Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   Now there're some folk 'round these parts who'll tell ya they remember a time when the "days since a mass shooting" sign sometimes had two digits on it, but, I think they must be very old, or very great liars   ( yahoo.com) divider line
    More: News, television station KCRA, Police, Rancho Tehama School, Tehama County Assistant, Tehama County Sheriff, shooting spree, Tehama County, California, Sheriff Phil Johnston  
•       •       •

6849 clicks; posted to Main » on 14 Nov 2017 at 3:41 PM (4 days ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Funniest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

4 days ago  
71 votes:
Dead elementary students? Surely this will be what it takes to bring about reform in gun control at long last.
4 days ago  
35 votes:
img.fark.net
4 days ago  
31 votes:

Omnidirectional Punching: Sure is a shame that once again there's absolutely nothing we could ever do to put a stop to gun violence.


If California had tough laws banning pistol grips and adjustable stocks on rifles then this shooting would not have happened.
4 days ago  
31 votes:
The guns are reported to be in stable condition.
4 days ago  
18 votes:
"I thought this only happens to places like L.A. or New York," said Jose Garcia - local man who lives in a cave
4 days ago  
16 votes:
Some reports say he was a felon.  Might want to look into passing a law making it illegal to have guns if you're a felon.
4 days ago  
16 votes:
img.fark.net
4 days ago  
14 votes:

bikerbob59: First you must define 'mass shooting'.  I don't consider three 'mass'.


Are we really going to start Crocodile Dundee-ing mass shootings?
4 days ago  
14 votes:

skyotter: The guns are reported to be in stable condition.


thank jesus.
4 days ago  
12 votes:

Mugato: Ferreira said he heard gunfire for over 20 minutes

20 minutes and only "at least" three dead? That's not only poor reporting that they can't accurately count corpses, that's poor mass shooting to get only three people in 20 minutes.


i.imgur.com
4 days ago  
12 votes:
img.washingtonpost.com
4 days ago  
9 votes:

SoCalChris: NBC LA is reporting 5 dead, including two students.

https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/cal​ifornia/Fatal-Tehama-County-Shooting-4​57497863.html


I am not reading any indication of students being killed at that article , though I may have overlooked it. It did state that some students were airlifted, indicating student injuries, but that is consistent with other articles.

Also,

Flint said his truck was stolen and his roommate was shot and killed by the alleged shooter whom he described as "Kevin," a known felon in his 50s.

img.fark.net


Uh-oh.
4 days ago  
8 votes:

NEDM: "Give us a little now or we take it all" is not a "compromise" by any definition of the word


Actually it's the definition of compromise. One side wants to reduce violence and has means that don't infringe on your rights to own toys of death.  The other side doesn't give a fark.  So there are three options.  One is to do nothing and more people die - great for the gun nuts, they see no downside whatsoever.  Two is to take away all the guns so that this doesn't happen.  A third option is somewhere in between, where there might be a little inconvenience for gun nuts in getting their death toys but it also works to keep those death toys out of the hands of incredibly dangerous people.  Gun nuts see options 2 and 3 as being the same and you're going along with it.

You're incredibly wrong.  Which is why I will have no sympathy for you when the path you want to go down meets its inevitable end.
4 days ago  
8 votes:

hawks9nkh: 3 is now a mass shooting? Hell, that's Chiraq on a good day.


Because people opposed to gun control cite Chicago's gun violence solely for the purpose of explaining why gun control does not work (all the while ignoring that Chicago's per capita gun violence is actually fairly low) and not at all because they're upset that a black guy from Chicago was once president.
4 days ago  
7 votes:

HumanSVD: AdmirableSnackbar: Dimensio: It would also keep each firearm traceable to its last legal owner, which would drastically dry up the illegal gun market.

Gun nuts say we can't do that because it would lead directly to confiscation.

Because it usually does.


And that defense is why I honestly have no sympathy for gun nuts and now assume that they love these mass shootings.  The incredibly remote chance that one day their toys may be illegal is too much of a risk to work to prevent needless deaths like these.  They're all terrible people.  Every last one of them.
4 days ago  
7 votes:
img.fark.net
4 days ago  
6 votes:
One day, a giant meteor hit the U.S., killing one third of the U.S. population.  That same day, NASA discovered a second giant meteor headed towards Earth. They went public with the news that as many as another third of the U.S. population would die if no action was taken.  The government did nothing.

When pressed for a response, House, Senate and White House officials issued the following joint statement:
"In this difficult and tragic moment when so many of our fellow citizens are grieving, it would be inappropriate to politicize the issue of giant meteors by engaging in a debate on how to deal with them. Now is simply not the time."
4 days ago  
6 votes:

Omnidirectional Punching: Sure is a shame that once again there's absolutely nothing we could ever do to put a stop to gun violence.


There's a lot we could do.  We could ban X-Box and Playstation.  We could not let kids see R rated movies.  We could put Advisory Statements on prime-time TV shows.  We could make women cover their boobies.  We could limit sugar.  My god, the list is almost endless...
4 days ago  
6 votes:

Subtonic: Dimensio: Subtonic: Dead elementary students? Surely this will be what it takes to bring about reform in gun control at long last.

FTA: Shots were fired at the school and some people were injured at the campus but no students or staff members died, Corning Union Elementary School District administrative assistant Jeanine Quist said by phone.

/Yes, I know, correcting a mistake means that I advocate doing nothing about gun violence.

Initial reports are sketchy.  It was 5 dead, 2 kids, now 4, only wounded kids... Give it a minute and I sure my post will be correct.


Can we be certain that some of the dead have not since come back to life?
4 days ago  
6 votes:
The GOP credo: a child is created at the moment of conception and becomes an adult when molested by a conservative unless caught up in a mass shooting by a patriot.
4 days ago  
6 votes:
img.fark.net
4 days ago  
6 votes:
Hey, shut this thread down dammit. Now is not the time to talk about guns. Tomorrow won't be either. I might have some time in late 2038 if you'd like to make an appointment....

...no wait, sorry, that time isn't appropriate either...
4 days ago  
5 votes:

The_Sponge: Thingster: Perlin Noise: Pet_Peve: I would like to know how outlawing guns would be anymore effective than outlawing drugs has been.

Well, lets start with the idea that the only thing they would have in common would be being illegal to posses, etc. So, if that's the only thing in common, we can make the exact same comparison to anything else illegal, like child porn. So, I take it you don't think it's worth the effort to try to minimize child porn by making it illegal?


/I'm so tired of the "when guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns" argument. It's really really stupid.

The thing about child pornography is the simple act of possessing it requires the harming of a child - and you're an accessory to that harm by consuming the product.

Simple possession of marijuana or a gun does not inherently victimize someone.  There's no victim in me possessing a gun, while there has to be a victim for you to possess child pornography.

That's why the law argument is stupid. "Well let's just get rid of murder laws then! Hurr, deer!"

No, because murder has a victim.

While me possessing a gun has no victim, and passing these laws just creates criminals of the otherwise law abiding.


And a smart vote for you.

We have laws against rape/murder/assault/etc.  because those actions involve one person harming another.

How am I harming someone just because I own certain firearms and magazines that seem to rustle the jimmies of every gun grabber out there?


Is not the constant terror that I expereince by knowing that you are able to have that arsenal a harm?
4 days ago  
5 votes:
The_Sponge:Really?  Because this is what I constantly hear from your side:

1) We need to ban "assault weapons"!
2) We need to ban "high capacity" magazines!
3) We need to make it very costly to be a gun owner!
4) We need a ban like Australia!

...and that is why we don't trust your side at all.


Your "side" has absolutely no standing to demand anything. None whatsoever. You have no right to act like there's any good reason for America to keep guns anymore.

Shut the fark up and let the adults talk.
4 days ago  
5 votes:

pedrop357: AdmirableSnackbar: The_Sponge: AdmirableSnackbar: The_Sponge: AdmirableSnackbar: If you don't like the proposals coming from the other side then propose some ideas of your own. Otherwise you're simply being intransigent and the "want these to continue" absolutely applies.

Those proposals coming from your side are infringements on our rights.....and earlier, you claimed that your side didn't want that:

AdmirableSnackbar: One side wants to reduce violence and has means that don't infringe on your rights

At least be honest and say that you guys want to take our rights away.

You want a proposal?  How about cleaning up the background check system?  Because it FAILED before the shooting in Texas.

I don't want to take your rights away. But considering how disgusting I find your attitude towards guns I'm not going to advocate against that action either. I'd like to find a compromise that works but gun nuts refuse those every single time. You're choosing this path and hate where it leads. I'd think you'd want to try a different path but here you are. I'm not gonna cry for you, you cry enough for yourself and your guns while good people who aren't you die. So no sympathy.

Enjoy crowing about all these deaths and lives forever altered. I hope it's worth it for you.


You should see a therapist.

Yes there's clearly something wrong with me because I care more about human beings than guns.

You care more about gun control than you do saving lives.  Very few gun control proposals have any chance of stopping either day-to-day violence or spree/mass killers.  The ones that would actually work would require massive confiscation and a near police state to maintain compliance.
This is unworkable and a violation of rights.

That you can't see beyond gun control as a solution to reducing violence shows misguided you are.

Drug war violence, poverty, violent people being released over and over again.  Addressing these would begin doing wonders for the violent crime you're concerned about.


Considering how many gun nuts vote Republican therefore against better education, socioeconomic mobility, and ending the war on drugs that would help reduce gun violence I find their (and by extension your) arguments about reducing gun violence disingenuous. They're giving those of us who care about human beings very few options.
4 days ago  
5 votes:
If you care more about an inanimate object than the lives of your fellow humans, you're a worthless garbage person who deserves neither respect nor consideration.
4 days ago  
5 votes:

HumanSVD: Dimensio: HumanSVD: Dimensio: Pinner: Gun violence. No such thing. They just sit there.
Let's address people violence.

If we can narc on people that assault people sexually, we should be able to drop a dime on people that have violent tendencies or are too aggressive (and happen to own guns)

Difficulty: evidence suggests that even when that does happen no one in authority does anything. See the Texas church shooter (known problems that should have disqualified him from firearm ownership that were never properly reported), the Naval Yard shooter (at least two previous arrests for negligent firearm discharges that resulted in no charges being filed) or the Virginia Tech shooter (improperly filed court records which would have prevented him from legally purchasing a firearm had they been properly filed).

But government should be the one I who can only have semi automatic firearms. You kniw, that same goverment that shiats on the 4th, and the same government whose police agents fark people over all the time.

Yes. Gun control is clearly what is needed.

I do not advocate prohibiting civilian ownership of semi-automatic firearms. In fact, I have stated opposition to any gun control proposal that involves outright prohibition of any currently available firearm model. I would want a path to legal ownership for any currently available firearm type, with the government having a burden to justify rejecting ownership (as is the case with shall-issue based permitting systems).

I also recognize, however, that some level of firearm restrictions can reduce rates of violent crime.

Yes, like Mexico, where guns are illegal. Unicorn's and rainbows all around.


img.fark.net

As if any single one of these weapons confiscated from Mexican cartels was not first bought using the gun show loophole and then smuggled over the border.
4 days ago  
5 votes:

The_Sponge: AdmirableSnackbar: The_Sponge: AdmirableSnackbar: And that defense is why I honestly have no sympathy for gun nuts and now assume that they love these mass shootings. The incredibly remote chance that one day their toys may be illegal is too much of a risk to work to prevent needless deaths like these. They're all terrible people. Every last one of them.


Nope.

Actions speak louder than words.


And your side doesn't love these shooting becuaAdmirableSnackbar: NEDM: "Give us a little now or we take it all" is not a "compromise" by any definition of the word

Actually it's the definition of compromise. One side wants to reduce violence and has means that don't infringe on your rights to own toys of death. The other side doesn't give a fark.  So there are three options.  One is to do nothing and more people die - great for the gun nuts, they see no downside whatsoever.  Two is to take away all the guns so that this doesn't happen.  A third option is somewhere in between, where there might be a little inconvenience for gun nuts in getting their death toys but it also works to keep those death toys out of the hands of incredibly dangerous people.  Gun nuts see options 2 and 3 as being the same and you're going along with it.

You're incredibly wrong.  Which is why I will have no sympathy for you when the path you want to go down meets its inevitable end.


Really?  Because this is what I constantly hear from your side:

1) We need to ban "assault weapons"!
2) We need to ban "high capacity" magazines!
3) We need to make it very costly to be a gun owner!
4) We need a ban like Australia!

...and that is why we don't trust your side at all.


If you don't like the proposals coming from the other side then propose some ideas of your own.  Otherwise you're simply being intransigent and the "want these to continue" absolutely applies.
4 days ago  
5 votes:

NEDM: AdmirableSnackbar: NEDM: "Give us a little now or we take it all" is not a "compromise" by any definition of the word

Actually it's the definition of compromise. One side wants to reduce violence and has means that don't infringe on your rights to own toys of death.  The other side doesn't give a fark.  So there are three options.  One is to do nothing and more people die - great for the gun nuts, they see no downside whatsoever.  Two is to take away all the guns so that this doesn't happen.  A third option is somewhere in between, where there might be a little inconvenience for gun nuts in getting their death toys but it also works to keep those death toys out of the hands of incredibly dangerous people.  Gun nuts see options 2 and 3 as being the same and you're going along with it.

You're incredibly wrong.  Which is why I will have no sympathy for you when the path you want to go down meets its inevitable end.

So you completely ignored the rest of my post, saying how A: California already has strict laws, and B: how people know now the "compromise" will never be enough?

If you want people to negotiate with you, you actually have to give them a reason to think you're negotiating in good faith.


Oh, and gun nuts are doing anything in good faith?
4 days ago  
5 votes:
img.fark.net
4 days ago  
5 votes:
registerguard.com
4 days ago  
4 votes:

pedrop357: carkiller: penetrating_virga: bluejeansonfire: Repeal the 2nd. Confiscate and ban. We're children who can't be trusted with our stupid little toys, so we need to take them all away.

I hope I see a gun-free United States in my lifetime. But I'm not stupid enough to hold my breath about that.

Fark guns.

Very realistic. Over 320 million guns in the USA and no telling how many billions of rounds and you want them all confiscated. Suuuure. Are we going to use unicorns to help us find ALL of the guns or perhaps the iPhone 12 will have a sensor for it?  Not to mention that a zip gun can be made in minutes with supplies from your local hardware store.

How many rounds per minute you figure you can swing with a zip gun, Tex, and at what range?  And do tell about your bold plan to scale production.

With the right approach, a person only needs one to kill someone with a gun (cop, soldier) and take their gun.  This was an effective tactic in WW2.

Beyond, Sten Guns can be made pretty easily.


That popping sound you might have just heard is one of my optic nerves separating from my eyes rolling to hard, if you were wondering.

Also, listen to yourself. You're smoking the chore boy for one last rush; if they take all the guns away, I can just make a gun, from the hardware store, and I can take my gun, and use it to steal another gun. Guuuunnnnns."  Seek rehab, man.
4 days ago  
4 votes:

bluejeansonfire: Repeal the 2nd. Confiscate and ban. We're children who can't be trusted with our stupid little toys, so we need to take them all away.

I hope I see a gun-free United States in my lifetime. But I'm not stupid enough to hold my breath about that.

Fark guns.



You're new to this whole trolling thing, aren't you?  One of your kids must have told you about it, and this must be your first time.

Bless your heart.
4 days ago  
4 votes:
Repeal the 2nd. Confiscate and ban. We're children who can't be trusted with our stupid little toys, so we need to take them all away.

I hope I see a gun-free United States in my lifetime. But I'm not stupid enough to hold my breath about that.

Fark guns.
4 days ago  
4 votes:

vrax: ThatGuyOverThere: The lawfully inclined are not currently inclined to be felons, obtain guns illegally, kill their neighbors, go on shooting sprees, murder innocents, and engage in firefights with police.
We do, in fact, already have laws against all those things. Our society has spoken pretty clearly on the matter.

However, there are things we can do.  The Las Vegas shooter purchased a large number of rifles, but because only purchases of handguns get reported, he went under the radar.  These "little" things are what need to be shored up and reported as do stringent universal background checks for all transfers of ownership.  And fark the NRA and other assholes, we need a national database so these things can be done with efficiency instead of being stuck back in the dark ages.


I think the best thing we can do is to deny ANY public funding to the NRA and its subsidiaries from any level of government.

Since the NRA thinks law enforcement officers are jack-booted thugs, they have no business being paid to train law enforcement officers or citizens.

They can do so on the private dime.
4 days ago  
4 votes:
I was a kid when that ex-soldier shot all of those students from the bell tower of a college. It was an act so unheard of then that even the cops were not equipped for the situation. (Damn! I can't recall the college or the guys name.) However that was way before anyone even heard of PTSD and soldiers who faced bloody battles came out of them just as normal as ever and if one had a breakdown, he was considered a coward. (Patton saw to that.)

It was years before the next one -- and by then the Internet was here, the first car phones and cellular phones popped up and the Lunatic Fringe was already blasting out false news and 'documents' showing others how easy it would be to kill a bunch of people and become famous. Hollywood had begun to turn the mass killer into movies making him look either pathetic and worthy of sympathy or determined to get even for imagined wrongs.

Then many more guns appeared in movies and all over the internet. Along with idiots who, using Freedom of Speech, informed anyone out there on how to tun civilian versions of semi-automatic weapons into full auto and started selling kits to do so. Then gun shows popped up, where you could buy huge bags of ammo, nearly any type of weapon and, if you looked around a but, conversion kits.

The gun became a manly penis extension for guys, which filled them with an urge to shoot something. (Back then, nearly every street sign out in the sticks.)

I think most men would climax if they could get their hands on that new, multi barreled machine gun shown on the original Mythbusters with it's hellacious rate of fire that surpassed even the Gatling guns of the Vietnam War.

So, naturally, due to the ease of buying guns, assorted nuts started shooting people for any reason under the sun and you could not watch an inner city movie without some of the characters brandishing guns. Guns became a sign of manhood and toughness.

I recall when people solved their differences with their fists. Now they whip out a hand cannon at the slightest excuse. Even in grocery stores while shopping.

It's scary and ridiculous and the gun companies are blocking every attempt to reign in their production. Even though they provide millions of weapons to any overseas coup or battle. They don't care who the 'good guys' are.
4 days ago  
4 votes:
The gun nuts have a great strategy here:
1. Establish the belief that it is somehow disrespectful to the victims to talk about gun violence for several days after a mass shooting.
2. Ensure that we never have more than a few days between mass shootings.
img.fark.net
4 days ago  
4 votes:

pedrop357: Shakin_Haitian: Yet, you'll keep voting for the people that won't do anything about those problems either, because any gun regulation is "stepping on your rights."

How are you getting my voting records?

Also, how do I vote to address the disproportionate levels of violence and homicide in cities like St. Louis,
Kansas City, Detroit, Baltimore, New Orleans, Chicago, DC, Oakland, etc.?
Shouldn't the people leading those city's governments be the ones to work on that, followed by appropriate assistance from state lawmakers?

I will do what I can in my area (Las Vegas), but I live in unincorporated Clark County, so I don't have a voting influence on City of Las Vegas politics to deal with addressing the crime problems inherent to some areas of Las Vegas proper.

I vote at the state level who might do things to address some of the problems that are more general across the state, but most of the solutions will still need to come from city governments who control things like zoning, policing strategy, business tax policy, community outreach, etc.


So you don't care enough to actually get off your arse and do anything. Got it.
4 days ago  
4 votes:
The simple sad fact is the gun debate is well over. Gun nuts won. They've established, through their lobbying arm and the politicians it owns, that piles of innocent corpses is just the price we all have to pay so that they can have easy access to their toys.
4 days ago  
4 votes:

penetrating_virga: AdmirableSnackbar: Either get more gun nuts on your side, convince them that they need to compromise a little or get ready to lose your toys, because that's going to happen eventually...

We as a country aren't on the cusp of abolishing the 2nd amendment and probably will not until a day and time where there's a more efficient force equalizing tool.


According to gun nuts we're exactly on the cusp of abolishing the 2nd amendment.  Doing anything to address gun violence will lead directly to confiscation, right?  If not, then clearly they'd be OK with registration and closing loopholes that make it easier for bad people to get guns.

So make up your mind, are you OK with some inconvenience on your end so that shiat like this doesn't happen?  Or do you love shiat like this and will do everything within your power to allow it to continue?
4 days ago  
4 votes:
img.fark.net
4 days ago  
4 votes:
It's time for America's favorite game.... Thoughts and Prayers!

California, come on down! Have we got some amazing thoughts and prayers for you today!!

*queue theme music*
4 days ago  
4 votes:

SoCalChris: NBC LA is reporting 5 dead, including two students.

https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/cal​ifornia/Fatal-Tehama-County-Shooting-4​57497863.html


Now is not the time to update us.
3 days ago  
3 votes:

ThatGuyOverThere: carkiller: ThatGuyOverThere: Note: that he killed people is not awesome.
That Pedro pointed out that people can make guns, then carkiller took a serious attitude while showing incredible ignorance, and then it turns out that this was indeed the case - that's awesome.

I stand corrected on homemade firearms, apparently. That you guys consider that some sort of victory does nothing to diminish my disgust. Quite the contrary, in fact. But by all means, feel vindicated in your bloodlust at my expense. I'm a big girl; I can take it.

He was a prohibited person. He wasn't allowed receive, purchase, or possess any guns at all. He also wasn't allowed to make what he made in california.
Guns are simple machines. You can make an AR out of a cutting board or scrap metal, or an AK out of an old shovel. And many many illegal knockoff guns (which are fully functional) come from people hand fitting castings in 3rd world hellholes, like this, or this.
It's not bloodlust, it's reality. Face it. Trying to ban things is just a silly idea that won't work.


I'm not even talking policy here. My desire to dynamite the factories and melt existing guns to slag is fantasy, and I'm fully aware of it. So whatever. Enjoy your reality. Enjoy your shiatty love of weaponry. Enjoy coming into this mass shooting thread and all the others that are sure to follow to defend your killing machines. You don't see a need to clean up your mess, there's nothing I can really do about it. Enjoy your mess. Just don't ever expect me to ever be persuaded it's anything but disgusting, and to say so when I feel like it.
4 days ago  
3 votes:
img.fark.net
4 days ago  
3 votes:

Dimensio: The_Sponge: Thingster: Perlin Noise: Pet_Peve: I would like to know how outlawing guns would be anymore effective than outlawing drugs has been.

Well, lets start with the idea that the only thing they would have in common would be being illegal to posses, etc. So, if that's the only thing in common, we can make the exact same comparison to anything else illegal, like child porn. So, I take it you don't think it's worth the effort to try to minimize child porn by making it illegal?


/I'm so tired of the "when guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns" argument. It's really really stupid.

The thing about child pornography is the simple act of possessing it requires the harming of a child - and you're an accessory to that harm by consuming the product.

Simple possession of marijuana or a gun does not inherently victimize someone.  There's no victim in me possessing a gun, while there has to be a victim for you to possess child pornography.

That's why the law argument is stupid. "Well let's just get rid of murder laws then! Hurr, deer!"

No, because murder has a victim.

While me possessing a gun has no victim, and passing these laws just creates criminals of the otherwise law abiding.


And a smart vote for you.

We have laws against rape/murder/assault/etc.  because those actions involve one person harming another.

How am I harming someone just because I own certain firearms and magazines that seem to rustle the jimmies of every gun grabber out there?

Is not the constant terror that I expereince by knowing that you are able to have that arsenal a harm?


dude, you REALLY need to start marking your sarcasm. I have you in pleasant blue. don't make me orange you.
4 days ago  
3 votes:

pedrop357: Well that's been gone quite a while unless you want to tell us that a white supremacist country elected a half-black person for two terms as president.

Note, I saw "half-black" because he was, and from what I've read of white supremacists in the past, that was worse than being black in their eyes.   Words like "mongrelization" , "Race mixing", etc. were tossed at people who merely associated with people of other races, and mixed race babies were worse in their eyes.

White supremacists seemed to 'tolerate' black people as long as they stayed on "their side" or in "their place", but had no such tolerance for babies from mixed couples.  On a side note, black people weren't too fond of half-white babies either.

The election of Obama should have done away with this idea that the US is a "White Supremacist" country for good.  White Supremacist countries do not have non-white leaders in every level of government, and holding positions of significant power.


I'm not going to explain America's white supremacy to you. Read a book.
4 days ago  
3 votes:

ThatGuyOverThere: 1) It's neat that you think the vegas shooter had a "large" collection of anything. He didn't. He had a good start.
2) He purchased his rifles via background checks. He purchased them over time, not all at once, so he wouldn't have set off any alarms anyway. 12 rifles in 20 years is ... well it's not a lot if you do a lot of shooting
3) despite popular opinion, registries DO lead to confiscations and a few years back congress had to pass a law about confiscations during states of emergency, which was overwhelmingly approved, in bipartisan fashion. No registries. no thanks.
4) if you meant a database of prohibited people... you can actually thank the NRA for the NICS system that the ATF uses. They forced adoption of NICS to get rid of discretionary waiting periods. They've been promoting enhancing NICS to include mental health for years. A lot of states/cities are too lazy to actually submit their stuff though, and that's on them, not on every other innocent person in the country.


Considering you are so full of shiat,  I'm just going to flag you as full of shiat.

"Some of Paddock's gun purchases date back more than 20 years, but authorities have determined that more than 30 of the firearms were acquired in the past 12 months, the official said."

Most of those were rifles.  Thanks for playing.
4 days ago  
3 votes:

Dr Jack Badofsky: HumanSVD: Markoff_Cheney: I sneezed and 200 posts happened...

Gun threads always blow up

Sorry.  It was the grenade launcher / fragmentation bombs that I bought at the local Harbor Freight.


If you buy anything at Harbor Freight intending to use it more than once, well buddy, that's on you.
4 days ago  
3 votes:

Cthulhu Theory: HumanSVD: AdmirableSnackbar: The_Sponge: AdmirableSnackbar: If you don't like the proposals coming from the other side then propose some ideas of your own. Otherwise you're simply being intransigent and the "want these to continue" absolutely applies.

Those proposals coming from your side are infringements on our rights.....and earlier, you claimed that your side didn't want that:

AdmirableSnackbar: One side wants to reduce violence and has means that don't infringe on your rights

At least be honest and say that you guys want to take our rights away.

You want a proposal?  How about cleaning up the background check system?  Because it FAILED before the shooting in Texas.

I don't want to take your rights away. But considering how disgusting I find your attitude towards guns I'm not going to advocate against that action either. I'd like to find a compromise that works but gun nuts refuse those every single time. You're choosing this path and hate where it leads. I'd think you'd want to try a different path but here you are. I'm not gonna cry for you, you cry enough for yourself and your guns while good people who aren't you die. So no sympathy.

Enjoy crowing about all these deaths and lives forever altered. I hope it's worth it for you.

I do not want to take away your gun rights, but since you are a poopie head, I won't advocate against it.

In other words, you'd be cool with it.

Desiring something and being ok with something are two different things. Personally I enjoy shooting guns, but I have no desire to own one, nor do I find them particularly necessary. So, I'd be ok if every gun disappeared from the face of the planet, but I'm not going to advocate for it.


That level of nuance cannot be understood by some people. Critical thinking eludes then and when they see it it scares them so much that they think that person must need a therapist.
4 days ago  
3 votes:

Dimensio: Omnidirectional Punching: Sure is a shame that once again there's absolutely nothing we could ever do to put a stop to gun violence.

If California had tough laws banning pistol grips and adjustable stocks on rifles then this shooting would not have happened.


Shut the actual fark up.  You can count the number of bodies that it took to make dry sarcasm on a mass shooting in a high gun control state infuriating.
4 days ago  
3 votes:

The_Sponge: 4) We need a ban like Australia!

...and that is why we don't trust your side at all.


As an Australian, that is why I don't get why my sister and her husband choose to live in the US. She lives in a relatively safe state (Connecticut), but she's still putting my niece and nephew in what I see as an inordinate amount of danger.

You zany 'Mericans going around shooting each other isn't cute. Why the fark do you love guns so much?
4 days ago  
3 votes:

Yellow Beard: Dimensio:As if any single one of these weapons confiscated from Mexican cartels was not first bought using the gun show loophole and then smuggled over the border.

I haven't been to a gun show in years. When did they start selling grenades, 40 mm grenades, and LAW rockets?



Earlier this year...but you need to know the secret handshake.
4 days ago  
3 votes:

The_Sponge: xalres: Spongey's not much of an "idea" guy, so much as a "NO!" guy.


Oh really?  Because in the past I've said that we need to clean up the background check system, make it easier to black list people with severe mental problems.  (My younger brother is mentally ill, so I'm objective in saying that.)   And I've also said that we need to increase the penalties for people who use firearms during the commission of a crime.

And yes, I say "NO" a lot because the gun control side keeps coming up with lame ideas.


You say "NO" a lot because it's easier to just sit back and be contrarian than to actually use your brain to think up ideas of your own.
4 days ago  
3 votes:

BlackPete: I really hate to ask this:

Are shootings in the US really news flash worthy anymore?

As long as the issue isn't being addressed in a meaningful way, it's the new normal.


So you think the millions and millions spent by he NRA, the gun lobby, and gun nuts aren't addressing mass shootings? They very much are. Buying elected and appointed officials is EXPENSIVE.
4 days ago  
3 votes:

pedrop357: Some reports say he was a felon.  Might want to look into passing a law making it illegal to have guns if you're a felon.


yet another mass shooting thread which you claim are very rare
4 days ago  
3 votes:

NEDM: AdmirableSnackbar: Doesn't matter to them. Shall. Not. Be. Infringed.

And this is the price we pay for it. Either get more gun nuts on your side, convince them that they need to compromise a little or get ready to lose your toys, because that's going to happen eventually due to gun nut intransigence on the issue. I realize you're actually one of the "good ones" - hence my snark earlier - but damn are you more rare than a unicorn.

"Give us a little now or we take it all" is not a "compromise" by any definition of the word, and the fact that you think it is is why nobody is willing to negotiate anymore.  People know that the "compromise" of "reasonable restrictions" will never be enough and people will always be coming back for more.  For fark's sake, this happened in California, being committed by an (apparent) felon, and you STILL want to restrict guns more.  What farking else could they do besides a farking outright ban?

/but nobody is coming for your guns, dontcha know
//inb4 "California's laws don't count because they're not nationwide"


So let's just continue to do nothing because shiat's going real farking great as is.
4 days ago  
3 votes:

Dimensio: Chicago-style deep dish pizza is the only true pizza.

No, it isn't. But you just keep on thinking it is. New York style pizza is the only real pizza.


You claim that, but I know that a number of people are still on the fence about the matter.


That's not true.

Chicago-style is too heavy to be supported by a fence.
4 days ago  
3 votes:

Subtonic: Dead elementary students? Surely this will be what it takes to bring about reform in gun control at long last.


i.imgur.com
4 days ago  
3 votes:

skyotter: The guns are reported to be in stable condition.


Yes. They are smart guns. The person pulling the trigger has nothing to do with it. People no longer have responsibility in the Great Liberal Renaissance you are currently experiencing. Its wonderful!
4 days ago  
3 votes:

Russ1642: [img.fark.net image 850x850]


When seconds matter, policy will arrive in decades.
4 days ago  
3 votes:
Sure is a shame that once again there's absolutely nothing we could ever do to put a stop to gun violence.
4 days ago  
2 votes:

penetrating_virga: bluejeansonfire: Repeal the 2nd. Confiscate and ban. We're children who can't be trusted with our stupid little toys, so we need to take them all away.

I hope I see a gun-free United States in my lifetime. But I'm not stupid enough to hold my breath about that.

Fark guns.

Very realistic. Over 320 million guns in the USA and no telling how many billions of rounds and you want them all confiscated. Suuuure. Are we going to use unicorns to help us find ALL of the guns or perhaps the iPhone 12 will have a sensor for it?  Not to mention that a zip gun can be made in minutes with supplies from your local hardware store.


How many rounds per minute you figure you can swing with a zip gun, Tex, and at what range?  And do tell about your bold plan to scale production.
4 days ago  
2 votes:

potterydove: rewind2846: s house. The fact that criminals were able to get them through theft or other means from these legal owners shows that there are simply too may of them and that they are too easy to get.

The second amendment says people CAN have guns.
It does not insist that that people MUST have guns.
It is that fetishistic desire which causes the sickness here, a societal sickness that will erupt into incidents like this one.

Yet Switzerland has similar per capita private gun ownership, but much lower crime rates. The problem is cultural. Stop blaming inanimate objects.


Goddam right the problem is cultural. A culture of fetishizing and recreationalizing a machine designed to transfer a lethal amount of energy and mass long distances at high velocities, combined with aggressive masculinity, to be specific.
4 days ago  
2 votes:

The_Sponge: "Nobody wants to take your guns away."


I certainly don't want to "take" your guns.
The issue is your attitude toward them. No other first world nation on the planet has it.
Guns are machines, which is how other first world nations with them see them. Machines that can be left alone. Machines that simply aren't that important.

But not here. Somehow the people here cannot do without them. And that is what must change first. But it won't, so long as there are forces that want to make money by stoking fear and people who are too simple to resist.
4 days ago  
2 votes:

potterydove: Yet Switzerland has similar per capita private gun ownership, but much lower crime rates. The problem is cultural. Stop blaming inanimate objects.


I didn't blame guns. I distinctly blamed culture.
" It is that fetishistic desire which causes the sickness here, a societal sickness that will erupt into incidents like this one."
Work on your reading comprehension.
4 days ago  
2 votes:

potterydove: In California? This is just proof that gun control doesn't work.


No. The only thing this proves is that we need fewer guns here.
Not more laws, not more rules, not more regulations, just fewer guns.
And don't even try the "well da crinimalz gots de guns!" because every gun manufactured here was at one time in its existence legally owned - from the manufacturer to gun shops to someone's house. The fact that criminals were able to get them through theft or other means from these legal owners shows that there are simply too may of them and that they are too easy to get.

The second amendment says people CAN have guns.
It does not insist that that people MUST have guns.
It is that fetishistic desire which causes the sickness here, a societal sickness that will erupt into incidents like this one.

Again, and again, and again. Don't even need a calendar.
4 days ago  
2 votes:

pedrop357: xalres: Literally nothing. There's no one thing that will solve everything 100% a the time so there's just no point in trying. Our only solace in this bleak, meaningless hellscape is that hobbyists and tyranny-overthrowing afficionados such as yourself can go to the range and plink some targets. And believe me when I say we all take great comforin that.

As a starting point, can you propose something that would have made a difference in this instance?


Because that's a conversation I haven't had on this site over and over. I used to engage thinking gun suckers actually were interested in discussing solutions to a very clear problem, but all you people really end up doing is screaming "NO!" over and over.

So I'll bid you adieu and we'll have the same conversation, I'm sure, in the next mass shooting thread. Maybe we can actually make it into the double digits on the "days since the last mass shooting" sign.
4 days ago  
2 votes:

fragMasterFlash: [i.dailymail.co.uk image 634x723]

Hello, teacher. Tell me what's my lesson.


Today we're learning how the evil libbie libs want to take daddy's guns and make you less safe.
4 days ago  
2 votes:

pedrop357: xalres: hundreddollarman: See you guys at the next Fark Gun Thread™
[img.fark.net image 504x420]

What's the over/under, timewise? Three weeks? Maybe two?

/nothing we can do, literally nothing
//prots and thayers
///tots and pears

What steps should have been taken that would have stopped this shooting that California doesn't already have?


Literally nothing. There's no one thing that will solve everything 100% a the time so there's just no point in trying. Our only solace in this bleak, meaningless hellscape is that hobbyists and tyranny-overthrowing afficionados such as yourself can go to the range and plink some targets. And believe me when I say we all take great comforin that.
4 days ago  
2 votes:

carkiller: Jiro Dreams Of McRibs: SurelyShirley: According to "Guns & Ammo", best states for gun owners:
8th: Texas (25 dead in recent shooting)
25th: Nevada (58 dead in recent shooting)
46th: California (5 dead in recent shooting)

Statistics don't lie. Guncontrol works. 'Bout time jackbooted thugs knock down some doors and grab guns & ammo (not the magazine).
If we only had a prednisone who cared about the 'murcan people.

Just stay outta Texas Smashburgers and you'll be okay. I think their like the Friars Club and jackets. If you don't have an AR15, they'll loan you one so you can be seated.

[img.fark.net image 500x375]

This is not normal.


I think the question is whether it's fine. And I think I both know the answer and need a cocktail.
4 days ago  
2 votes:

kling_klang_bed: Trump and Fox News anxiously awaiting the race and religion of the gunman before weighing in, which is why Pence got shoved to the front to comment first.


Unlike all the gun control supporters which never concern themselves with the race or religion of a shooter.
4 days ago  
2 votes:
The people who protest in front of doctors offices and health clinics because somehow a woman getting healthcare = murder, why aren't they protesting in front of gun manufacturers and shops?

Oh, yeah, that's right. Because they're full of shiat.
4 days ago  
2 votes:

pedrop357: Yes, he is clearly representative of the vast majority of murderers in this country.  Ignore the stats showing that it's young men, and disproportionately young black men committing much of the violent crime in this country.


Yeah a couple centuries of white supremacy will do that.
4 days ago  
2 votes:

DeathByGeekSquad: Focus on the mentality, rather than the tool.  Conflict resolution and critical thinking - skillsets that are increasingly difficult to find in younger generations.


Stephen Paddock was 64 years old so maybe pump the brakes on your bullsh*t psychoanalysis, Freud.
4 days ago  
2 votes:

bluejeansonfire: Your "side" has absolutely no standing to demand anything. None whatsoever. You have no right to act like there's any good reason for America to keep guns anymore.

Shut the fark up and let the adults talk.


img.fark.net
4 days ago  
2 votes:
According to "Guns & Ammo", best states for gun owners:
8th: Texas (25 dead in recent shooting)
25th: Nevada (58 dead in recent shooting)
46th: California (5 dead in recent shooting)

Statistics don't lie. Guncontrol works. 'Bout time jackbooted thugs knock down some doors and grab guns & ammo (not the magazine).
If we only had a prednisone who cared about the 'murcan people.
4 days ago  
2 votes:

HumanSVD: AdmirableSnackbar: HumanSVD: AdmirableSnackbar: Dimensio: It would also keep each firearm traceable to its last legal owner, which would drastically dry up the illegal gun market.

Gun nuts say we can't do that because it would lead directly to confiscation.

Because it usually does.

And that defense is why I honestly have no sympathy for gun nuts and now assume that they love these mass shootings.  The incredibly remote chance that one day their toys may be illegal is too much of a risk to work to prevent needless deaths like these.  They're all terrible people.  Every last one of them.

We don't love mass shootings at all. That's your own personal fanfiction with splash of dishonesty added to it.

Me and every other farker that has argued with you here has already pointed out numerous times that the government in charge of enforcing the laws already on the books have failed numerous times to disqualify and prevent the sale of firearms to those who shouldn't.

Another farker above above ready cited three examples with the last one being the texas shooter. All of those classes should have resulted in the buyer being disqualified but didn't because the government failed to carry out the paper work or failed to choose disqualification on pertinent information. Adam Lanza was reported on twice and police failed to do anything about it.

Yet you sit here, again and again complain why no one will compromise with you when it's been shown the government cannot keep use safe with the laws on hand, even in a gun restrictive state like California. You then go on and call people who have reservation in a effectiveness of these laws who have reasonable fears it will lead further and further encroachment on their rights terrible people.

And yet you still wonder why people do not want to compromise with you.


Tell us more how all these deaths and injuries are worth being stubborn and refusing to cooperate in finding a solution because some guy managed to buy a gun due to a failure in procedure, or some people ignore the laws. I mean it's not like Vegas was perpetrated by a guy who followed the laws... oh wait.

It's time to admit the laws are farked and need to be revisited. Stop being little biatches and finding every excuse to work your way out of culpability due to complacency, and start coming up with ways to fix the damn problem that don't rely on the system that already isn't farking working.
4 days ago  
2 votes:

The_Sponge: Dadoody: fark Denmark


Icelandic-like typing detected.


img.fark.net
4 days ago  
2 votes:

HumanSVD: Magorn: Sean M: If only it were illegal to kill someone... because laws um...stop people from doing things, right?

In seriousness, this crap HAS gone on.  It's with social media & the internet that we hear about every single incident now vs. in the past.  Flip through some old newspapers.  Sadly, this is NOT a new problem.

We do not pass laws because we magically expect that once passed they will be obeyed 100% of the time.  We pass laws as a statement of our shared societal values, to deter certain behaviors among the lawfully inclined and punish those behaviors among the criminally inclined

In other words, feelings not effectiveness.

Do you feel the same way about drug laws too? Especially with Marijuana? I mean shared values and all...


Absolutely, which is why it s long past time to repeal them.  They cannot be said to reflect our shared values anymore if they ever did (Dupont involvement in the "reefer madness" campaign raises many questions.

In fact, I'd say the current gun laws and drug laws have that in common: they reflect the views of a very small percentage of the population who has entrenched themselves in power because of the cowardice of politicians
4 days ago  
2 votes:

pedrop357: Very few gun control proposals have any chance of stopping either day-to-day violence or spree/mass killers.  The ones that would actually work would require massive confiscation and a near police state to maintain compliance.
This is unworkable and a violation of rights.


Okay, here's one that puts the lie to that silly contention:  Remove the "boyfriend loophole" that allows people in more that 30 states (who only get charged with assault instead of domestic assault because they don't live with the victim) to avoid being blacklisted from firearms ownership. If you are convicted of assaulting a relative or romantic partner, your guns should go away. Period. The living arrangements shouldn't matter.

The majority of mass shooting perpetrators in the United States have a history of family violence and were not legally prevented from owning a firearm. A majority of mass shooting victims from 2009 to 2015 were an intimate partner, ex-partner, or other family member of the shooter.

Let's just look at women for example:
Between 1980 and 2008, 41.5 percent of murdered women were killed by a current or former husband or boyfriend, 30 percent were killed by an acquaintance, and 16.7 percent were killed by a family member. In other words, 88.2% of murdered women are killed by someone they know. In cases where a firearm was used at least some, if not most, of those events could have been prevented with this simple legal fix.

"Massive confiscation and a police state" my ass.  All you need is to actually understand the friggin' numbers and take a few glaringly obvious steps.
4 days ago  
2 votes:

Dimensio: HumanSVD: Dimensio: HumanSVD: Dimensio: Pinner: Gun violence. No such thing. They just sit there.
Let's address people violence.

If we can narc on people that assault people sexually, we should be able to drop a dime on people that have violent tendencies or are too aggressive (and happen to own guns)

Difficulty: evidence suggests that even when that does happen no one in authority does anything. See the Texas church shooter (known problems that should have disqualified him from firearm ownership that were never properly reported), the Naval Yard shooter (at least two previous arrests for negligent firearm discharges that resulted in no charges being filed) or the Virginia Tech shooter (improperly filed court records which would have prevented him from legally purchasing a firearm had they been properly filed).

But government should be the one I who can only have semi automatic firearms. You kniw, that same goverment that shiats on the 4th, and the same government whose police agents fark people over all the time.

Yes. Gun control is clearly what is needed.

I do not advocate prohibiting civilian ownership of semi-automatic firearms. In fact, I have stated opposition to any gun control proposal that involves outright prohibition of any currently available firearm model. I would want a path to legal ownership for any currently available firearm type, with the government having a burden to justify rejecting ownership (as is the case with shall-issue based permitting systems).

I also recognize, however, that some level of firearm restrictions can reduce rates of violent crime.

Yes, like Mexico, where guns are illegal. Unicorn's and rainbows all around.

[img.fark.net image 850x624]

As if any single one of these weapons confiscated from Mexican cartels was not first bought using the gun show loophole and then smuggled over the border.

Do you have any idea how much legal arms we (The USA) sell to Mexico EVERY year, and how much of that goes walkabout when the recruits disappear to join the cartels?!  Why try smuggling them over the border when we hand delivery them by the crate!

http://www.jgspl.org/u-s-arms-exports​-​mexican-war-drugs-violation-arms-trade​-treaty/
4 days ago  
2 votes:

The_Sponge: AdmirableSnackbar: If you don't like the proposals coming from the other side then propose some ideas of your own. Otherwise you're simply being intransigent and the "want these to continue" absolutely applies.

Those proposals coming from your side are infringements on our rights.....and earlier, you claimed that your side didn't want that:

AdmirableSnackbar: One side wants to reduce violence and has means that don't infringe on your rights

At least be honest and say that you guys want to take our rights away.

You want a proposal?  How about cleaning up the background check system?  Because it FAILED before the shooting in Texas.


I don't want to take your rights away. But considering how disgusting I find your attitude towards guns I'm not going to advocate against that action either. I'd like to find a compromise that works but gun nuts refuse those every single time. You're choosing this path and hate where it leads. I'd think you'd want to try a different path but here you are. I'm not gonna cry for you, you cry enough for yourself and your guns while good people who aren't you die. So no sympathy.

Enjoy crowing about all these deaths and lives forever altered. I hope it's worth it for you.
4 days ago  
2 votes:
Dimensio:As if any single one of these weapons confiscated from Mexican cartels was not first bought using the gun show loophole and then smuggled over the border.

I haven't been to a gun show in years. When did they start selling grenades, 40 mm grenades, and LAW rockets?
4 days ago  
2 votes:
static.metacritic.com
4 days ago  
2 votes:

AdmirableSnackbar: The_Sponge: AdmirableSnackbar: The_Sponge: AdmirableSnackbar: And that defense is why I honestly have no sympathy for gun nuts and now assume that they love these mass shootings. The incredibly remote chance that one day their toys may be illegal is too much of a risk to work to prevent needless deaths like these. They're all terrible people. Every last one of them.


Nope.

Actions speak louder than words.


And your side doesn't love these shooting becuaAdmirableSnackbar: NEDM: "Give us a little now or we take it all" is not a "compromise" by any definition of the word

Actually it's the definition of compromise. One side wants to reduce violence and has means that don't infringe on your rights to own toys of death. The other side doesn't give a fark.  So there are three options.  One is to do nothing and more people die - great for the gun nuts, they see no downside whatsoever.  Two is to take away all the guns so that this doesn't happen.  A third option is somewhere in between, where there might be a little inconvenience for gun nuts in getting their death toys but it also works to keep those death toys out of the hands of incredibly dangerous people.  Gun nuts see options 2 and 3 as being the same and you're going along with it.

You're incredibly wrong.  Which is why I will have no sympathy for you when the path you want to go down meets its inevitable end.


Really?  Because this is what I constantly hear from your side:

1) We need to ban "assault weapons"!
2) We need to ban "high capacity" magazines!
3) We need to make it very costly to be a gun owner!
4) We need a ban like Australia!

...and that is why we don't trust your side at all.

If you don't like the proposals coming from the other side then propose some ideas of your own.  Otherwise you're simply being intransigent and the "want these to continue" absolutely applies.


Spongey's not much of an "idea" guy, so much as a "NO!" guy.
4 days ago  
2 votes:
the fact that there are people who will b*tch that 5 people dead and 2 injured CHILDREN still isn't a "mass shooting" means we have literally failed as a society.
4 days ago  
2 votes:

pedrop357: xalres: pedrop357: xalres: NEDM: AdmirableSnackbar: Doesn't matter to them. Shall. Not. Be. Infringed.

And this is the price we pay for it. Either get more gun nuts on your side, convince them that they need to compromise a little or get ready to lose your toys, because that's going to happen eventually due to gun nut intransigence on the issue. I realize you're actually one of the "good ones" - hence my snark earlier - but damn are you more rare than a unicorn.

"Give us a little now or we take it all" is not a "compromise" by any definition of the word, and the fact that you think it is is why nobody is willing to negotiate anymore.  People know that the "compromise" of "reasonable restrictions" will never be enough and people will always be coming back for more.  For fark's sake, this happened in California, being committed by an (apparent) felon, and you STILL want to restrict guns more.  What farking else could they do besides a farking outright ban?

/but nobody is coming for your guns, dontcha know
//inb4 "California's laws don't count because they're not nationwide"

So let's just continue to do nothing because shiat's going real farking great as is.

It is actually.  Crime is near record lows, and the long term trend is downward.

I bet the parents of those kids, or the other 500+ shot in these events in the last six weeks, are comforted by that fact.

I don't care if they are or not.  Facts are facts, whether they make someone comfortable or not.


We know.
4 days ago  
2 votes:

pedrop357: xalres: NEDM: AdmirableSnackbar: Doesn't matter to them. Shall. Not. Be. Infringed.

And this is the price we pay for it. Either get more gun nuts on your side, convince them that they need to compromise a little or get ready to lose your toys, because that's going to happen eventually due to gun nut intransigence on the issue. I realize you're actually one of the "good ones" - hence my snark earlier - but damn are you more rare than a unicorn.

"Give us a little now or we take it all" is not a "compromise" by any definition of the word, and the fact that you think it is is why nobody is willing to negotiate anymore.  People know that the "compromise" of "reasonable restrictions" will never be enough and people will always be coming back for more.  For fark's sake, this happened in California, being committed by an (apparent) felon, and you STILL want to restrict guns more.  What farking else could they do besides a farking outright ban?

/but nobody is coming for your guns, dontcha know
//inb4 "California's laws don't count because they're not nationwide"

So let's just continue to do nothing because shiat's going real farking great as is.

It is actually.  Crime is near record lows, and the long term trend is downward.


I bet the parents of those kids, or the other 500+ shot in these events in the last six weeks, are comforted by that fact.
4 days ago  
2 votes:

The_Sponge: AdmirableSnackbar: And that defense is why I honestly have no sympathy for gun nuts and now assume that they love these mass shootings. The incredibly remote chance that one day their toys may be illegal is too much of a risk to work to prevent needless deaths like these. They're all terrible people. Every last one of them.


Nope.


Actions speak louder than words.
4 days ago  
2 votes:
I know some of y'all are just dying to find out the identity of the perp so that you can roll up your sleeves and make political hay... but that's what drives these types of criminals, so my thoughts and prayers are for all media outlets to not reveal a name or image.


/anyway the shooter is probably Jewish
4 days ago  
2 votes:

Markoff_Cheney: Columbine was the first big one in my lifetime, and it seemed like we didn't have another for a long stretch after that.  People aren't even talking about Vegas any more, I remember Columbine being front page news for 3+ months straight around here.


It wasn't just your lifetime.  That was the first time it ever happened.

Prior to that no one had ever considered shooting up a school.
4 days ago  
2 votes:

Dimensio: AdmirableSnackbar: Dimensio: It would also keep each firearm traceable to its last legal owner, which would drastically dry up the illegal gun market.

Gun nuts say we can't do that because it would lead directly to confiscation.

And that is why I have suggested admittedly complicated safeguards to assuage such concerns.


Doesn't matter to them.  Shall. Not. Be. Infringed.

And this is the price we pay for it.  Either get more gun nuts on your side, convince them that they need to compromise a little or get ready to lose your toys, because that's going to happen eventually due to gun nut intransigence on the issue.  I realize you're actually one of the "good ones" - hence my snark earlier - but damn are you more rare than a unicorn.
4 days ago  
2 votes:
img.fark.net
4 days ago  
2 votes:

Thank You Black Jesus!: skyotter: The guns are reported to be in stable condition.

thank jesus.


And they say thoughts and prayers don't work!
4 days ago  
2 votes:
Pepperidge Farm remembers
4 days ago  
2 votes:

bikerbob59: First you must define 'mass shooting'.  I don't consider three 'mass'.


That's the most American thing I've read in quite a while.
4 days ago  
2 votes:
vignette.wikia.nocookie.net
Picture of the suspect.
3 days ago  
1 vote:

sugar_fetus: carkiller: sugar_fetus: carkiller: ThatGuyOverThere: Note: that he killed people is not awesome.
That Pedro pointed out that people can make guns, then carkiller took a serious attitude while showing incredible ignorance, and then it turns out that this was indeed the case - that's awesome.

I stand corrected on homemade firearms, apparently. That you guys consider that some sort of victory does nothing to diminish my disgust. Quite the contrary, in fact. But by all means, feel vindicated in your bloodlust at my expense. I'm a big girl; I can take it.

You conflate the desire to own firearms with the desire to harm or kill innocent people.

Maybe you need to rethink that.

The more I think about it, the sicker of gun culture I get, honestly. All of it. This guy in California, the Saturday afternoon plinker, the kid in the city avenging his friend's drive-by, the concealed carry guy, the hunter and his Fudd gun, the James Bond cosplayer, the collector, the 'neutralize the threat and ask questions later' cop, the sovcit, all of it.  Guns are machines designed to kill, or in the case of the big ones, destroy buildings and vehicles. You've got the right in this country to have them, and until you demonstrate otherwise I guess, I'll take your word that you're one of the good guys with them. But own the fact that whatever your reasoning, whatever level of responsibility you exercise with them, whatever your justification, what you value is a killing machine. And understand that I, and probably other people but definitely me, find that utterly repugnant. You don't have to like that I do, but understand that if you want any dim hope of changing it, you're going to have to make a hell of a convincing case. And until I've heard that case made, shiat like kids getting selected from school to the hospital with gunshot wounds is your farking mess, in my mind

Thank you for blaming me and other people for things we have not done.

Do you drink alcohol? A poisonous substance? Is the mess of 88,000 people dead in the US of alcohol-related causes partly yours?

Or maybe - just maybe - inanimate objects have no morality - no good or evil, except the uses that people make of them. By your logic, the firearm in the hands of a woman defending herself from a rapist has the same moral value as the firearm in the hands of a mass murderer.

I cannot agree with that in any way.


So don't agree with me. I'm honestly not expecting or even trying to change your mind. I'm voicing my opinion. Like it or lump it.
3 days ago  
1 vote:

sugar_fetus: carkiller: ThatGuyOverThere: Note: that he killed people is not awesome.
That Pedro pointed out that people can make guns, then carkiller took a serious attitude while showing incredible ignorance, and then it turns out that this was indeed the case - that's awesome.

I stand corrected on homemade firearms, apparently. That you guys consider that some sort of victory does nothing to diminish my disgust. Quite the contrary, in fact. But by all means, feel vindicated in your bloodlust at my expense. I'm a big girl; I can take it.

You conflate the desire to own firearms with the desire to harm or kill innocent people.

Maybe you need to rethink that.


The more I think about it, the sicker of gun culture I get, honestly. All of it. This guy in California, the Saturday afternoon plinker, the kid in the city avenging his friend's drive-by, the concealed carry guy, the hunter and his Fudd gun, the James Bond cosplayer, the collector, the 'neutralize the threat and ask questions later' cop, the sovcit, all of it.  Guns are machines designed to kill, or in the case of the big ones, destroy buildings and vehicles. You've got the right in this country to have them, and until you demonstrate otherwise I guess, I'll take your word that you're one of the good guys with them. But own the fact that whatever your reasoning, whatever level of responsibility you exercise with them, whatever your justification, what you value is a killing machine. And understand that I, and probably other people but definitely me, find that utterly repugnant. You don't have to like that I do, but understand that if you want any dim hope of changing it, you're going to have to make a hell of a convincing case. And until I've heard that case made, shiat like kids getting selected from school to the hospital with gunshot wounds is your farking mess, in my mind.
3 days ago  
1 vote:

John Buck 41: carkiller: My desire to dynamite the factories and melt existing guns to slag is fantasy, and I'm fully aware of it.

A gold star for you.


Save it for someone who values your esteem.
3 days ago  
1 vote:
I'm up for compromise.  I agree to that we can close the gun show loophole. In exchange give us 50 state plus D.C. and all outlying U.S. territory concealed carry.

Simple.
3 days ago  
1 vote:

carkiller: ThatGuyOverThere: Note: that he killed people is not awesome.
That Pedro pointed out that people can make guns, then carkiller took a serious attitude while showing incredible ignorance, and then it turns out that this was indeed the case - that's awesome.

I stand corrected on homemade firearms, apparently. That you guys consider that some sort of victory does nothing to diminish my disgust. Quite the contrary, in fact. But by all means, feel vindicated in your bloodlust at my expense. I'm a big girl; I can take it.


Our bloodlust will never be satisfied.
3 days ago  
1 vote:

ThatGuyOverThere: Note: that he killed people is not awesome.
That Pedro pointed out that people can make guns, then carkiller took a serious attitude while showing incredible ignorance, and then it turns out that this was indeed the case - that's awesome.


I stand corrected on homemade firearms, apparently. That you guys consider that some sort of victory does nothing to diminish my disgust. Quite the contrary, in fact. But by all means, feel vindicated in your bloodlust at my expense. I'm a big girl; I can take it.
3 days ago  
1 vote:

pedrop357: Dusk-You-n-Me: pedrop357: Yes, he is clearly representative of the vast majority of murderers in this country.  Ignore the stats showing that it's young men, and disproportionately young black men committing much of the violent crime in this country.

Yeah a couple centuries of white supremacy will do that.

Well that's been gone quite a while unless you want to tell us that a white supremacist country elected a half-black person for two terms as president.

Note, I saw "half-black" because he was, and from what I've read of white supremacists in the past, that was worse than being black in their eyes.   Words like "mongrelization" , "Race mixing", etc. were tossed at people who merely associated with people of other races, and mixed race babies were worse in their eyes.

White supremacists seemed to 'tolerate' black people as long as they stayed on "their side" or in "their place", but had no such tolerance for babies from mixed couples.  On a side note, black people weren't too fond of half-white babies either.

The election of Obama should have done away with this idea that the US is a "White Supremacist" country for good.  White Supremacist countries do not have non-white leaders in every level of government, and holding positions of significant power.


Nice to see you found some time in your busy Roy Moore Defending schedule to slip in some dog whistle racism and blame some shooting victims.

I hope you never sleep at night you trash heap.
3 days ago  
1 vote:

ThatGuyOverThere: durbnpoisn: So let's just say, it's the first time ever that a couple of students, together, got a hold of a bunch of semi-automatic weapons, shot up a school, mostly students died, and then they killed themselves.

They only each had one semi-auto 9mm gun. They also each had a shotgun, one had a pump action and one had a double barreled breech loading shotgun. They improvised many bombs.
I had to look this up. Seems like they each had a billion guns on them in retrospect, but nope. I think that when we hear "columbine" we somehow associate it with this classic kid.

carkiller: That popping sound you might have just heard is one of my optic nerves separating from my eyes rolling to hard, if you were wondering.
You clearly don't know much about the cheaply made, but very effective, guns of WWII. Or zip guns, pen guns, or pipe guns. or AOWs in the form of keychain guns, cane guns, etc.


Nor care much, frankly. I'm really kinda into stuff that's not designed to kill people.
3 days ago  
1 vote:

pedrop357: You can see this in Chicago with offender and victim rates for different races/ethnicities.


That whistling shouting through a bullhorn must leave you dreadfully short of breath.
Give it a rest.
4 days ago  
1 vote:

rewind2846: The_Sponge: "Nobody wants to take your guns away."

I certainly don't want to "take" your guns.
The issue is your attitude toward them. No other first world nation on the planet has it.
Guns are machines, which is how other first world nations with them see them. Machines that can be left alone. Machines that simply aren't that important.

But not here. Somehow the people here cannot do without them. And that is what must change first. But it won't, so long as there are forces that want to make money by stoking fear and people who are too simple to resist.


Yeah, and unfortunately....there are people...and some of them who are elected officials...at the state and federal level...who want to take them away...or at the very least, certain males and models.
4 days ago  
1 vote:

pedrop357: carkiller: potterydove: rewind2846: s house. The fact that criminals were able to get them through theft or other means from these legal owners shows that there are simply too may of them and that they are too easy to get.

The second amendment says people CAN have guns.
It does not insist that that people MUST have guns.
It is that fetishistic desire which causes the sickness here, a societal sickness that will erupt into incidents like this one.

Yet Switzerland has similar per capita private gun ownership, but much lower crime rates. The problem is cultural. Stop blaming inanimate objects.

Goddam right the problem is cultural. A culture of fetishizing and recreationalizing a machine designed to transfer a lethal amount of energy and mass long distances at high velocities, combined with aggressive masculinity, to be specific.

Yet the people most associated (stereotyped) with that culture (white people) have homicide rates that are on par with European nations.

This somewhat shows up in states that are predominantly white like NH, VT, ME, ID, UT, MT, WY, etc. and and have very low homicide rates.

Someone posted a report from Milwaukee where the homicide rate for white people in the city was around 1.7/100k vs 27.9 for black people.  This shows up in New Orleans where in some years up to 95% of homicides are believed to be committed by black people who are ~60% of the population.

You can see this in Chicago with offender and victim rates for different races/ethnicities.


I figured you were whistling, there, but I wanted you to put yourself. Nice work, cowboy.
4 days ago  
1 vote:

rewind2846: But not here.


Incorrect.  For example, many of the gun nuts I know will not shoot for several months during the winter.  You seem to be rooted in something along the lines of  "Area man passionate about what he imagines gun nuts to be."

It is actually obvious you know little about these people.
4 days ago  
1 vote:
With cars, there's been a continuous improvement in their safety. They're always adding driver assist features and when autonomous cars get here, it should really put a dent in traffic fatalities.

img.fark.net


Airlines, ditto.

img.fark.net


But guns? Seems like there's never anything done, no background check upgrades, the same types of clowns keep getting weapons and ammo, after each mass shooting, year after year.

img.fark.net


I'm not okay with the "tough sh•t, cupcake" approach to gun injuries and fatalities.
4 days ago  
1 vote:

durbnpoisn: Keyser_Soze_Death: durbnpoisn: Keyser_Soze_Death: durbnpoisn: Markoff_Cheney: Columbine was the first big one in my lifetime, and it seemed like we didn't have another for a long stretch after that.  People aren't even talking about Vegas any more, I remember Columbine being front page news for 3+ months straight around here.

It wasn't just your lifetime.  That was the first time it ever happened.

Prior to that no one had ever considered shooting up a school.

[images.gr-assets.com image 308x475]

No one... Ever.

//Does 2 seconds of research...

Ok.  I stand corrected.
I don't think that exactly qualifies as a mass shooting by Columbine standards.

1966 University of Texas tower shooting (15 killed 32 injured)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universi​ty_of_Texas_tower_shooting

1922 Bath School disaster (44 killed 58 injured)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_Sch​ool_disaster


Harry Chapin wrote a song about that top one.

Anyway...  Thanks, everyone, for proving how completely wrong I was that Columbine was the most screwed up thing that had happened up to that time.  You've done tons to restore my faith in humanity.

So let's just say, it's the first time ever that a couple of students, together, got a hold of a bunch of semi-automatic weapons, shot up a school, mostly students died, and then they killed themselves.

I'm pretty that's the first time THAT happened.


cdn.nexternal.com
4 days ago  
1 vote:
Thoughts, etc.
4 days ago  
1 vote:

Frederf: The_Sponge: durbnpoisn: Keyser_Soze_Death: durbnpoisn: Keyser_Soze_Death: durbnpoisn: Markoff_Cheney: Columbine was the first big one in my lifetime, and it seemed like we didn't have another for a long stretch after that.  People aren't even talking about Vegas any more, I remember Columbine being front page news for 3+ months straight around here.

It wasn't just your lifetime.  That was the first time it ever happened.

Prior to that no one had ever considered shooting up a school.

[images.gr-assets.com image 308x475]

No one... Ever.

//Does 2 seconds of research...

Ok.  I stand corrected.
I don't think that exactly qualifies as a mass shooting by Columbine standards.

1966 University of Texas tower shooting (15 killed 32 injured)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universi​ty_of_Texas_tower_shooting

1922 Bath School disaster (44 killed 58 injured)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_Sch​ool_disaster


Harry Chapin wrote a song about that top one.

Anyway...  Thanks, everyone, for proving how completely wrong I was that Columbine was the most screwed up thing that had happened up to that time.  You've done tons to restore my faith in humanity.

So let's just say, it's the first time ever that a couple of students, together, got a hold of a bunch of semi-automatic weapons, shot up a school, mostly students died, and then they killed themselves.

I'm pretty that's the first time THAT happened.

Side note:  Columbine took place during Bill Clinton's ban on "assault weapons".

Man dies of flu the day after penecillin invented.


The ban passed in 1994, Columbine took place in 1999.  Try again.
4 days ago  
1 vote:

Mugato: So you really think that if there are fewer guns that a dedicated psycho who wants to shoot up a place will just throw up his hands and take up needle point?


If there are fewer guns total, they will be harder to get, more difficult to steal, and therefore less likely to be used to kill other people.
I cannot shoot you with a gun that does not exist.
But of course the gun manufacturers and their NRA lobbyists will not let that happen. Incidents like this one are what their shareholders live for.
4 days ago  
1 vote:

rewind2846: No. The only thing this proves is that we need fewer guns here.


So you really think that if there are fewer guns that a dedicated psycho who wants to shoot up a place will just throw up his hands and take up needle point?
4 days ago  
1 vote:

NEDM: California, which did use one of its gun registries to go door to door confiscating guns.


[citation needed]
4 days ago  
1 vote:

ChicagoKev: anustart: The deep and serious flaw with this logic is that a huge proportion of gun violence is committed on the spur of the moment, in a fit of uncontrolled anger. They aren't premeditated acts by career criminals

[Citation needed]

Perpetrators of any violent crime, ("gun" violence or otherwise) rarely "just snap", the majority have an adult criminal record.  For example, in one Milwaukee  report, 90% of homicide suspects had an adult criminal record.


Thanks for that.

2. The homicide rate was 14.5 per 100,000 residents and the nonfatal shooting rate was 79.5 per 100,000 residents.
3. The homicide rate per Black residents is 27.9 per 100,000 compared to 9.7 per 100,000 Latino
residents and 1.7 per 100,000 White residents.
8. The vast majority of homicides and nonfatal shootings took place in lower socioeconomic neighborhoods.
17. Four squad areas (340, 520, 530, 540) made up 45% (or 213 out of 473) of all nonfatal shootings. Of these squad areas, 530 and 540 had significant increases over 2010 (93% and 58% respectively).


No, this is purely a gun problem.

That 5.7x and 16.4x difference is the result of non white people being framed to lay the blame on poor people instead of where it belongs, white NRA members.
4 days ago  
1 vote:

ThatGuyOverThere: vrax: Considering you are so full of shiat,  I'm just going to flag you as full of shiat.

"Some of Paddock's gun purchases date back more than 20 years, but authorities have determined that more than 30 of the firearms were acquired in the past 12 months, the official said."

Most of those were rifles.  Thanks for playing.

My mistake. I hadn't read that before. Last I heard he had been "collecting" for 20 years. Even so 30 in a year is... not really abnormal. an average of 3 a month is ambitious for most folks (financially), but not at all unheard of.
The very first time I went to get a pistol purchase permit in michigan, the nice lady asked me how many permits I wanted. I said "well... just one. isn't that enough?" And she laughed, said I'd be back for more soon. I got a carry license instead so I didn't have to bother getting permits ahead of time (state rules).
When I have the cash and find good deals, I may buy 3-4+ at a time. Some retailers will even bundle 3-5 rifle lowers as a perk for buying a decent pistol. Since it's from a retailer, background checks are still needed though.


Sorry I said that you were so full of shiat.  I checked my patience dipstick and it's empty.
4 days ago  
1 vote:

This text is now purple: Why do we still talk about JenBenet Ramsay, and not the hundreds of other missing kids?


Because she looks like this:
img.fark.net

and not like this:
img.fark.net
or like this:
img.fark.net

But I thought everyone knew that already...
4 days ago  
1 vote:

AdmirableSnackbar: NEDM: "Give us a little now or we take it all" is not a "compromise" by any definition of the word

Actually it's the definition of compromise.


You REALLY need a dictionary.
4 days ago  
1 vote:
See you guys at the next Fark Gun Thread™
img.fark.net
4 days ago  
1 vote:

pedrop357: SurelyShirley: According to "Guns & Ammo", best states for gun owners:
8th: Texas (25 dead in recent shooting)
25th: Nevada (58 dead in recent shooting)
46th: California (5 dead in recent shooting)

Statistics don't lie. Guncontrol works. 'Bout time jackbooted thugs knock down some doors and grab guns & ammo (not the magazine).
If we only had a prednisone who cared about the 'murcan people.

This is not how statistics work.


That is definitely how statistics work. Only three data points from a firearms publication is all we need to repeal the second and fourth amendments.
4 days ago  
1 vote:

GoldSpider: Dr Jack Badofsky: HumanSVD: Markoff_Cheney: I sneezed and 200 posts happened...

Gun threads always blow up

Sorry.  It was the grenade launcher / fragmentation bombs that I bought at the local Harbor Freight.

If you buy anything at Harbor Freight intending to use it more than once, well buddy, that's on you.


Uhh, how many times are YOU able to use a bomb?
4 days ago  
1 vote:

Dusk-You-n-Me: DeathByGeekSquad: Focus on the mentality, rather than the tool.  Conflict resolution and critical thinking - skillsets that are increasingly difficult to find in younger generations.

Stephen Paddock was 64 years old so maybe pump the brakes on your bullsh*t psychoanalysis, Freud.


Yes, he is clearly representative of the vast majority of murderers in this country.  Ignore the stats showing that it's young men, and disproportionately young black men committing much of the violent crime in this country.
4 days ago  
1 vote:

SurelyShirley: According to "Guns & Ammo", best states for gun owners:
8th: Texas (25 dead in recent shooting)
25th: Nevada (58 dead in recent shooting)
46th: California (5 dead in recent shooting)

Statistics don't lie. Guncontrol works. 'Bout time jackbooted thugs knock down some doors and grab guns & ammo (not the magazine).
If we only had a prednisone who cared about the 'murcan people.


Just stay outta Texas Smashburgers and you'll be okay. I think their like the Friars Club and jackets. If you don't have an AR15, they'll loan you one so you can be seated.

img.fark.net
4 days ago  
1 vote:
Remember folks there are only about 40 more potential mass shootings till Xmas.

/Happy Holidays!
4 days ago  
1 vote:

bluejeansonfire: Repeal the 2nd. Confiscate and ban. We're children who can't be trusted with our stupid little toys, so we need to take them all away.

I hope I see a gun-free United States in my lifetime. But I'm not stupid enough to hold my breath about that.

Fark guns.


I hope to see the Democratic party make this part of their platform.
4 days ago  
1 vote:

HumanSVD: However, there are things we can do.  The Las Vegas shooter purchased a large number of rifles, but because only purchases of handguns get reported, he went under the radar.  These "little" things are what need to be shored up and reported as do stringent universal background checks for all transfers of ownership.  And fark the NRA and other assholes, we need a national database so these things can be done with efficiency instead of being stuck back in the dark ages.


No.


Yes.
Sorry, but being pants-wettingly afraid of your own democratically elected government is not a sufficient reason for objecting to proper record-keeping.
Nowhere in your right to bear arms does it say the words "secretly", "anonymously" or "unaccountably".

Gee whiz, all these "proud 2nd Amendment supporters" sure seem to be reluctant to have to admit they exercise the right itself.
4 days ago  
1 vote:

GoldSpider: pedrop357: As long as you believe it, who am I to argue about what I believe or care about?

Want to know what a gun owner believes?  Ask a gun-grabber.



*Applause*
4 days ago  
1 vote:

Dr Jack Badofsky: HumanSVD: Markoff_Cheney: I sneezed and 200 posts happened...

Gun threads always blow up

Sorry.  It was the grenade launcher / fragmentation bombs that I bought at the local Harbor Freight.


Were they on sale or did you use the 20 percent off coupon?
4 days ago  
1 vote:

The_Sponge: Jiro Dreams Of McRibs: I think the best thing we can do is to deny ANY public funding to the NRA and its subsidiaries from any level of government.

Since the NRA thinks law enforcement officers are jack-booted thugs, they have no business being paid to train law enforcement officers or citizens.

They can do so on the private dime.

Name a current organization that can easily take over that void if that ever happened.


IIRC the Boy Scouts offers a firearms safety badge...
4 days ago  
1 vote:

HumanSVD: AdmirableSnackbar: HumanSVD: AdmirableSnackbar: Dimensio: It would also keep each firearm traceable to its last legal owner, which would drastically dry up the illegal gun market.

Gun nuts say we can't do that because it would lead directly to confiscation.

Because it usually does.

And that defense is why I honestly have no sympathy for gun nuts and now assume that they love these mass shootings.  The incredibly remote chance that one day their toys may be illegal is too much of a risk to work to prevent needless deaths like these.  They're all terrible people.  Every last one of them.

We don't love mass shootings at all. That's your own personal fanfiction with splash of dishonesty added to it.

Me and every other farker that has argued with you here has already pointed out numerous times that the government in charge of enforcing the laws already on the books have failed numerous times to disqualify and prevent the sale of firearms to those who shouldn't.

Another farker above above ready cited three examples with the last one being the texas shooter. All of those classes should have resulted in the buyer being disqualified but didn't because the government failed to carry out the paper work or failed to choose disqualification on pertinent information. Adam Lanza was reported on twice and police failed to do anything about it.

Yet you sit here, again and again complain why no one will compromise with you when it's been shown the government cannot keep use safe with the laws on hand, even in a gun restrictive state like California. You then go on and call people who have reservation in a effectiveness of these laws who have reasonable fears it will lead further and further encroachment on their rights terrible people.

And yet you still wonder why people do not want to compromise with you.


You blame me for what you support. Interesting.
4 days ago  
1 vote:

ThatGuyOverThere: The lawfully inclined are not currently inclined to be felons, obtain guns illegally, kill their neighbors, go on shooting sprees, murder innocents, and engage in firefights with police.
We do, in fact, already have laws against all those things. Our society has spoken pretty clearly on the matter.


However, there are things we can do.  The Las Vegas shooter purchased a large number of rifles, but because only purchases of handguns get reported, he went under the radar.  These "little" things are what need to be shored up and reported as do stringent universal background checks for all transfers of ownership.  And fark the NRA and other assholes, we need a national database so these things can be done with efficiency instead of being stuck back in the dark ages.
4 days ago  
1 vote:

Dadoody: fark Denmark



Icelandic-like typing detected.
4 days ago  
1 vote:
It's not the guns we should ban; it's the stupidity we should ban. Starting with YOU (of course I'm not talking about you).
4 days ago  
1 vote:

AdmirableSnackbar: Considering how many gun nuts vote Republican therefore against better education, socioeconomic mobility, and ending the war on drugs that would help reduce gun violence I find their (and by extension your) arguments about reducing gun violence disingenuous. They're giving those of us who care about human beings very few options.


Yes, city, county, and even state governments have no control over education policy, community outreach, policing strategy, business and tax policy, zoning, etc. that would do a lot to address these problems.
4 days ago  
1 vote:

Trapper439: As an Australian, that is why I don't get why my sister and her husband choose to live in the US.


You have trees whose leaves are literally neurotoxic, and you're wondering why your sister chooses to live someplace else?
4 days ago  
1 vote:

xalres: If you care more about an inanimate object than the lives of your fellow humans, you're a worthless garbage person who deserves neither respect nor consideration.


But enough about the prohibition of alcohol.
4 days ago  
1 vote:

This text is now purple: Mild mannered dude steals neighbors truck, goes in rampage to school, which he shoots up from outside for 20 minutes, while apparently engaging multiple responding police.

Was he driving a Ferrari? Did he look like this?

[img.fark.net image 675x360]


Not any longer!

img.fark.net
4 days ago  
1 vote:

xalres: Because we can tell it's a disingenuous attempt to move the conversation from the fact that, yet again, a bunch of people are injured and/or dead at the hands of one asshole with a gun or twelve. It's as transparent as when you lot suddenly care SO. FARKING. MUCH. about mental healthcare in the wake of one of these events. Then once it's out of the news cycle your interest in the issue suddenly fades into the ether and it's never brought up again until the next mass shooting.


Do we know each other outside of fark?

Nobody's farking buying it. I sincerely do not believe that you give two shiats about poverty or inner city crime beyond their ability to deflect.

As long as you believe it, who am I to argue about what I believe or care about?
4 days ago  
1 vote:

Mikey1969: Don't come crying to me when your farking bullshiat comes back to bite you on the ass.


You're far, far down the list of people I plan to go crying about anything to, tough guy, so rest your troubled head.
4 days ago  
1 vote:

The_Sponge: Trapper439: The_Sponge: 4) We need a ban like Australia!

...and that is why we don't trust your side at all.

As an Australian, that is why I don't get why my sister and her husband choose to live in the US. She lives in a relatively safe state (Connecticut), but she's still putting my niece and nephew in what I see as an inordinate amount of danger.

You zany 'Mericans going around shooting each other isn't cute. Why the fark do you love guns so much?


Of FFS.  We're not Afghanistan.  It seems like a lot of foreign media outlets are just creating hype.

Look...I live in a state where law-abiding people can have concealed carry permits.....I also have one...and yet, Washington is a safe place to live.  The vast majority of us are not "going around shooting each other".

I'm 39 now, and have owned firearms since the age of 18....and yet, not only have I never shot anyone, I have never aimed a firearm at single person...and I hope I don't have to.


Since you haven't shot anyone, we can extrapolate that no one has ever shot anyone.
4 days ago  
1 vote:

Trapper439: The_Sponge: 4) We need a ban like Australia!

...and that is why we don't trust your side at all.

As an Australian, that is why I don't get why my sister and her husband choose to live in the US. She lives in a relatively safe state (Connecticut), but she's still putting my niece and nephew in what I see as an inordinate amount of danger.

You zany 'Mericans going around shooting each other isn't cute. Why the fark do you love guns so much?



Of FFS.  We're not Afghanistan.  It seems like a lot of foreign media outlets are just creating hype.

Look...I live in a state where law-abiding people can have concealed carry permits.....I also have one...and yet, Washington is a safe place to live.  The vast majority of us are not "going around shooting each other".

I'm 39 now, and have owned firearms since the age of 18....and yet, not only have I never shot anyone, I have never aimed a firearm at single person...and I hope I don't have to.
4 days ago  
1 vote:

pedrop357: xalres: The_Sponge: xalres: Spongey's not much of an "idea" guy, so much as a "NO!" guy.


Oh really?  Because in the past I've said that we need to clean up the background check system, make it easier to black list people with severe mental problems.  (My younger brother is mentally ill, so I'm objective in saying that.)   And I've also said that we need to increase the penalties for people who use firearms during the commission of a crime.

And yes, I say "NO" a lot because the gun control side keeps coming up with lame ideas.

You say "NO" a lot because it's easier to just sit back and be contrarian than to actually use your brain to think up ideas of your own.

I say no a lot as well because the ideas are idiotic, come across as some weird power fantasy with no hope of doing anything positive, or are unconstitutional.

I've posted at length about crime distribution in many cities and how poverty is a major factor in most of the violent crime in this country, meaning that dealing with that poverty is key to reducing crime (and thus violence with and without guns) along with ending or scaling back the drug war.

You want more talk about gun control, not about reducing violence, curbing murder, etc.  This is why people eventually just say "NO" to you and move on.


Because we can tell it's a disingenuous attempt to move the conversation from the fact that, yet again, a bunch of people are injured and/or dead at the hands of one asshole with a gun or twelve. It's as transparent as when you lot suddenly care SO. FARKING. MUCH. about mental healthcare in the wake of one of these events. Then once it's out of the news cycle your interest in the issue suddenly fades into the ether and it's never brought up again until the next mass shooting. Nobody's farking buying it. I sincerely do not believe that you give two shiats about poverty or inner city crime beyond their ability to deflect.
4 days ago  
1 vote:

Trapper439: The_Sponge: 4) We need a ban like Australia!

...and that is why we don't trust your side at all.

As an Australian, that is why I don't get why my sister and her husband choose to live in the US. She lives in a relatively safe state (Connecticut), but she's still putting my niece and nephew in what I see as an inordinate amount of danger.

You zany 'Mericans going around shooting each other isn't cute. Why the fark do you love guns so much?


They're part of what got us away from the King of England on our own terms back in the 1700s.

Beyond that, most areas of most states are perfectly safe.
4 days ago  
1 vote:

The_Sponge: AdmirableSnackbar: The_Sponge: AdmirableSnackbar: If you don't like the proposals coming from the other side then propose some ideas of your own. Otherwise you're simply being intransigent and the "want these to continue" absolutely applies.

Those proposals coming from your side are infringements on our rights.....and earlier, you claimed that your side didn't want that:

AdmirableSnackbar: One side wants to reduce violence and has means that don't infringe on your rights

At least be honest and say that you guys want to take our rights away.

You want a proposal?  How about cleaning up the background check system?  Because it FAILED before the shooting in Texas.

I don't want to take your rights away. But considering how disgusting I find your attitude towards guns I'm not going to advocate against that action either. I'd like to find a compromise that works but gun nuts refuse those every single time. You're choosing this path and hate where it leads. I'd think you'd want to try a different path but here you are. I'm not gonna cry for you, you cry enough for yourself and your guns while good people who aren't you die. So no sympathy.

Enjoy crowing about all these deaths and lives forever altered. I hope it's worth it for you.


You should see a therapist.


Yes there's clearly something wrong with me because I care more about human beings than guns.
4 days ago  
1 vote:

AdmirableSnackbar: I don't want to take your rights away.


Yes you do.

But considering how disgusting I find your attitude towards guns I'm not going to advocate against that action either.

What a surprise.

I'd like to find a compromise that works but gun nuts refuse those every single time.
Because your compromise as stated before is "Give me even more or I take it all"

You're choosing this path and hate where it leads. I'd think you'd want to try a different path but here you are.

By all means, lead us down that path.  I think you'd want to try a different path, but here we area.
4 days ago  
1 vote:

AdmirableSnackbar: The_Sponge: AdmirableSnackbar: If you don't like the proposals coming from the other side then propose some ideas of your own. Otherwise you're simply being intransigent and the "want these to continue" absolutely applies.

Those proposals coming from your side are infringements on our rights.....and earlier, you claimed that your side didn't want that:

AdmirableSnackbar: One side wants to reduce violence and has means that don't infringe on your rights

At least be honest and say that you guys want to take our rights away.

You want a proposal?  How about cleaning up the background check system?  Because it FAILED before the shooting in Texas.

I don't want to take your rights away. But considering how disgusting I find your attitude towards guns I'm not going to advocate against that action either. I'd like to find a compromise that works but gun nuts refuse those every single time. You're choosing this path and hate where it leads. I'd think you'd want to try a different path but here you are. I'm not gonna cry for you, you cry enough for yourself and your guns while good people who aren't you die. So no sympathy.

Enjoy crowing about all these deaths and lives forever altered. I hope it's worth it for you.



You should see a therapist.
4 days ago  
1 vote:

AdmirableSnackbar: NEDM: AdmirableSnackbar: NEDM: "Give us a little now or we take it all" is not a "compromise" by any definition of the word

Actually it's the definition of compromise. One side wants to reduce violence and has means that don't infringe on your rights to own toys of death.  The other side doesn't give a fark.  So there are three options.  One is to do nothing and more people die - great for the gun nuts, they see no downside whatsoever.  Two is to take away all the guns so that this doesn't happen.  A third option is somewhere in between, where there might be a little inconvenience for gun nuts in getting their death toys but it also works to keep those death toys out of the hands of incredibly dangerous people.  Gun nuts see options 2 and 3 as being the same and you're going along with it.

You're incredibly wrong.  Which is why I will have no sympathy for you when the path you want to go down meets its inevitable end.

So you completely ignored the rest of my post, saying how A: California already has strict laws, and B: how people know now the "compromise" will never be enough?

If you want people to negotiate with you, you actually have to give them a reason to think you're negotiating in good faith.

Oh, and gun nuts are doing anything in good faith?


How's that moral high ground?
4 days ago  
1 vote:
Look, my congressman has to plow a girl in the mall parking lot this afternoon and doesn't have time for this so we'll talk about it tomorrow after the next one.
4 days ago  
1 vote:

AdmirableSnackbar: penetrating_virga: AdmirableSnackbar: Either get more gun nuts on your side, convince them that they need to compromise a little or get ready to lose your toys, because that's going to happen eventually...

We as a country aren't on the cusp of abolishing the 2nd amendment and probably will not until a day and time where there's a more efficient force equalizing tool.

According to gun nuts we're exactly on the cusp of abolishing the 2nd amendment.  Doing anything to address gun violence will lead directly to confiscation, right?  If not, then clearly they'd be OK with registration and closing loopholes that make it easier for bad people to get guns.


Registration does nothing.  The "loopholes" you want to close can't be shown to be anything more than a tiny source of guns by prohibited people.  We're tired of people getting out of prison on softball sentences and committing new crimes wherein the response is more checks and burdens on the rest of us.  Keep violent people behind bars you won't to worry about people's backgrounds nearly as much.

How do you explain the low homicide rates of numerous states with no registration or universal background checks?

So make up your mind, are you OK with some inconvenience on your end so that shiat like this doesn't happen?  Or do you love shiat like this and will do everything within your power to allow it to continue?

Nothing you propose has ever been shown to work, therefore we all pass on it in favor of things that have a better chance - keeping violent felons in prison, working to reduce poverty in inner cities, I want the drug war ended, etc.
4 days ago  
1 vote:
Just ban all guns and give gun owners VR Headsets

/Might actually work
4 days ago  
1 vote:

AdmirableSnackbar: The_Sponge: AdmirableSnackbar: And that defense is why I honestly have no sympathy for gun nuts and now assume that they love these mass shootings. The incredibly remote chance that one day their toys may be illegal is too much of a risk to work to prevent needless deaths like these. They're all terrible people. Every last one of them.


Nope.

Actions speak louder than words.



And your side doesn't love these shooting becua

AdmirableSnackbar: NEDM: "Give us a little now or we take it all" is not a "compromise" by any definition of the word

Actually it's the definition of compromise. One side wants to reduce violence and has means that don't infringe on your rights to own toys of death. The other side doesn't give a fark.  So there are three options.  One is to do nothing and more people die - great for the gun nuts, they see no downside whatsoever.  Two is to take away all the guns so that this doesn't happen.  A third option is somewhere in between, where there might be a little inconvenience for gun nuts in getting their death toys but it also works to keep those death toys out of the hands of incredibly dangerous people.  Gun nuts see options 2 and 3 as being the same and you're going along with it.

You're incredibly wrong.  Which is why I will have no sympathy for you when the path you want to go down meets its inevitable end.



Really?  Because this is what I constantly hear from your side:

1) We need to ban "assault weapons"!
2) We need to ban "high capacity" magazines!
3) We need to make it very costly to be a gun owner!
4) We need a ban like Australia!

...and that is why we don't trust your side at all.
4 days ago  
1 vote:

pedrop357: You seem to be unaware of California laws when putting your option 3 forward.


Good thing we have customs posts at state borders. Otherwise arguments about particular states' gun laws would be kind of pointless.
4 days ago  
1 vote:

mrshowrules: pedrop357: Some reports say he was a felon.  Might want to look into passing a law making it illegal to have guns if you're a felon.

yet another mass shooting thread which you claim are very rare


Yep.
4 days ago  
1 vote:

Walker: [img.fark.net image 305x159]

Great police work there Lou.

[img.fark.net image 244x327]

DAMMIT KEVIN!
[img.fark.net image 320x180]


img.fark.net

So no one won the betting pool?
4 days ago  
1 vote:

keylock71: It's time for America's favorite game.... Thoughts and Prayers!

California, come on down! Have we got some amazing thoughts and prayers for you today!!

*queue theme music*


img.fark.net
4 days ago  
1 vote:
At this moment, the one thing we cannot do is blame the guns. They are not at fault.

/Are they safe?
//I hope so....
4 days ago  
1 vote:

pedrop357: Oysterman: [registerguard.com image 850x725]

Says the person in a thread where people are talking about gun control.


Fark is not a legislative body. It has no law making power. So relax, your guns are safe.
4 days ago  
1 vote:
img.fark.net

Great police work there Lou.

img.fark.net

DAMMIT KEVIN!
img.fark.net
4 days ago  
1 vote:

This text is now purple: Markoff_Cheney: Columbine was the first big one in my lifetime, and it seemed like we didn't have another for a long stretch after that.  People aren't even talking about Vegas any more, I remember Columbine being front page news for 3+ months straight around here.

Columbine had a compelling (if mostly false) narrative, which the media proceeded to beat into the ground.

Vegas was confounding because no one has a good idea of why it happened, and the police don't want to force it because it only brings their embarrassing response into the forefront.

Why do we still talk about JenBenet Ramsay, and not the hundreds of other missing kids?


Benet Ramsey was accidently killed by the family and they covered it up. We know that's what happened.
4 days ago  
1 vote:

carkiller: Mikey1969: And THIS is why you don't jump on the news immediately after these stories:

School shooting in Tehama County leaves at least three dead
3 dead, shooter killed at Tehama County school - KCRA.com

In reality, there are 5 dead people, including the shooter, and NOBODY at the school is dead. This seems to be some kind of spree at multiple locations, but the news headlines specifically say that there are dead kids AT the school. Even the headline of TFA was wrong up until a few minutes ago.

Yeah, come on guys, he only wounded children.  No big, amirite?


No, the farking point, for illiterate morons, is that jumping on the bandwagon and screaming the second the story comes i=out isn't accurate at all. If you notice, NO students at the school died, but these assholes are so happy to try and get a scoop, that they have the wrong farking information.

Kind of like you, I guess.
4 days ago  
1 vote:

Dimensio: Omnidirectional Punching: Sure is a shame that once again there's absolutely nothing we could ever do to put a stop to gun violence.

If California had tough laws banning pistol grips and adjustable stocks on rifles then this shooting would not have happened.


I know, right? They could even start limiting the capacity of magazines, and maybe enforce a waiting period for any purchases.
4 days ago  
1 vote:
Mild mannered dude steals neighbors truck, goes in rampage to school, which he shoots up from outside for 20 minutes, while apparently engaging multiple responding police.

Was he driving a Ferrari? Did he look like this?

img.fark.net
4 days ago  
1 vote:

Mikey1969: And THIS is why you don't jump on the news immediately after these stories:

School shooting in Tehama County leaves at least three dead
3 dead, shooter killed at Tehama County school - KCRA.com

In reality, there are 5 dead people, including the shooter, and NOBODY at the school is dead. This seems to be some kind of spree at multiple locations, but the news headlines specifically say that there are dead kids AT the school. Even the headline of TFA was wrong up until a few minutes ago.


Yeah, come on guys, he only wounded children.  No big, amirite?
4 days ago  
1 vote:

Dimensio: It would also keep each firearm traceable to its last legal owner, which would drastically dry up the illegal gun market.


Gun nuts say we can't do that because it would lead directly to confiscation.
4 days ago  
1 vote:

Mugato: pedrop357: Some reports say he was a felon.  Might want to look into passing a law making it illegal to have guns if you're a felon.

Everyone's been over this circle jerk for years. It's illegal to get coke too but we still have coke heads.


And remember, according to gun nuts we can't close the gun show loophole because that would lead directly to confiscation.
4 days ago  
1 vote:
Ferreira said he heard gunfire for over 20 minutes

20 minutes and only "at least" three dead? That's not only poor reporting that they can't accurately count corpses, that's poor mass shooting to get only three people in 20 minutes.
4 days ago  
1 vote:

rummonkey: the fact that any kids are being airlifted to the hospital because of ANOTHER shooting is enough.


It's not enough. Gun nuts need MORE freedom!  More death for their death cult is needed.  This is what they want.
4 days ago  
1 vote:

Dimensio: Subtonic: Dead elementary students? Surely this will be what it takes to bring about reform in gun control at long last.

FTA: Shots were fired at the school and some people were injured at the campus but no students or staff members died, Corning Union Elementary School District administrative assistant Jeanine Quist said by phone.

/Yes, I know, correcting a mistake means that I advocate doing nothing about gun violence.


Initial reports are sketchy.  It was 5 dead, 2 kids, now 4, only wounded kids... Give it a minute and I sure my post will be correct.
4 days ago  
1 vote:
First you must define 'mass shooting'.  I don't consider three 'mass'.
4 days ago  
1 vote:
Yawn.  Thoughts and prayers.
4 days ago  
1 vote:
kids, today's lesson is: Freedom

I can't bring myself to care anymore.  wooooooooooooo freedom
 
Displayed 174 of 174 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.

In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report