Nashville Trans School Shooter’s Manifesto Reveals She Made a 10 Minute “Final Video”, Where is It?

[Bob Blaylock]

There's a whole bunch of Gods you deny. You Deny Guanyin, Amaterasu, Krishna, Allah, Zeus, Odin, etc.
I just believe in one less God than you do.

There is only one God.

Citing a bunch of false gods does not change the reality of the one true God, nor diminish the folly of your denying and mocking Him.

 

[2aguy]

Was specifically referring to school shootings.


Says the crazy person who wants to murder women for having abortions to please an invisible fairy in the sky?

School shootings....the rarest of rare events while in democrat party cities young black men are murdering each other in the 10a of thousands each year

 

[JoeB131]

There is only one God.

Citing a bunch of false gods does not change the reality of the one true God, nor diminish the folly of your denying and mocking Him.

Except 75% of the Global population doesn't worship your God.

 

[JoeB131]

School shootings....the rarest of rare events

Not rare enough.

Sure, I wish that we paid as much attention to all shootings. The School shootings are the only ones that hit a nerve.

 

[SweetTea]

Um, the recent shootings aren't black kids in the big cities... they are white kids in suburbs like Sandy Hook, Stoneman, Uvalde, Columbine...

And your point is? Access to guns has always been there. That isn't the problem.

 

[JoeB131]

And your point is? Access to guns has always been there. That isn't the problem.

Well, that's not really true, either.

In 1950, there were 40 million guns of all types available for 150 million Americans.

In 2023, there are 450 million guns for 330 million Americans.

Not to mention the types of guns, including semi-automatic assault rifles that can do a lot more damage than Pa's squirrel gun.

 

[2aguy]

Not rare enough.

Sure, I wish that we paid as much attention to all shootings. The School shootings are the only ones that hit a nerve.

No.....school shootings allow you to lie about the rest of the shootings....the shootings that take place in democrat party controlled cities every single day. But you can't exploit those because 1) you don't care about black murder, and 2) if people realize how rare mass public shootings are vs. how real democrat party shootings are, they might vote you buffoons out of office...

 

[MinTrut]

Seems to me that if she was being abused on a daily basis for being different, then that was the fault of the people who abused her.

Most schools are recognizing the signs of bullying and putting a stop to it before it escalates... this School was "Right with Jesus" and didn't.

So sad.

The victim becomes the predator.

 

[SweetTea]

Well, that's not really true, either.

In 1950, there were 40 million guns of all types available for 150 million Americans.

In 2023, there are 450 million guns for 330 million Americans.

Not to mention the types of guns, including semi-automatic assault rifles that can do a lot more damage than Pa's squirrel gun.

There may be more guns, but there are less households since 1973 that own guns. This means that those who have guns tend to collect them. Me having 1 gun or 10 guns doesn’t make me any more or less likely to commit a crime with them. I’m not sure how this helps your case.

https://vpc.org/studies/ownership.pdf

Again, logic fails you. Yes, an AR or AK can do more harm than Pa’s squirrel gun, but the fact is we didn’t have the same number of shootings back then even with Pa’s squirrel gun. The amount of people killed is irrelevant to the fact that the crimes didn’t occur in the first place. But, just to entertain your faulty logic, a person could have walked into a crowded theatre with a 12-gauge loaded with 00 buck and extra shells and killed plenty of people if he/she so desired.

 

[2aguy]

There may be more guns, but there are less households since 1973 that own guns. This means that those who have guns tend to collect them. Me having 1 gun or 10 guns doesn’t make me any more or less likely to commit a crime with them. I’m not sure how this helps your case.

https://vpc.org/studies/ownership.pdf

Again, logic fails you. Yes, an AR or AK can do more harm than Pa’s squirrel gun, but the fact is we didn’t have the same number of shootings back then even with Pa’s squirrel gun. The amount of people killed is irrelevant to the fact that the crimes didn’t occur in the first place. But, just to entertain your faulty logic, a person could have walked into a crowded theatre with a 12-gauge loaded with 00 buck and extra shells and killed plenty of people if he/she so desired.

Wrong......you don't know what you are talking about.

Minorities and women are the biggest growth sectors in gun ownership, they are new gun owners, not collectors......

The shooter in Kerch, Russia murdered 20 people and injured 70 with a 5 shot, pump action shotgun. It isn't the gun, it is the amount of time the killer has in the gun free zone before someone starts shooting back at them, causing them to stop shooting unarmed victims.

 

[JoeB131]

No.....school shootings allow you to lie about the rest of the shootings....the shootings that take place in democrat party controlled cities every single day. But you can't exploit those because 1) you don't care about black murder, and 2) if people realize how rare mass public shootings are vs. how real democrat party shootings are, they might vote you buffoons out of office...

Actually, all shootings are bad. That this country is so racist that we don't care unless the victims are white kids is a bad reflection on us.

There may be more guns, but there are less households since 1973 that own guns. This means that those who have guns tend to collect them. Me having 1 gun or 10 guns doesn’t make me any more or less likely to commit a crime with them. I’m not sure how this helps your case.

Well, it does in that the gun industry sells to the kind of nut who wants 10 guns like he's a prime customer. You see, it used to be that we had sensible gun laws in this country, and the NRA even supported them.

When the Black Panthers started brandishing weapons in the open as a response to police murdering their members, the NRA and Republican governors like Ronald Reagan passed laws against that sort of thing.

Again, logic fails you. Yes, an AR or AK can do more harm than Pa’s squirrel gun, but the fact is we didn’t have the same number of shootings back then even with Pa’s squirrel gun. The amount of people killed is irrelevant to the fact that the crimes didn’t occur in the first place. But, just to entertain your faulty logic, a person could have walked into a crowded theatre with a 12-gauge loaded with 00 buck and extra shells and killed plenty of people if he/she so desired.

Actually, fairly unlikely... You see, if someone crazy started stockpiling guns to go on a rampage, his family or neighbors reported him and the local Sheriff came by and confiscated his guns.

Now, thanks to the gun crazy culture of guys like 2TinyGuy, red flags laws are considered a violation of his rights, his ability to buy military-grade assault rifles is something that is encouraged, and big surprise, you have the occassional nut who shoots up a school.

 

[SweetTea]

Wrong......you don't know what you are talking about.

Minorities and women are the biggest growth sectors in gun ownership, they are new gun owners, not collectors......

The shooter in Kerch, Russia murdered 20 people and injured 70 with a 5 shot, pump action shotgun. It isn't the gun, it is the amount of time the killer has in the gun free zone before someone starts shooting back at them, causing them to stop shooting unarmed victims.

Maybe you misunderstood my post. I think we are on the same page, but I am just stating facts to JoeB that the number of households with guns has declined since 1973. Maybe that leads to the problem you are talking about where a shooter has too much time to continue shooting before facing return fire. Fewer citizens with guns leads to more deaths in that case for certain.

 

[SweetTea]

Actually, all shootings are bad. That this country is so racist that we don't care unless the victims are white kids is a bad reflection on us.

It has nothing to do with race. If there was a mass shooting of black people it would get just as much coverage as the ones involving white victims. If the shooter was white, it would get far more coverage.

Actually, fairly unlikely... You see, if someone crazy started stockpiling guns to go on a rampage, his family or neighbors reported him and the local Sheriff came by and confiscated his guns.

Are you suggesting that we also limit the number of guns a law abiding citizen can purchase?

Now, thanks to the gun crazy culture of guys like 2TinyGuy, red flags laws are considered a violation of his rights, his ability to buy military-grade assault rifles is something that is encouraged, and big surprise, you have the occassional nut who shoots up a school.

And once again, you ignore the fact that we didn’t have these shootings decades ago. The capablity of the weapons has nothing to do with the intent, only perhaps the carnage. The intent to do such harm wasn’t as prevalent decades ago. Guns are not the issue,

 

[JoeB131]

It has nothing to do with race. If there was a mass shooting of black people it would get just as much coverage as the ones involving white victims. If the shooter was white, it would get far more coverage.

Except, not really.

We have 600 mass shootings a year, but the only time we pay attention is if white people are the victims or if there's a really high body count.

Are you suggesting that we also limit the number of guns a law abiding citizen can purchase?

Yes.

I think every gun purchase needs to be heavily scrutinized. Imagine if someone had actually scrutinized the Las Vegas Concert Shooter when he started stockpiling guns to do what he did? Or Nancy Lanza.

And once again, you ignore the fact that we didn’t have these shootings decades ago. The capablity of the weapons has nothing to do with the intent, only perhaps the carnage. The intent to do such harm wasn’t as prevalent decades ago. Guns are not the issue,

We didn't have these shooting decades ago because we didn't have as many guns or guns that were as deadly. And the gun industry didn't specifically market to crazy people.

You see, we DID have a huge spike in the murder rate in the 1920's. The 1920's murder rate was higher than it is now. Gangsters were using tommy guns to fight over booze distribution.

So the government did something breathtakingly rational. It made Booze legal again and put restrictions on guns that lasted until the 1970's when Wayne LaPeirre and the other crazies took over the NRA.

 

[SweetTea]

We have 600 mass shootings a year, but the only time we pay attention is if white people are the victims or if there's a really high body count.

Propaganda. Completely untrue.

We didn't have these shooting decades ago because we didn't have as many guns or guns that were as deadly. And the gun industry didn't specifically market to crazy people.

Again, we have less guns per household than we did in the 70’s. 1 person with more guns doesn’t make him/her more likely to commit murder.

The problem is that I see people like you as crazy. You see people like me as crazy. Giving either your or me the power to make that determination would be extremely detrimental to one of us. The definition of “reasonable” gun control laws is also up for debate. To you, it seems that it is unreasonable for me to have more than 1 gun and that gun probably needs to be a lever action capable of firing no more than 2 shots without reloading.

 

[JoeB131]

Propaganda. Completely untrue.

Well, no, the thing is you guys define "Mass shooting" up to mean at least five killed.

But we have 600 incidents a year where more than one person is killed or wounded. That's a mass shooting.

The problem is that I see people like you as crazy. You see people like me as crazy. Giving either your or me the power to make that determination would be extremely detrimental to one of us. The definition of “reasonable” gun control laws is also up for debate. To you, it seems that it is unreasonable for me to have more than 1 gun and that gun probably needs to be a lever action capable of firing no more than 2 shots without reloading.

Well, no, you see, if we are both determined to be "too crazy" to have a gun (even though the Army let me have one for 11 years, and I was in a much worse place psychologically back then than I am now.) then no harm, because neither one of us really needs a gun.

I'd be perfectly fine if all privately owned guns were banned. But I'm willing to work with you halfway, as long as your gun is registered, you've been background checked, have undergone a reasonable amount of training, and are required to carry insurance.

Now, before you say, "That's unreasonable!" we undergo that kind of scrutiny before we get a job or a home loan. I'm trying to get my wife a marriage visa, they are making us fill out a ton of paperwork. (Even though she's been working here for the last 7 years and has family here.)

 

[SweetTea]

I'd be perfectly fine if all privately owned guns were banned.

Yes, you and virtually all Democrats. In your fantasy world, there is just no way that bad guys would ever have guns(see Hamas 10/7 attack on Israel) and that our government would never, ever try to take control by force. Just couldn’t happen, right?

But I'm willing to work with you halfway, as long as your gun is registered, you've been background checked, have undergone a reasonable amount of training, and are required to carry insurance.

Yeah, they do this kind of stuff in NYC where it is very difficult for a law abiding citizen to get a permit to have a gun. The devil is in the details. Most would never get a gun in this case and don’t think that politics couldn’t come into play as well.

Now, before you say, "That's unreasonable!" we undergo that kind of scrutiny before we get a job or a home loan.

The same could be said about requiring voter id, but you are against that because you feel it is just too much work for the average citizen. It is amazing how quickly your story changes depending one the circumstance.

 

[Zincwarrior]

Nah, they're a little minority...thank God

What size pumps do you wear?

Please keep me out of your weird personal fantasies.

I swear I did SO a Trans couple at a match this weekend. Instead of pushing over a barrel to shoot targets one kicked the barrel off the table. All us old farts went "wo" imagining the weeks of intense pain we would have pulling muscles doing that.

 

[Zincwarrior]

There is only one God.

And Allah is his name.

Oh wait, did you have another candidate?

 

[JoeB131]

Yes, you and virtually all Democrats. In your fantasy world, there is just no way that bad guys would ever have guns(see Hamas 10/7 attack on Israel) and that our government would never, ever try to take control by force. Just couldn’t happen, right?

If the government goes bad, your gun will not fix the problem.

Again, I don't expect to take the guns from all the bad guys. What I do expect that once the police aren't cleaning up domestic shootings and suicides and the other petty stuff, they'll have time to go after the bad guys.

Yeah, they do this kind of stuff in NYC where it is very difficult for a law abiding citizen to get a permit to have a gun. The devil is in the details. Most would never get a gun in this case and don’t think that politics couldn’t come into play as well.

Guy, I recently got a FOID card here for Illinois. It's a ******* joke. $11.00 and a questionaire. That's all it took.

The same could be said about requiring voter id, but you are against that because you feel it is just too much work for the average citizen. It is amazing how quickly your story changes depending one the circumstance.

We already told you why we don't want voter ID.
Because it comes from the same place as literacy tests, poll taxes and all the other Jim Crow crap you guys try to pull if we don't watch you.

If you could kill me with a vote, I would be more worried about whether you were voting at the right address or not.