Shooting

A warrant is a warrant...a computer database has no way of knowing whether someone has crossed a State line except and unless an arrest occurs in a different State than that which issued the warrant. The names should NEVER have been removed from the list of people ineligible for weapons purchase.

And to preclude the inevitable question from a resident left-tard, no it does not matter to me whether that warrant is for an outstanding felony or whether it is the numpty that simply cannot be bothered to pay their tickets. For the purposes of a weapons purchase, a warrant is a warrant. Responsibility on the part of the purchaser matters. if one of those ticket-related schmucks wants a gun, then they can go pay the outstanding fines and THEN go make their gun purchase.
 
Joe Fan said:
Click to expand...
It's sad that even 41% still miss the point. I am constantly reminded about the powerful force of indoctrination. Focusing on gun control does not prevent the next shooting. The next mass shooter very likely already owns his guns. Preventing the purchase of any firearm by law abiding citizens does nothing to prevent mass shootings. We have to protect our schools the same way we would protect a freaking courthouse or bank. And we need to make sure that disturbed individuals do not have access to firearms (easier said than done I know). It's amazing to me that this is even a discussion among otherwise intelligent people. Let's at least start by fixing all of the broken government protections that failed us in Parkland before we start taking away liberty from law abiding citizens.
 
UTChE96 said:
,,,, We have to protect our schools the same way we would protect a freaking courthouse or bank. ....
Click to expand...

Israel does
armed-israel-1.jpg
 
the idea that the answer to recent massacres is more "good guys with guns" is preposterous.
Click to expand...

Pretty sure that idea^^ works better than this one \/
 
Last edited:
So armed security and armed teachers won't stop school shooters, but students with rocks will. Link.

The Onion couldn't have come up with something this silly.
 
Mr. Deez said:
That was my initial reaction, but it looks legitimate. Besides, the nuttiness of the people who run American public schools has no bounds.
Click to expand...
Kids with rocks and adults with guns would be awesome though.
 
I predict rocks in the classroom will lead to criminals bringing bigger rocks to school campuses followed by a spike in rock-related violence (incredibly, no statistics are kept on this category of crime) followed by calls for stricter rock control laws. Predictably the pro-rock lobby will stonewall (hah) such efforts.
 
Last edited:
Mr. Deez said:
So armed security and armed teachers won't stop school shooters, but students with rocks will. Link.

The Onion couldn't have come up with something this silly.
Click to expand...

And yet we're being told by the teenage protestors that it's not realistic for a cop with a pistol to confront a shooter with an AR-15. Maybe we need to arm the cops with slingshots to even the odds up a little.
 
I have to say that I do find some of this stuff pretty distasteful. It shouldn't be surprising that high profile people making inflammatory remarks are going to be ridiculed on Twitter, and I'm as frustrated as the net person that so many of the marchers seem to know nothing and are willing to slander, smear, and attack millions of people that they don't know for disagreeing. But it's disheartening how many people are climbing right down into the gutter with them. We're supposed to be wiser than them - despite what the media is desperately trying to tell us.
 
Agree 100%. While I don't think curtailing the 2nd Amendment is the answer, I'm not opposed to having the conversation and I don't agree at all with lampooning the high school kids. Should we follow along with their ill informed rhetoric...no,, but meming (is that a word yet) them is out of line. Their 4 years of "adultish" life experience is not enough for them to have an informed opinion so feel free to disregard and debate it....but let's not go down the trail of demonizing teenagers.
 
At first I was irritated at former Supreme Court Justice Stevens for his wanting to repeal the second amendment. Then I realized that advocating for changing the Constitution the correct way through an amendment, as opposed to having the Court just make something up and improperly amend the Constitution unilaterally, was actually a step forward for a liberal supreme court justice. @Mr. Deez

I oppose his amendment suggestion, but I am pretty happy to see a former justice promoting constitutional amendments in general.
 
Htown77 said:
At first I was irritated at former Supreme Court Justice Stevens for his wanting to repeal the second amendment. Then I realized that advocating for changing the Constitution the correct way through an amendment, as opposed to having the Court just make something up and improperly amend the Constitution unilaterally, was actually a step forward for a liberal supreme court justice. @Mr. Deez

I oppose his amendment suggestion, but I am pretty happy to see a former justice promoting constitutional amendments in general.
Click to expand...

Completely agree. If someone wants to get rid of the right to bear arms, then let's have that debate and consider amending the Constitution. Nothing wrong with that. However, just blowing off the inconvenient parts of the Constitution eviscerates the rule of law. Not good.
 
Mr. Deez said:
Completely agree. If someone wants to get rid of the right to bear arms, then let's have that debate and consider amending the Constitution. ...
Click to expand...

Is there a liberal alive today capable of engaging in the type of civil debate that would be necessary to address such a huge question? The handful I can think of lean libertarian over modern Democrat -- and so I doubt today's liberals would even let these types represent them in a public debate. What I see instead in a bunch of bullies who have no desire to listen to anyone except those already inside their own echo chamber.

The current gun control proponents do not care what we think. They do not want to talk to us about it. They simply want to cram it down our throats with zero discussion. This is one reason the Constitution was written in the manner it was. So that individual citizens would not be at the mercy of mob rule. And so that our core rights could never be denied at the whim of a simple democratic majority. The majority (or mob) cannot make the rest of us follow a state religion just like they cannot subject us to cruel and unusual punishment, or deny us free speech or the ability to peacefully assemble. The right to bear arms falls into this category, it is a civil right. A mob cant take it away.

IMO, amending the Constitution is a hill to high for them to ever climb. At least in any of our lifetimes. Based on what Ive seen of the folks currently throwing this idea around, they do not have any idea what is actually required to make it happen. We are never going to be able to address this issue properly until the other side comes to this realization.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top