Mass shooting: At Least 11 Shot At Gilroy Garlic Festival

[Blues Man]

the problem isn't law abiding people with guns

The latest shooter was law abiding until he wasn't. If he wasn't a problem you have no worries.

So what?

That is absolutely meaningless.

You're not a rapist until you are so should I treat you like a rapist?

 

[cnm]

70% of all murders take place in poor urban areas and are committed by people who cannot legally possess firearms

So take the firearms out of circulation to reduce the firearms homicide rate. But I understand gun nuts are too selfish to do that as their paranoia will be aggravated.

 

[Blues Man]

70% of all murders take place in poor urban areas and are committed by people who cannot legally possess firearms

So take the firearms out of circulation to reduce the firearms homicide rate. But I understand gun nuts are too selfish to do that as their paranoia will be aggravated.

It wouldn't reduce the murder rate because people would just kill with some other weapon

And people who want to keep their rights are not selfish.

People who want to take away rights are selfish

 

[cnm]

So what?

So being a law abiding gun owner is a temporary circumstance. They are law abiding until they aren't. Just like people who haven't raped are not rapists until they are.

 

[cnm]

It wouldn't reduce the murder rate because people would just kill with some other weapon

Swimming pools, I bet.

 

[Blues Man]

So what?

So being a law abiding gun owner is a temporary circumstance. They are law abiding until they aren't. Just like people who haven't raped are not rapists until they are.

So you're not a drunk driver until you are

Maybe we should revoke your drivers license

 

[cnm]

And people who want to keep their rights are not selfish.

It's generous to be a mass murderer.

 

[Blues Man]

It wouldn't reduce the murder rate because people would just kill with some other weapon

Swimming pools, I bet.

Bats, knives, clubs, bare hands.... the list is literally endless

 

[Blues Man]

And people who want to keep their rights are not selfish.

It's generous to be a mass murderer.

99.999% of gun owners will never be mass murderers.

 

[bodecea]

70% of all murders take place in poor urban areas and are committed by people who cannot legally possess firearms

So take the firearms out of circulation to reduce the firearms homicide rate. But I understand gun nuts are too selfish to do that as their paranoia will be aggravated.

It wouldn't reduce the murder rate because people would just kill with some other weapon

And people who want to keep their rights are not selfish.

People who want to take away rights are selfish

Because the murder rate is just as extreme in all those other countries that have gun control laws.

 

[cnm]

There is absolutely no reason to deny law abiding people the right to own firearms

Nor RPGs. I mean, they'll obey the law, they're law abiding.

Until they aren't.

 

[Blues Man]

70% of all murders take place in poor urban areas and are committed by people who cannot legally possess firearms

So take the firearms out of circulation to reduce the firearms homicide rate. But I understand gun nuts are too selfish to do that as their paranoia will be aggravated.

It wouldn't reduce the murder rate because people would just kill with some other weapon

And people who want to keep their rights are not selfish.

People who want to take away rights are selfish

Because the murder rate is just as extreme in all those other countries that have gun control laws.

Guns do not cause murder.

And I don't want to live in another country where people don't have the right to protect themselves with the best tool for the job.

Those countries also will throw you in jail for saying the wrong thing so if you want to live in a country like that feel free to move

 

[iceberg]

great. so before we go changing things, how about some research instead of emo-grandstanding.

Did you know around half of US homicides were committed with handguns? I found that out by researching it.

how many laws do we have?
why are they not working?
what laws would you suggest that would have stopped any known mass shooting in the last decade?

The way you frame the question is par for the course. If an action won't stop shootings it's to be ridiculed. The idea that actions can reduce shootings is dismissed as nonsensical. When the experience of other countries is put forward the exceptional USA excuse is trotted out immediately. Fair enough, it's not my country, I just giggle at the loons.

The way to reduce the US firearm homicide and mass shooting rates is to severely limit the numbers of handguns and military style semi automatic rifles in circulation.

I understand you don't want to do that, rather you happily accept the current consequences. No worries.

the way you refuse to answer it is why we're not getting anything done. i'm asking for base information on where we are today and you act like that's a crime.

that's how shit gets fixed in the real world. your over-emo-drama-shit won't do a thing.

 

[iceberg]

But we cannot deny people any of their rights because they MIGHT commit a crime.

True, you can make it so handguns and military style semi automatic rifles are not a right. Just like other weapons which citizens have no right to. After all, RPGs are commonly carried by the military and would be damned useful to a militia.

you keep saying "military style" as if that means shit or can really be defined.

which military? NO MILITARY uses the AR15. so it can't really be "military style" if the military doesn't use it.

the military uses handguns too. do we outlaw the 1911 now cause it's "military" in style?

the browning longtrac is also a "military style" if you want it to be.

this is the issue here - you can't DEFINE what you want to ban. as soon as you try, it's pointed out why that doesn't work across the board and instead of going "oh, i learned something today" you just want to ban MOAR guns and widen your definition.

"assault rifle" was never applied to a semi-automatic weapon until liberals got scared of them and demanded something be done about them. but hell, even then the same group scared of them thought they were fully automatic for the longest time.

stop being a dumbass and then you can speak intelligently about topics. til then, **** off.

 

[pismoe]

There is absolutely no reason to deny law abiding people the right to own firearms

Nor RPGs. I mean, they'll obey the law, they're law abiding.

Until they aren't.

------------------------------------------------------ 'rpg' are area weapons and not the individual arms generally issued to American combat troops . Course , if you have enough money and can jump through the hoops you can probably own 'rpg' CNM .

 

[RealDave]

And how long ago was that? We have regular mass shootings. You clowns have a small handful of rare examples. A few barriers will stop that from happening again.

Three years ago. And that one truck killed more than all of the mass shootings we have had since Las Vegas. NEXT!

Trucks have a purpose. An assault type rifle doesn't.

good thing a purpose is not necessary for a right.

You don't have a right to own an AR-15. The USSC said so.

Do the words in common use mean anything to you?

Don't run around claiming the Second Amendment means no regulation.

 

[RealDave]

But we cannot deny people any of their rights because they MIGHT commit a crime.

True, you can make it so handguns and military style semi automatic rifles are not a right. Just like other weapons which citizens have no right to. After all, RPGs are commonly carried by the military and would be damned useful to a militia.

you keep saying "military style" as if that means shit or can really be defined.

which military? NO MILITARY uses the AR15. so it can't really be "military style" if the military doesn't use it.

the military uses handguns too. do we outlaw the 1911 now cause it's "military" in style?

the browning longtrac is also a "military style" if you want it to be.

this is the issue here - you can't DEFINE what you want to ban. as soon as you try, it's pointed out why that doesn't work across the board and instead of going "oh, i learned something today" you just want to ban MOAR guns and widen your definition.

"assault rifle" was never applied to a semi-automatic weapon until liberals got scared of them and demanded something be done about them. but hell, even then the same group scared of them thought they were fully automatic for the longest time.

stop being a dumbass and then you can speak intelligently about topics. til then, **** off.

People ase so ******* tired of this stupid argument you assfucks make.

We all know what is being discussed.

What I find proof that you assdfucl\ks are too mentally sick to own any gun is this fetish you have to carry a weapon that looks like a military style assault rifle. Do you play soldier? Does the design make you puff out your chest & feel important? What is it?

 

[RealDave]

But we cannot deny people any of their rights because they MIGHT commit a crime.

True, you can make it so handguns and military style semi automatic rifles are not a right. Just like other weapons which citizens have no right to. After all, RPGs are commonly carried by the military and would be damned useful to a militia.

Any other wishes you want to share?

Everyone knows how to change the Constitution and if there was any chance in hell of repealing the Second Amendment it would have already been tried.

The Second will never be repealed in our lifetime. But in the meantime we should enforce the laws we already have because when they are enforced they work.

There is absolutely no reason to deny law abiding people the right to own firearms

I think the problem is that people think the ight to own firearms means any firearm of any style.

If you had a single shot .22 rifle, you would bear arms.

 

[OldLady]

70% of all murders take place in poor urban areas and are committed by people who cannot legally possess firearms

So take the firearms out of circulation to reduce the firearms homicide rate. But I understand gun nuts are too selfish to do that as their paranoia will be aggravated.

It wouldn't reduce the murder rate because people would just kill with some other weapon

And people who want to keep their rights are not selfish.

People who want to take away rights are selfish

I have the right not to be shot for no reason.

 

[cnm]

Bats, knives, clubs, bare hands.... the list is literally endless

But swimming pools were quoted so often as being so dangerous in gun control debates. Someone must have attacked someone with a swimming pool, Shirley?