But don't we have laws in place that are SUPPOSED to keep gun rights away from NON law abiding citizens? I wonder how many charges of "felon in possession of a firearm" are filed annually in the US? My point, and OG's point is that sh*t doesn't work.
Tate County shootings
- Thread starter stateu1
- Start date
- Status
@BingleCocktail — How good would you judge @mstateglfr be as a fisherman on RSFC?
He’s by far the best one here on SPS.
I think he could post the itinerary of which Chicks tour shows he’ll be attending and hook a lot of folks with that stinky bait…
No, I am not trolling at all. I am posting a well thought out view which seems to cause some to emotionally snap for multiple perceived reasons.
That isn't trolling in any manner. I am not trying to get them all worked up. In this instance, they are simply incapable of having a discussion out of fear they may 'lose' a toy they like. I used quotes there because I think guns should be legal and many seem to hurt ignore that.
At some point, those who get triggered over a very common viewpoint need to take responsibility for their inability to be rational. It isn't on me to tiptoe around the issue to ensure they don't throw a tempertantrum.
Once more, I don't want to a ban on guns.
Goat- your claim that other countries are simply not violent is 17ing absurd. A real conversation can't be had when someone approaches it with such a disconnect from reality.
Ronny- please list what you view to be 'common sense'. That term is largely meaningless since both sides seem to think their view is common sense, but I would enjoy some details.
As I have posted in the past, I do not want a ban on guns.
The right to bear arms is one that has been limited for decades now, so the claim that 2a is sacred is simply BS. We aren't allowedd to own many types of arms and yet that reality is ignored(or not even recognized) by many.
I want guns that can hold fewer than 5 bullets to be legal.
Once again, guns should be legal.
My idea will not stop all gun killings. It will not stop all mass shootings. But it will make it more difficult for mass shootings to realistically happen. Sure someone could bring 10 guns with them and effectively have 50 bullets still, but I think that is more difficult to pull off and less likely to happen.
My idea would still allow for everyone to carry, so that emotional fear wouldn't be an issue.
Once again, it would not solve everything. I have never claimed it would solve everything. I think it would improve things though.
Here is the kicker- I have seen nothing from gun advotcates that would legitimately reduce mass shootings.
- The common suggestion is access to mental health. OK then, but that's hollow since social Healthcare spending is constantly threatened to be reduced or eliminated by the right.
- Another common suggestion is to further arm the populace and that would allow the public to take action and shoot people that would potentially harm others. That's straight absurd since we have more carrying than I've ever known in my life and mass shootings certainly aren't going down.
If someone has a solution that would actually reduce mass shootings, I'm all ears.
Until then, I will continue to find the prayers sent to victims to be insulting and hollow.
Glfr’s initial response was measured and respectful. I dare anyone here to find something in his initial statement that isn’t true. I know we all know where he stands, but attacking someone on the other sides of your beliefs every time they say something is literally what is wrong with this country. I personally believe wholeheartedly in the second amendment and any attempt to curtail it is unacceptable. I also believe it is too damn easy for people to get dangerous firearms. You can believe both things. The problem is no one will have a honest talk about it without screaming about it.
I also realize that in defending GLFR i have made myself an outcast and have brought shame on my family.
I also realize that in defending GLFR i have made myself an outcast and have brought shame on my family.
Australia is not bordered by a country that is literally run by a Cartel.Over 17,000 weapons surrendered in first year of Australian firearms amnesty | Gun control | The Guardian
Retrieved weapons include a Vietnam war-era flamethrower, sawn-off shotguns, rifles, gel blasters and revolversamp.theguardian.com
Australia confiscated 650,000 guns. Murders and suicides plummeted.
In the wake of the killing in Uvalde, here’s what America can learn from Australia’s response to tragedy.www.vox.com
I assume this isn't what you meant, but I dont know what you were referring to. And since you didn't actually offer up any info, I guessed.
open borders destroy countries.
This is pretty much what i feel GLFR looks like after he sees responses to his posts:
Mexico just buys guns from our government to them turn around and sell them for use against our LEOs.
@Maroon Eagle
*ahem*
I think there's a problem with this poast, as it is highly derivative of many popular poasts within the RSFC genre, although when read on its own merit, it does have a decent baitness .
However, what it has in baitness, it lacks in “shiny quality.” One can't help but be reminded of such poasters as Maria Pescadero, Coz, and other poasters that bear the mantle of so-called “baiters”.
One is even reminded of Peaches when she wore curlers. This poast speaks less to the heart, and more to the sphincter.
BOTTOM LINE: The poast is judged and found….worthy of a RUTSIE nomination
Last edited:
That would wipe out all revolvers.
Nobody is performing a mass shooting with a revolver.
This discussion has been about mass shootings.
Is it your claim that we have countless mass shootings because some people are able to cross into our country from Mexico?
If that is your claim, then 17 it's bad.
If thars not your claim, I dont know what the point of your post even is.
If golfer was legitimately trying to enter the conversation in a non-provocative way why would he not answer BA and PB dogs' very legitimate questions about his initial response ? They were every bit as respectful as him.
That's the point - to try and wipe out mass shootings.
...there are 5 shot revolvers.
By the time they asked questions Multiple posters had cussed him out. It had already gone off the rails.
No, the Australia comparison is apples/oranges. They aren’t fighting a border issue Or gang issues.
As I have posted, I made an effort to not get into the details of their question because it's been hashed out many times before, with the threads being locked after people lose their minds over the suggestion of limiting guns(while still keeping guns legal).
Since I realized the thread was going to continue down that path even if I didn't respond, I decided to respond with why I hadn't responded earlier and then also discuss the idea further.
I am not the one who brought up Australia. All I did was respond to a poster who had brought up Australia.
If you dislike the Australia reference, go complain to poster that started it.
You still haven't tied mass shootings to our Southern Border though. That border could be locked down like a vault and we would still have mass shootings by the dozens.
Thank you for pointing that out. Meant 5. I then did the 5x 10 guns math further down I. That post.
Good catch - hope this clears that up.
I mean, it isn't BS, it's the truth, but OK then. I accept that you don't like the reason I gave.
Oh look, the classic couple of responses that don't actually solve anything.
How are mental health issues being normalized part of this? The normalization is an effort to remove the stigma that has been in place for decades. It is an effort to help get people to feel comfortable to talk about their struggles and seek help.
Why is any of that bad and why would that be a reason for more mass shootings?
'We need more mental health assistance and infrastructure to keep dangerous people off the streets!'
'Sure, that will cost society money though.'
'What? I refuse to allow more of my taxes to go to help others with their health! That's their responsibility, not mine!'.
And nothing changes.
As for implementing violent crime deterrent...do you really think mass shooters give a 17 about that? Many die at the scene, so whether they would have gotten life in prison or lethal injection is really of no concern to them.
The ones that are most often compared to the US in the name of gun confiscation are markedly better as far as crazies, mental health, radicals, etc.
- Status
Latest posts
Get unlimited access today.