Skip to content
 
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.

(CNN)   Man opens fire in Oklahoma City restaurant, reset the clock on the good guy with a gun preventing a mass shooting   (cnn.com) divider line
    More: News, Captain Bo Mathews, English-language films, Injury, American films, CNN affiliate KOCO, Woman, Police rank, Police  
•       •       •

9707 clicks; posted to Main » on 25 May 2018 at 3:00 AM (1 year ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



357 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2018-05-24 10:51:51 PM  
2 people are in the hospital with gunshot wounds.

1 person had to take a human life.

1 person is dead.

If THIS the "Great" that Republicans want to make America?

Is this really the best they can come up with?
 
2018-05-24 11:01:59 PM  

Angry Manatee: 2 people are in the hospital with gunshot wounds.

1 person had to take a human life.

1 person is dead.

If THIS the "Great" that Republicans want to make America?

Is this really the best they can come up with?


TDS
 
2018-05-24 11:03:26 PM  
TDS

Just like it's always too soon to talk about your cancer treatment when the doctor comes back with the biopsy results?
 
2018-05-24 11:45:55 PM  
If none of them had guns, it would have never happened in the first place.
 
2018-05-25 12:24:30 AM  
Are we finally willing to admit the 'Well regulated militia' part?

The reason I distrust guns is because I distrust most people. The reason cops get guns is that supposedly they are trained and accountable. Obviously this needs work.

I am not against private citizens owning and/or carrying guns.

Infringe:

To transgress or exceed the limits of; violate: infringe a contract; infringe a patent.
v.
Obsolete To defeat; invalidate.
v.
To encroach on someone or something; engage in trespassing: an increased workload that infringed on his personal life.

We're fairly clear that it's the encroaching etc. def 1&3 that we're discussing. But in both cases there are clear limits. You can't infringe something without limits.

I think this is again agreeable.

So the question is not whether gun rights can be infringed or not, but where the fringes are.

As with all rights, we're not talking about things that are given, but things that you have. Without restriction you would be able to do and/or say and/or think etc... anything. But you are not alone, and therefore in the protection of the individual, all must agree to give up some freedom in order to continue existing. You can't in your own interest decide to go murdering, otherwise you are giving up all possible rights to exist.

This too is the essence of government. We all choose to give up parts of our freedom to act in order to have a civilization and a society capable of producing fart jokes and late night TV and Fark and beer and so on.

We create rules, which are nothing more than agreements of behavior. We're really stupid, and we think that somehow this magically prevents the behaviors, and honestly for the most part it does, and the rules that tend to survive are the ones that work. Don't murder people. Don't steal. Don't do to other people what you don't want someone bigger and stronger doing to you. There's always a bigger fish, and if there isn't, turns out everybody's mortal eventually. And so on.

We aren't going to fix it. Not with out strong rules that we as a people just aren't willing or able to enforce.

The USA is and always has been a really weird political experiment, and it's still interesting, even as it goes through the weird parts.
 
2018-05-25 12:38:00 AM  
Leo's is very good.
 
2018-05-25 02:51:26 AM  
As the gunman was fleeing the scene

So whose life was saved by this?
 
2018-05-25 03:02:52 AM  

2xhelix: If none of them had guns, it would have never happened in the first place.


right? stupid armed americans
 
2018-05-25 03:03:22 AM  
So, killing a guy, who's running away after shooting two people, is preventing a mass shooting, eh?
 
2018-05-25 03:08:25 AM  
This thread never had a chance.
img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2018-05-25 03:11:38 AM  

Natalie Portmanteau: So, killing a guy, who's running away after shooting two people, is preventing a mass shooting, eh?


The Mississauga terrorism thread is one down.
 
2018-05-25 03:13:33 AM  
WAIT, what? It's a bad thing for the bad guy to die? No thank you given as it does not meet the anti-gun narrative?
 
2018-05-25 03:13:49 AM  
The wild west . This is what the GOP wants .
 
2018-05-25 03:14:41 AM  

Natalie Portmanteau: So, killing a guy, who's running away after shooting two people, is preventing a mass shooting, eh?


Fuq that guy.
 
2018-05-25 03:15:45 AM  
The victims of Sandy Hook, Orlando, Columbine, Colorado, Houston, Vegas, etc are grateful for the good guy with a gun I'm sure .
 
2018-05-25 03:16:18 AM  

Angry Manatee: 2 people are in the hospital with gunshot wounds.

1 person had to take a human life.

1 person is dead.

If THIS the "Great" that Republicans want to make America?

Is this really the best they can come up with?


Anyone who disagrees with you in the least way is a gun-toting mass-murderer; anyone who agrees with you is a liberal afraid of a Nintendo Zapper.

The only safe option: Telling you to "go fark yourself."
 
2018-05-25 03:22:43 AM  
Thank God...  We can still do better.
 
2018-05-25 03:23:36 AM  
Shooting people in the back who are fleeing is totally standing your ground I suppose. We know for a fact that it is for US cops, but for citizens as well?
 
2018-05-25 03:29:03 AM  

PirateKing: Are we finally willing to admit the 'Well regulated militia' part?

The reason I distrust guns is because I distrust most people. The reason cops get guns is that supposedly they are trained and accountable. Obviously this needs work.

I am not against private citizens owning and/or carrying guns.

Infringe:

To transgress or exceed the limits of; violate: infringe a contract; infringe a patent.
v.
Obsolete To defeat; invalidate.
v.
To encroach on someone or something; engage in trespassing: an increased workload that infringed on his personal life.

We're fairly clear that it's the encroaching etc. def 1&3 that we're discussing. But in both cases there are clear limits. You can't infringe something without limits.

I think this is again agreeable.

So the question is not whether gun rights can be infringed or not, but where the fringes are.

As with all rights, we're not talking about things that are given, but things that you have. Without restriction you would be able to do and/or say and/or think etc... anything. But you are not alone, and therefore in the protection of the individual, all must agree to give up some freedom in order to continue existing. You can't in your own interest decide to go murdering, otherwise you are giving up all possible rights to exist.

This too is the essence of government. We all choose to give up parts of our freedom to act in order to have a civilization and a society capable of producing fart jokes and late night TV and Fark and beer and so on.

We create rules, which are nothing more than agreements of behavior. We're really stupid, and we think that somehow this magically prevents the behaviors, and honestly for the most part it does, and the rules that tend to survive are the ones that work. Don't murder people. Don't steal. Don't do to other people what you don't want someone bigger and stronger doing to you. There's always a bigger fish, and if there isn't, turns out everybody's mortal eventually. And so on.

We aren't goi ...


Counter-argument: Anyone who hates both bow and rifle, is a really crappy shot. Like, "can't hit the side of a barn" crappy.
 
2018-05-25 03:31:51 AM  

meatofmystery: The victims of Sandy Hook, Orlando, Columbine, Colorado, Houston, Vegas, etc are grateful for the good guy with a gun I'm sure .


I'm sure they wished he was there with them.
 
2018-05-25 03:34:21 AM  

Natalie Portmanteau: So, killing a guy, who's running away after shooting two people, is preventing a mass shooting, eh?


Quite possibly.
 
2018-05-25 03:36:51 AM  

Angry Manatee: 2 people are in the hospital with gunshot wounds.

1 person had to take a human life.

1 person is dead.

If THIS the "Great" that Republicans want to make America?

Is this really the best they can come up with?


The only death was that of the perpetrator.  What's your problem with that?
 
2018-05-25 03:37:08 AM  
I could say "Boy, something really farked-up is going on with my fellow Americans", but that would make me a h

mr_larry: This thread never had a chance.
[img.fark.net image 267x199]


Either you say "Something's really farked up about our psychology" and get branded a gun-nut, or you say "maybe we should keep guns out of nutjob hands" and get branded a gun-grabbing liberal.

In either case, you end up in the same tedious arguments, with the same cowardly farks/tedious coonts. AGAIN.
 
2018-05-25 03:39:59 AM  

lucksi: Shooting people in the back who are fleeing is totally standing your ground I suppose. We know for a fact that it is for US cops, but for citizens as well?


Germany, huh? I bet you probably didn't people trying to stop that dude who ran over all those people a couple years ago.
 
2018-05-25 03:40:01 AM  

2xhelix: If none of them had guns, it would have never happened in the first place.


There's no way to guarantee a criminal won't have a gun, so stop wasting your time with that wish of uninventing guns.
 
2018-05-25 03:43:12 AM  

Buck Dancer: WAIT, what? It's a bad thing for the bad guy to die? No thank you given as it does not meet the anti-gun narrative?


It's racist to call MS13 members "animals", so yeah, it's a Bad Thing (tm).
 
2018-05-25 03:45:11 AM  

meatofmystery: The victims of Sandy Hook, Orlando, Columbine, Colorado, Houston, Vegas, etc are grateful for the good guy with a gun I'm sure .


No good guys were present at the time a difference could have been made for those crimes.  What's your point?
 
2018-05-25 03:47:20 AM  
TFA:  "Right now, all I know is that it was just a good Samaritan that was there and looks like he took the right measures to be able to put an end to a terrible, terrible incident," Mathews said.

I didn't know killing someone is how you become a Good Samaritan.
 
2018-05-25 03:48:27 AM  

Buck Dancer: WAIT, what? It's a bad thing for the bad guy to die? No thank you given as it does not meet the anti-gun narrative?


Not really.  Trial might have been preferable, but I ain't gonna shed a tear.

That said: prevented a mass shooting?  Possibly, but it's a might be early to be claiming that.  Stopped a shooting at all?  Nope.  Interrupted a shooting?  Not that either.

So, shooter dead = OK by me, but let's not start sucking our own dicks yet.
 
2018-05-25 03:48:57 AM  

lucksi: Shooting people in the back who are fleeing is totally standing your ground I suppose. We know for a fact that it is for US cops, but for citizens as well?


A violent nut, still armed, is running from the crime scene, probably TOWARDS some other potential victims.  What do YOU think he might do next?  This is one of those scenarios a back shot is warranted.
 
2018-05-25 03:50:37 AM  

LaughingRadish: Buck Dancer: WAIT, what? It's a bad thing for the bad guy to die? No thank you given as it does not meet the anti-gun narrative?

It's racist to call MS13 members "animals", so yeah, it's a Bad Thing (tm).


I'm surprised CNN gave this story "airtime." It goes against their gun-control narrative.
 
2018-05-25 03:50:57 AM  
So, this is happening again.. and I'm angry about it. I'd love to see some major reform here in America, but you have people saying (and I quote directly) "You should be afraid, because we're coming for your guns and locking you up 10+ years for every one you own." Or "If you depend on a rifle to feed your family, you all deserve to die."

...then they wonder why people look at them like idiots... and that can't even scratch the surface of right-wing ignorance.
 
2018-05-25 03:51:01 AM  
There was a movie about this -- I expect the 'good Samaritan' will likely be charged for shooting someone as they ran and not being a cop.

And the movie allowed me to see a particular individuals funbags in prison and she never broke role.

/so thx4that, sweetheart, u kno who u are
 
2018-05-25 03:57:15 AM  
The rare "restaurant attack" trifecta is in play.
 
2018-05-25 03:57:49 AM  

JAILBR34K: There was a movie about this -- I expect the 'good Samaritan' will likely be charged for shooting someone as they ran and not being a cop.

And the movie allowed me to see a particular individuals funbags in prison and she never broke role.

/so thx4that, sweetheart, u kno who u are


No the good samaritan won't be charged for anything. This is the shooting one political group wants. A good guy stopped a bad guy using a gun. This is everything some people are asking for.
 
2018-05-25 03:58:04 AM  
Why is everyone assuming he was shot in the back anyway. The shooter "Fleeing" doesn't mean the ggwag couldn't have encountered him face to face.
 
2018-05-25 03:59:05 AM  

Buck Dancer: I bet you probably didn't people trying


Almost the whole.
 
2018-05-25 03:59:17 AM  
Let's be precise here, because it matters.

The guy is indeed good by this accounting, and his use of force justified. But the bad guy was killed after the mass shooting was over. The shooting wasn't prevented. The bad guy was fleeing, this particular engagement was over.

Certainly the bad guy had a much, much higher than average chance of going on to shoot someone else in the future, but the "Good guy with a gun" fantasy that the industry is selling and that subby cites involves prevention and we didn't really get that here.
 
2018-05-25 03:59:34 AM  
Good job, man-who-shot-and-killed-shooter-who-wa​s-running-away. Which means what? The victims of Sandy Hook and Stoneman Douglas and Santa Fe will be coming back to life any minute now?
 
2018-05-25 04:03:07 AM  

Huck And Molly Ziegler: Good job, man-who-shot-and-killed-shooter-who-wa​s-running-away. Which means what? The victims of Sandy Hook and Stoneman Douglas and Santa Fe will be coming back to life any minute now?


What sort of fantasy land do you live in?
 
2018-05-25 04:04:55 AM  

Angry Manatee: 2 people are in the hospital with gunshot wounds.

1 person had to take a human life.

1 person is dead.

If THIS the "Great" that Republicans want to make America?

Is this really the best they can come up with?


Yup.
 
2018-05-25 04:06:15 AM  

LindenFark: Let's be precise here, because it matters.

The guy is indeed good by this accounting, and his use of force justified. But the bad guy was killed after the mass shooting was over. The shooting wasn't prevented. The bad guy was fleeing, this particular engagement was over.

Certainly the bad guy had a much, much higher than average chance of going on to shoot someone else in the future, but the "Good guy with a gun" fantasy that the industry is selling and that subby cites involves prevention and we didn't really get that here.


Are you complaining because the good guy didn't shoot another good guy? You disappointed that your lame narrative is dissolving? You are no better than the anti-climate change, flat earth, trump supporting crowd
 
2018-05-25 04:07:03 AM  

LaughingRadish: Angry Manatee: 2 people are in the hospital with gunshot wounds.

1 person had to take a human life.

1 person is dead.

If THIS the "Great" that Republicans want to make America?

Is this really the best they can come up with?

The only death was that of the perpetrator.  What's your problem with that?


That he was killed by another person instead of being arrested and charged with a crime. Either you support a society of law or accept vigilante justice. You can't have both. I know what happens when people take the law into their own hands and greatly prefer law by government.
 
2018-05-25 04:08:29 AM  
vignette.wikia.nocookie.netView Full Size


Image of the good samaritan in question.
 
2018-05-25 04:09:12 AM  

Gordon Bennett: LaughingRadish: Angry Manatee: 2 people are in the hospital with gunshot wounds.

1 person had to take a human life.

1 person is dead.

If THIS the "Great" that Republicans want to make America?

Is this really the best they can come up with?

The only death was that of the perpetrator.  What's your problem with that?

That he was killed by another person instead of being arrested and charged with a crime. Either you support a society of law or accept vigilante justice. You can't have both. I know what happens when people take the law into their own hands and greatly prefer law by government.


Get off the stage and go back to your fantasy bubble. A good dead was done. Sorry that this CNN story does not fit your narrative.
 
2018-05-25 04:14:42 AM  
"A good dead was done" is the name of my acoustic folk-rock Greatful Dead cover band.
 
2018-05-25 04:15:35 AM  

0z79: So, this is happening again.. and I'm angry about it. I'd love to see some major reform here in America, but you have people saying (and I quote directly) "You should be afraid, because we're coming for your guns and locking you up 10+ years for every one you own." Or "If you depend on a rifle to feed your family, you all deserve to die."

...then they wonder why people look at them like idiots... and that can't even scratch the surface of right-wing ignorance.


i0.kym-cdn.comView Full Size


(Only because you said you were quoting directly and a Google search for either turns up squat, in whole or in part.)

/perhaps I suck at the Google
 
2018-05-25 04:17:34 AM  
I hate to say it but my first instinct was "I don't go to Oklahoma City for a reason."

My second thought was "Republicans want to see people get killed by guns every day."
 
2018-05-25 04:18:22 AM  

JAILBR34K: "A good dead was done" is the name of my acoustic folk-rock Greatful Dead cover band.


I need a 5% royalty
 
2018-05-25 04:19:45 AM  

Buck Dancer: LindenFark: Let's be precise here, because it matters.

The guy is indeed good by this accounting, and his use of force justified. But the bad guy was killed after the mass shooting was over. The shooting wasn't prevented. The bad guy was fleeing, this particular engagement was over.

Certainly the bad guy had a much, much higher than average chance of going on to shoot someone else in the future, but the "Good guy with a gun" fantasy that the industry is selling and that subby cites involves prevention and we didn't really get that here.

Are you complaining because the good guy didn't shoot another good guy?


No. Who would root for that?

You disappointed that your lame narrative is dissolving?

I don't think I have put forth a narrative to dissolve, lame or otherwise. Question mark?

You are no better than the anti-climate change, flat earth, trump supporting crowd

It's not clear to me what you are taking offense to (being defensive about?) Does "anti-climate change" mean "against those who believe in climate change" or "denying climate change exists"?
 
Displayed 50 of 357 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter




In Other Media
Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  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