Mass shooting in Santa Clarita, CA.

[Porter Rockwell]

Obviously the solution to mass random shooting is more "thoughts and prayers".

If someone came up with a solution that did not involve gun control, would you work toward helping get it implemented?

 

[Vandalshandle]

Obviously the solution to mass random shooting is more "thoughts and prayers".

If someone came up with a solution that did not involve gun control, would you work toward helping get it implemented?

if there was such a solution, it would have been initiated after the Texas Tower massacre in 1966.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

Obviously the solution to mass random shooting is more "thoughts and prayers".

If someone came up with a solution that did not involve gun control, would you work toward helping get it implemented?

if there was such a solution, it would have been initiated after the Texas Tower massacre in 1966.

It wasn't perceived as a problem in 1966. There were only 6 mass shootings in that entire decade. It was too small a number to extrapolate any commonalities from.

The short answer is, you'd rather complain about it and tell us what can't be done.

 

[Vandalshandle]

Obviously the solution to mass random shooting is more "thoughts and prayers".

If someone came up with a solution that did not involve gun control, would you work toward helping get it implemented?

if there was such a solution, it would have been initiated after the Texas Tower massacre in 1966.

It wasn't perceived as a problem in 1966. There were only 6 mass shootings in that entire decade. It was too small a number to extrapolate any commonalities from.

The short answer is, you'd rather complain about it and tell us what can't be done.

I have no problem telling you what needs to be done. It is illegal for a citizen to carry around live hand grenades. It should also be illegal for a citizen to own a ammo magazine holding more than 15 rounds, to buy a firearm even from a private party without a background check or a 3 day waiting period, and to operate a firearm without a license and insurance, just like an automobile. BTW, in Georgia, it is illegal to saw off the barrel of a working shotgun, or to have one holding more than 3 shells. Oh! The outrage!

 

[Picaro]

It isn't a 'gun control problem', it's a culture war issue, a war on morality and social values by commies manipulating spoiled dope addled bourgeois narcissistic Burb Brats who think they're 'libertarians n stuff' and grew up believing their personal whims and fashions and mindless self-indulgence is all important. Patrick Moynihan said it best in the 1960's when he pointed out 'the middle class has lost the capacity to govern itself'. 'Gun control' is a joke anyway when you can't even control your own borders or even protect your own children from being indoctrinated in your pubic schools by total degenerates and sociopaths. Yeah, right ... 'it's da gunz...'

 

[Vandalshandle]

It isn't a 'gun control problem', it's a culture war issue, a war on morality and social values by commies manipulating spoiled dope addled bourgeois narcissistic Burb Brats who think they're 'libertarians n stuff' and grew up believing their personal whims and fashions and mindless self-indulgence is all important. Patrick Moynihan said it best in the 1960's when he pointed out 'the middle class has lost the capacity to govern itself'. 'Gun control' is a joke anyway when you can't even control your own borders or even protect your own children from being indoctrinated in your pubic schools by total degenerates and sociopaths. Yeah, right ... 'it's da gunz...'

All the paranoids are out to get you, Picaro.

 

[Picaro]

It isn't a 'gun control problem', it's a culture war issue, a war on morality and social values by commies manipulating spoiled dope addled bourgeois narcissistic Burb Brats who think they're 'libertarians n stuff' and grew up believing their personal whims and fashions and mindless self-indulgence is all important. Patrick Moynihan said it best in the 1960's when he pointed out 'the middle class has lost the capacity to govern itself'. 'Gun control' is a joke anyway when you can't even control your own borders or even protect your own children from being indoctrinated in your pubic schools by total degenerates and sociopaths. Yeah, right ... 'it's da gunz...'

All the paranoids are out to get you, Picaro.

Who's paranoid? Or is it you just can't deny the facts as usual?

 

[Porter Rockwell]

Obviously the solution to mass random shooting is more "thoughts and prayers".

If someone came up with a solution that did not involve gun control, would you work toward helping get it implemented?

if there was such a solution, it would have been initiated after the Texas Tower massacre in 1966.

It wasn't perceived as a problem in 1966. There were only 6 mass shootings in that entire decade. It was too small a number to extrapolate any commonalities from.

The short answer is, you'd rather complain about it and tell us what can't be done.

I have no problem telling you what needs to be done. It is illegal for a citizen to carry around live hand grenades. It should also be illegal for a citizen to own a ammo magazine holding more than 15 rounds, to buy a firearm even from a private party without a background check or a 3 day waiting period, and to operate a firearm without a license and insurance, just like an automobile. BTW, in Georgia, it is illegal to saw off the barrel of a working shotgun, or to have one holding more than 3 shells. Oh! The outrage!

LMAO. None of what you say needs to be done OR should be done.

The United States Supreme Court has ruled that your individual safety is your responsibility. The government only has a general duty to protect society. With that in mind, you want the best protection you can have that modern technology has to offer.

If the police and military are limited to 15 round magazines, you might have a point. The reality is that in the 1960s we did not have all the laws you find today that put limits on firearms, yet a civilian could buy a REAL military firearm from the government with a 30 round magazine capacity. Between 1958 and 1967 the United States government sold 207,000 M1 Carbines to the public and we had a total of 6 mass shootings in the United States during the entire decade of the 1960s. There is no correlation between weapon availability and mass shootings. Arbitrary numbers on how many bullets a gun should be limited to are nonsensical arguments. A lady in my neighborhood proved that:

gwinnett woman kills intruder - Bing video

You get in a gunfight with three intruders at night and even 15 rounds might be insufficient.

Background checks??? Seriously??? I don't suppose that you've ever heard of the 4th Amendment? Where is the probable cause to think that just because I want to exercise a constitutional Right that I might be some kind of criminal? And, if my life is in danger, someone might kill me in those 72 hours:

'No one helped her': NJ woman murdered by ex while awaiting gun permit

Operating a vehicle on the streets is a "privilege." The Right to keep and bear Arms is an unalienable Right. So, no, licenses, background checks, and waiting periods don't work for me. Let me give you a quick history lesson here. Associate Justice Joseph Story of the United States Supreme Court wrote:

"The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them." - Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States

Story was appointed to the United States Supreme Court by the man who is the father of the Bill of Rights. You can't get much more authoritative than that.

 

[Vandalshandle]

Obviously the solution to mass random shooting is more "thoughts and prayers".

If someone came up with a solution that did not involve gun control, would you work toward helping get it implemented?

if there was such a solution, it would have been initiated after the Texas Tower massacre in 1966.

It wasn't perceived as a problem in 1966. There were only 6 mass shootings in that entire decade. It was too small a number to extrapolate any commonalities from.

The short answer is, you'd rather complain about it and tell us what can't be done.

I have no problem telling you what needs to be done. It is illegal for a citizen to carry around live hand grenades. It should also be illegal for a citizen to own a ammo magazine holding more than 15 rounds, to buy a firearm even from a private party without a background check or a 3 day waiting period, and to operate a firearm without a license and insurance, just like an automobile. BTW, in Georgia, it is illegal to saw off the barrel of a working shotgun, or to have one holding more than 3 shells. Oh! The outrage!

LMAO. None of what you say needs to be done OR should be done.

The United States Supreme Court has ruled that your individual safety is your responsibility. The government only has a general duty to protect society. With that in mind, you want the best protection you can have that modern technology has to offer.

If the police and military are limited to 15 round magazines, you might have a point. The reality is that in the 1960s we did not have all the laws you find today that put limits on firearms, yet a civilian could buy a REAL military firearm from the government with a 30 round magazine capacity. Between 1958 and 1967 the United States government sold 207,000 M1 Carbines to the public and we had a total of 6 mass shootings in the United States during the entire decade of the 1960s. There is no correlation between weapon availability and mass shootings. Arbitrary numbers on how many bullets a gun should be limited to are nonsensical arguments. A lady in my neighborhood proved that:

gwinnett woman kills intruder - Bing video

You get in a gunfight with three intruders at night and even 15 rounds might be insufficient.

Background checks??? Seriously??? I don't suppose that you've ever heard of the 4th Amendment? Where is the probable cause to think that just because I want to exercise a constitutional Right that I might be some kind of criminal? And, if my life is in danger, someone might kill me in those 72 hours:

'No one helped her': NJ woman murdered by ex while awaiting gun permit

Operating a vehicle on the streets is a "privilege." The Right to keep and bear Arms is an unalienable Right. So, no, licenses, background checks, and waiting periods don't work for me. Let me give you a quick history lesson here. Associate Justice Joseph Story of the United States Supreme Court wrote:

"The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them." - Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States

Story was appointed to the United States Supreme Court by the man who is the father of the Bill of Rights. You can't get much more authoritative than that.

if you get in a fight with 3 intruders, 15 rounds won't be enough? Oh, pleaseeeeeeeee….

 

[Porter Rockwell]

If someone came up with a solution that did not involve gun control, would you work toward helping get it implemented?

if there was such a solution, it would have been initiated after the Texas Tower massacre in 1966.

It wasn't perceived as a problem in 1966. There were only 6 mass shootings in that entire decade. It was too small a number to extrapolate any commonalities from.

The short answer is, you'd rather complain about it and tell us what can't be done.

I have no problem telling you what needs to be done. It is illegal for a citizen to carry around live hand grenades. It should also be illegal for a citizen to own a ammo magazine holding more than 15 rounds, to buy a firearm even from a private party without a background check or a 3 day waiting period, and to operate a firearm without a license and insurance, just like an automobile. BTW, in Georgia, it is illegal to saw off the barrel of a working shotgun, or to have one holding more than 3 shells. Oh! The outrage!

LMAO. None of what you say needs to be done OR should be done.

The United States Supreme Court has ruled that your individual safety is your responsibility. The government only has a general duty to protect society. With that in mind, you want the best protection you can have that modern technology has to offer.

If the police and military are limited to 15 round magazines, you might have a point. The reality is that in the 1960s we did not have all the laws you find today that put limits on firearms, yet a civilian could buy a REAL military firearm from the government with a 30 round magazine capacity. Between 1958 and 1967 the United States government sold 207,000 M1 Carbines to the public and we had a total of 6 mass shootings in the United States during the entire decade of the 1960s. There is no correlation between weapon availability and mass shootings. Arbitrary numbers on how many bullets a gun should be limited to are nonsensical arguments. A lady in my neighborhood proved that:

gwinnett woman kills intruder - Bing video

You get in a gunfight with three intruders at night and even 15 rounds might be insufficient.

Background checks??? Seriously??? I don't suppose that you've ever heard of the 4th Amendment? Where is the probable cause to think that just because I want to exercise a constitutional Right that I might be some kind of criminal? And, if my life is in danger, someone might kill me in those 72 hours:

'No one helped her': NJ woman murdered by ex while awaiting gun permit

Operating a vehicle on the streets is a "privilege." The Right to keep and bear Arms is an unalienable Right. So, no, licenses, background checks, and waiting periods don't work for me. Let me give you a quick history lesson here. Associate Justice Joseph Story of the United States Supreme Court wrote:

"The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them." - Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States

Story was appointed to the United States Supreme Court by the man who is the father of the Bill of Rights. You can't get much more authoritative than that.

if you get in a fight with 3 intruders, 15 rounds won't be enough? Oh, pleaseeeeeeeee….

You don't know squat about guns. My neighbor emptied her magazine and only ended up killing one of the intruders. You will never know until you've been IN a gunfight how they go down.

Secondary to that, your math don't make a lot of sense. You're okay with a guy having a six shooter and one bad guy, but if there are three intruders he gets fewer bullets per bad guy.

Well, someone should tell you, the Right of the people shall not be infringed. If you don't like the Constitution, buses leave every few hours for Mexico.

 

[Vandalshandle]

if there was such a solution, it would have been initiated after the Texas Tower massacre in 1966.

It wasn't perceived as a problem in 1966. There were only 6 mass shootings in that entire decade. It was too small a number to extrapolate any commonalities from.

The short answer is, you'd rather complain about it and tell us what can't be done.

I have no problem telling you what needs to be done. It is illegal for a citizen to carry around live hand grenades. It should also be illegal for a citizen to own a ammo magazine holding more than 15 rounds, to buy a firearm even from a private party without a background check or a 3 day waiting period, and to operate a firearm without a license and insurance, just like an automobile. BTW, in Georgia, it is illegal to saw off the barrel of a working shotgun, or to have one holding more than 3 shells. Oh! The outrage!

LMAO. None of what you say needs to be done OR should be done.

The United States Supreme Court has ruled that your individual safety is your responsibility. The government only has a general duty to protect society. With that in mind, you want the best protection you can have that modern technology has to offer.

If the police and military are limited to 15 round magazines, you might have a point. The reality is that in the 1960s we did not have all the laws you find today that put limits on firearms, yet a civilian could buy a REAL military firearm from the government with a 30 round magazine capacity. Between 1958 and 1967 the United States government sold 207,000 M1 Carbines to the public and we had a total of 6 mass shootings in the United States during the entire decade of the 1960s. There is no correlation between weapon availability and mass shootings. Arbitrary numbers on how many bullets a gun should be limited to are nonsensical arguments. A lady in my neighborhood proved that:

gwinnett woman kills intruder - Bing video

You get in a gunfight with three intruders at night and even 15 rounds might be insufficient.

Background checks??? Seriously??? I don't suppose that you've ever heard of the 4th Amendment? Where is the probable cause to think that just because I want to exercise a constitutional Right that I might be some kind of criminal? And, if my life is in danger, someone might kill me in those 72 hours:

'No one helped her': NJ woman murdered by ex while awaiting gun permit

Operating a vehicle on the streets is a "privilege." The Right to keep and bear Arms is an unalienable Right. So, no, licenses, background checks, and waiting periods don't work for me. Let me give you a quick history lesson here. Associate Justice Joseph Story of the United States Supreme Court wrote:

"The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them." - Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States

Story was appointed to the United States Supreme Court by the man who is the father of the Bill of Rights. You can't get much more authoritative than that.

if you get in a fight with 3 intruders, 15 rounds won't be enough? Oh, pleaseeeeeeeee….

You don't know squat about guns. My neighbor emptied her magazine and only ended up killing one of the intruders. You will never know until you've been IN a gunfight how they go down.

Secondary to that, your math don't make a lot of sense. You're okay with a guy having a six shooter and one bad guy, but if there are three intruders he gets fewer bullets per bad guy.

Well, someone should tell you, the Right of the people shall not be infringed. If you don't like the Constitution, buses leave every few hours for Mexico.

I admit that if your home is invaded by a herd of bison and you only have 15 rounds, you may have as problem. Let me know when that happens.

 

[miketx]

Wow, those California gun laws sure make a difference, eh?

Another reason for comprehensive gun controls.

Idiot, they already have "comprehensive" gun laws and they don't work! Why are you gun grabbers so stupid? Tell us what laws would stop this? If you really wanted it stopped you would arm the school staff. We don't have school shootings here, staff are armed.

 

[Vandalshandle]

Wow, those California gun laws sure make a difference, eh?

Another reason for comprehensive gun controls.

Idiot, they already have "comprehensive" gun laws and they don't work! Why are you gun grabbers so stupid? Tell us what laws would stop this? If you really wanted it stopped you would arm the school staff. We don't have school shootings here, staff are armed.

Right! The solution to gun violence is more guns! In fact, the nation that has the most guns is bound to be the safest nation! And, that is why in America, we have....er….uh... Wait a minute. Let me rethink that a little.....

 

[miketx]

Wow, those California gun laws sure make a difference, eh?

Another reason for comprehensive gun controls.

Idiot, they already have "comprehensive" gun laws and they don't work! Why are you gun grabbers so stupid? Tell us what laws would stop this? If you really wanted it stopped you would arm the school staff. We don't have school shootings here, staff are armed.

Right! The solution to gun violence is more guns! In fact, the nation that has the most guns is bound to be the safest nation! And, that is why in America, we have....er….uh... Wait a minute. Let me rethink that a little.....

Your remarks as usual are ridiculous. We got armed staff in our schools and no school shootings. Let that sink into your lying hide.

 

[Vandalshandle]

Wow, those California gun laws sure make a difference, eh?

Another reason for comprehensive gun controls.

Idiot, they already have "comprehensive" gun laws and they don't work! Why are you gun grabbers so stupid? Tell us what laws would stop this? If you really wanted it stopped you would arm the school staff. We don't have school shootings here, staff are armed.

Right! The solution to gun violence is more guns! In fact, the nation that has the most guns is bound to be the safest nation! And, that is why in America, we have....er….uh... Wait a minute. Let me rethink that a little.....

Your remarks as usual are ridiculous. We got armed staff in our schools and no school shootings. Let that sink into your lying hide.

So glad that you have armed staff in your schools. I am sure that not one of them has ever flipped out, and done a mass killing before. Of course, in the last 50 years, none of the people who flipped out and did a mass killing had ever done that before either. Nothing makes me feel more secure than having my granddaughter in a building where a bunch of strangers are armed and walking the halls....

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Wow, those California gun laws sure make a difference, eh?

Another reason for comprehensive gun controls.

Idiot, they already have "comprehensive" gun laws and they don't work! Why are you gun grabbers so stupid? Tell us what laws would stop this? If you really wanted it stopped you would arm the school staff. We don't have school shootings here, staff are armed.

Right! The solution to gun violence is more guns! In fact, the nation that has the most guns is bound to be the safest nation! And, that is why in America, we have....er….uh... Wait a minute. Let me rethink that a little.....

Your remarks as usual are ridiculous. We got armed staff in our schools and no school shootings. Let that sink into your lying hide.

So glad that you have armed staff in your schools. I am sure that not one of them has ever flipped out, and done a mass killing before. Of course, in the last 50 years, none of the people who flipped out and did a mass killing had ever done that before either. Nothing makes me feel more secure than having my granddaughter in a building where a bunch of strangers are armed and walking the halls....

Has she ever visited a police station?

 

[miketx]

Wow, those California gun laws sure make a difference, eh?

Another reason for comprehensive gun controls.

Idiot, they already have "comprehensive" gun laws and they don't work! Why are you gun grabbers so stupid? Tell us what laws would stop this? If you really wanted it stopped you would arm the school staff. We don't have school shootings here, staff are armed.

Right! The solution to gun violence is more guns! In fact, the nation that has the most guns is bound to be the safest nation! And, that is why in America, we have....er….uh... Wait a minute. Let me rethink that a little.....

Your remarks as usual are ridiculous. We got armed staff in our schools and no school shootings. Let that sink into your lying hide.

So glad that you have armed staff in your schools. I am sure that not one of them has ever flipped out, and done a mass killing before. Of course, in the last 50 years, none of the people who flipped out and did a mass killing had ever done that before either. Nothing makes me feel more secure than having my granddaughter in a building where a bunch of strangers are armed and walking the halls....

That's right, none of them have, and I'm sure that upsets you to no end.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Another reason for comprehensive gun controls.

Idiot, they already have "comprehensive" gun laws and they don't work! Why are you gun grabbers so stupid? Tell us what laws would stop this? If you really wanted it stopped you would arm the school staff. We don't have school shootings here, staff are armed.

Right! The solution to gun violence is more guns! In fact, the nation that has the most guns is bound to be the safest nation! And, that is why in America, we have....er….uh... Wait a minute. Let me rethink that a little.....

Your remarks as usual are ridiculous. We got armed staff in our schools and no school shootings. Let that sink into your lying hide.

So glad that you have armed staff in your schools. I am sure that not one of them has ever flipped out, and done a mass killing before. Of course, in the last 50 years, none of the people who flipped out and did a mass killing had ever done that before either. Nothing makes me feel more secure than having my granddaughter in a building where a bunch of strangers are armed and walking the halls....

Has she ever visited a police station?

Odd how this thread migrates, it's time to put it to rest.