.

Please keep pushing that narrative. Thanks for your help. Keep pushing that idea that we is all knuckle-dragging, "Q", hysterical Trumps.

 

[Walkthedawg]

There is outrage over DUI deaths and texting while driving deaths. Those are actions which hurt others- they are safety issues.
There is outrage over drug use and decades of effort to reduce drug deaths. This is well documented. In the end though, these deaths are largely to the user and not others.
There is outrage over cancer deaths from smoking. Seriously, have you not been around or read anything from the last 50 years? Smoking isnt even allowed in many public places at this point. Again though, in the end cancer deaths from smoking are largely to the user and not others.
There is outrage over heart disease deaths from unhealthy foods. Once more, have you not been aware of this? And once more, this largely impacts just the user. There is an argument that it financially hurts others, but we are talking about death here so lets not try and equate someone paying more for health insurance because fat people are on their plan with violent mass shootings.


Mass shootings kill others. The things Hugh mentioned largely kill the user.
As for walkthedog, I mocked the earlier post with 'whatabout whatabout' because thats exactly what it was. 1- just because every issue isnt being resolved doesnt mean no issues can be resolved. 2- a automobile can be used as a weapon when it is misused. A gun can be used as a weapon when it is properly used. If you dont see the fundamental difference, that really sucks.

Sooooooooooooooooo. We for the sharp enhancement in sentencing in gun crimes or not?? No bail for people that use a gun in a crime? Mandatory sentencing for gun crimes? No parole?

again… this would be a go on the right. It’s doing something meaningful. It’s curbing gun violence.

this is something we can implement. Correct?

for some reason this is apparently being ignored.

 

[Boom Boom]

Please keep pushing that narrative. Thanks for your help. Keep pushing that idea that we is all knuckle-dragging, "Q", hysterical Trumps.

Well, they are. Those that realize it....don't stay with a movement that's become that. You can be "conservative" and see through what the movement has become, of course.

I don't just mean the Q types. Just about every "conservative" position these days is based on ivermectin-type bullshite. It's sustained by ignoring facts and reason. And it all comes down to not being able to admit a liberal has a point. Once that sets in, the only conclusion is ivermectin-level absurdity, because every non-absurdity supports a liberal point and thus must be rejected.

 

[OG Goat Holder]

Well, they are. Those that realize it....don't stay with a movement that's become that. You can be "conservative" and see through what the movement has become, of course.

I don't just mean the Q types. Just about every "conservative" position these days is based on ivermectin-type bullshite. It's sustained by ignoring facts and reason. And it all comes down to not being able to admit a liberal has a point. Once that sets in, the only conclusion is ivermectin-level absurdity, because every non-absurdity supports a liberal point and thus must be rejected.

We're talking guns here. What's your liberal point? That all guns must be banned, and this would make us safer?

Maybe, but have you considered the cost of this?

Do you really think that all the people who are pro-gun are idiots? I know you've likely come across these people in real life, and are likely friends with them. Do you hate them, or is this just internet rage?

 

[HailStout]

The Correct answer when innocent people are killed is to act like only your opinion is correct and everyone else is wrong. Then We all yell at each other like everyone else is an idiot and only my way Is correct. In doing so you completely ignore the actual tragedy of the situation and nothing is accomplished, It’s the way America works now. And I mean this about both sides.

Lock it up.

Sigh. No one hates Americans as much as Americans.

 

[NTDawg]

Well, they are. Those that realize it....don't stay with a movement that's become that. You can be "conservative" and see through what the movement has become, of course.

I don't just mean the Q types. Just about every "conservative" position these days is based on ivermectin-type bullshite. It's sustained by ignoring facts and reason. And it all comes down to not being able to admit a liberal has a point. Once that sets in, the only conclusion is ivermectin-level absurdity, because every non-absurdity supports a liberal point and thus must be rejected.

 

[Ranchdawg]

Things that I consider as an owner of many guns and someone who enjoys shooting. 1) AR15 is a very efficient weapon for killing/wounding a lot of people at a time 2) It more often than not looks military and seems to be appealing to people of the mindset to do this kind of harm 3) I like shooting them on the range because it is just fun to put a lot rounds downrange 4) I would gladly give up 3) to go back to the AR ban and see what happens. My quality of life/rights/whatever will not suffer in any substantive way compared to what people continuously inflict on others using those weapons. Those kinds of folks might still go off the rails and kill but it probably wouldn't have the same impact (i.e. fewer lives lost). I'd take that at this point.

I will also add that contrary to another poster above, I do not plan to ever use my guns and ammunition to kill anyone, much less those who implement policies that I don't agree with using our political system to get them passed. Killing people who legislate policy you disagree with is not patriotic, nor brave, nor freedom loving.

Killing people who legislate policy you disagree with is not patriotic, nor brave, nor freedom loving.

It is how our country was founded.

 

[johnson86-1]

Things that I consider as an owner of many guns and someone who enjoys shooting. 1) AR15 is a very efficient weapon for killing/wounding a lot of people at a time 2) It more often than not looks military and seems to be appealing to people of the mindset to do this kind of harm 3) I like shooting them on the range because it is just fun to put a lot rounds downrange 4) I would gladly give up 3) to go back to the AR ban and see what happens. My quality of life/rights/whatever will not suffer in any substantive way compared to what people continuously inflict on others using those weapons. Those kinds of folks might still go off the rails and kill but it probably wouldn't have the same impact (i.e. fewer lives lost). I'd take that at this point.

I will also add that contrary to another poster above, I do not plan to ever use my guns and ammunition to kill anyone, much less those who implement policies that I don't agree with using our political system to get them passed. Killing people who legislate policy you disagree with is not patriotic, nor brave, nor freedom loving.

So is a .22 rifle. I had a .22 rifle that I think would load 15 bullets without a magazine. Now it would be harder to reload, but I'm just not sure what we're gaining by banning an "assault rifle" chambered in a .223 but not other semiautomatic rifles, especially when there are already millions of them out there.

I'm not particularly tied to my .223. I rarely shoot it and I doubt I'll ever need it for defense. But I'm just generally against more laws that don't have a clear way to make things better. Background checks are great. Actually enforcing laws against straw purchases would be better. Harsher penalties for committing crimes with guns, particularly ones that aren't "crimes of passion" sounds good, hammering violent felons caught in possession of guns, having armed administrators or something to make schools less of a soft target would be good. All of those except making schools less soft targets would do more for gun violence in general than mass shooters though (at least what people think of as mass shooters; depending on your definition, that would do a lot for mass shootings also, just not school shootings).

 

[horshack.sixpack]

Well, they are. Those that realize it....don't stay with a movement that's become that. You can be "conservative" and see through what the movement has become, of course.

I don't just mean the Q types. Just about every "conservative" position these days is based on ivermectin-type bullshite. It's sustained by ignoring facts and reason. And it all comes down to not being able to admit a liberal has a point. Once that sets in, the only conclusion is ivermectin-level absurdity, because every non-absurdity supports a liberal point and thus must be rejected.

Us allowing the parties to successfully convince us that the other side is our enemy and evil is one of our greatest failings as a nation.

 

[Boom Boom]

No. I, like any liberal I've ever known, am more than capable of admitting when a con has a point. Try again. But of course, it's the conclusion you disagree with. To many, it can never be accepted that conservatism is not "serious", and that liberalism is. Since Woodstock, this is just a view that many won't challenge.

 

[dawgstudent]

The good thing about topic view instead of threaded is that these long *** threads of nonsense don't take up the whole ******* page.

And I get what we talk about normally is nonsense as well but the point of this board is sports discussion. Not rollerblading and guns.