The U.S.A. Mass Shootings Thread
Discussion
AW111 said:
The Hypno-Toad said:
Not sure about civil war but certainly a number of states (Texas would be the first.) will want to leave the Union if punitive gun legislation is introduced. Civil war would start if Washington then refused to let them leave.
Gun sales will be soaring in America today. Either from people trying to get in quick before more legislation is possibly introduced or people wanting to protect themselves from similar events.
Nuts.
Let them leave, and form their own fundamental religious backwater. Y'All Quaida, as it were.Gun sales will be soaring in America today. Either from people trying to get in quick before more legislation is possibly introduced or people wanting to protect themselves from similar events.
Nuts.
One thing to remember is that the redneck states are massively subsidised by the coastal states like California & NY. The religious republic would be a poor country.
AW111 said:
g4ry13 said:
You mean the states with large reserves of natural resources? I don't really see anyone mining for Oil, Lumber or metals in Manhattan or Washington.
So why do they get more federal funds than they contribute?AW111 said:
g4ry13 said:
You mean the states with large reserves of natural resources? I don't really see anyone mining for Oil, Lumber or metals in Manhattan or Washington.
So why do they get more federal funds than they contribute?8 of the top 10 states in terms of federal funding are Republican. 7 of the 9 states who send more than they receive are Democrat.
rscott said:
AW111 said:
g4ry13 said:
You mean the states with large reserves of natural resources? I don't really see anyone mining for Oil, Lumber or metals in Manhattan or Washington.
So why do they get more federal funds than they contribute?8 of the top 10 states in terms of federal funding are Republican. 7 of the 9 states who send more than they receive are Democrat.
LukeBrown66 said:
It is embarrassing quite honestly, and it is good to see a few people really losing the plot over this, a guy in their political practically had a melt down and the best one I saw was a basketball coach, literally shaking with frustration, emotion and anger abandoning a press conference to talk about this, a very powerful speech, he was so visibly moved it made a massive impression on me.
It is entrenched in their needlessly, overly powerful constitution, and to go against that is literally like removing the ability to speak freely in their eyes. They cannot see past that basic thing.
They are so obsessed with it, they cannot see how the rest of the world see them and it is a shame as there are vast numbers of Americans who couldn't care less about guns, never want one, need one, but there are also very large numbers who do and will NEVER give up this right.
I would go so far as to say if any leading politician did try and remove this right and change the constitution for the protection of innocents, there would be civil war in some parts of America.
They’ve done it before after a mass shouting. The Federal Assault Weapons Ban, which was in effect from 1994-2004.It is entrenched in their needlessly, overly powerful constitution, and to go against that is literally like removing the ability to speak freely in their eyes. They cannot see past that basic thing.
They are so obsessed with it, they cannot see how the rest of the world see them and it is a shame as there are vast numbers of Americans who couldn't care less about guns, never want one, need one, but there are also very large numbers who do and will NEVER give up this right.
I would go so far as to say if any leading politician did try and remove this right and change the constitution for the protection of innocents, there would be civil war in some parts of America.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_We...
Guess which party was in power at the time it came up for renewal/extension. And which party has frustrated any attempts to reinstate it since.
It’s an absolute disgrace and is a part of US society that is deeply shameful and makes me sick. The trouble is it only seems to be getting more prevalent, and there’s no way this would pass in the current climate. No one is focused on solutions, just opposition at all cost.
The gun lobby and their “thoughts and prayers” republican stooges have sold their soles to the devil. That’s the only conclusion I can come up with that explains the current situation.
MC Bodge said:
Castrol for a knave said:
America has no hope, when this is the quality of their politicians. From the Guardian.
"The Arizona congressman Paul Gosar fit both unfounded claims about Ramos in a single now-deleted tweet that also misspelled the shooter’s name. “It’s a transsexual leftist illegal alien named Salvatore Ramos,” Gosar tweeted Tuesday night.
Gosar’s office did not return a message seeking comment".
On R4 this morning, a Texan Congressman member of the Texas Rifle Association made some comments about the perpetrator of the massacre being a misfit who wore eyeliner, dresses and disrespected women, who'd been in trouble with the law (not so apparently) . He then went on to defend guns, then sort of admitted that the type of guns might need to be restricted, then back-pedalled. It was rambling BS."The Arizona congressman Paul Gosar fit both unfounded claims about Ramos in a single now-deleted tweet that also misspelled the shooter’s name. “It’s a transsexual leftist illegal alien named Salvatore Ramos,” Gosar tweeted Tuesday night.
Gosar’s office did not return a message seeking comment".
Guns are so deeply ingrained into their culture, it is almost like suggesting banning TV, Internet (or food?) to them.
Edited by MC Bodge on Thursday 26th May 09:23
https://news.gallup.com/poll/1645/guns.aspx
It is the classic issue of concentrated interest, gun lovers spend a lot more time thinking about their guns than the majority who are ambivalent or anti-gun. Hence the NRA is quite effective at deploying its 5 million members.
The cultural thing is less old than you might expect, the NRA themselves were pro gun control until the 70's when a bunch of crazies took over. The owning of weapons for "home defence" or similar is more of an 80's crack epidemic and 24hr news feature than a long standing tradition (with obvious caveat, farmer in the middle of nowhere with shotgun in the house is a reasonably accurate trope).
The Hypno-Toad said:
Not sure about civil war but certainly a number of states (Texas would be the first.) will want to leave the Union if punitive gun legislation is introduced. Civil war would start if Washington then refused to let them leave.
Gun sales will be soaring in America today. Either from people trying to get in quick before more legislation is possibly introduced or people wanting to protect themselves from similar events.
Nuts.
No one is proposing punitive gun legislation; there's a lot of NRA koolaid being drunk here. A very large majority of americans want better gun control, which includes GoP voters and NRA members. Gun sales will be soaring in America today. Either from people trying to get in quick before more legislation is possibly introduced or people wanting to protect themselves from similar events.
Nuts.
Gweeds said:
dvs_dave said:
Better. Fences. SMH 
The f
king state of that. Murdoch is evil.
Edited by hidetheelephants on Thursday 26th May 16:46
AW111 said:
g4ry13 said:
You mean the states with large reserves of natural resources? I don't really see anyone mining for Oil, Lumber or metals in Manhattan or Washington.
So why do they get more federal funds than they contribute?Hence I think Texas will turn blue before seceding.
Talksteer said:
The majority of Americans support gun control:
https://news.gallup.com/poll/1645/guns.aspx
It is the classic issue of concentrated interest, gun lovers spend a lot more time thinking about their guns than the majority who are ambivalent or anti-gun. Hence the NRA is quite effective at deploying its 5 million members.
The cultural thing is less old than you might expect, the NRA themselves were pro gun control until the 70's when a bunch of crazies took over. The owning of weapons for "home defence" or similar is more of an 80's crack epidemic and 24hr news feature than a long standing tradition (with obvious caveat, farmer in the middle of nowhere with shotgun in the house is a reasonably accurate trope).
I know. When I said "their culture", I meant the gun fetishists rather than US people in general.https://news.gallup.com/poll/1645/guns.aspx
It is the classic issue of concentrated interest, gun lovers spend a lot more time thinking about their guns than the majority who are ambivalent or anti-gun. Hence the NRA is quite effective at deploying its 5 million members.
The cultural thing is less old than you might expect, the NRA themselves were pro gun control until the 70's when a bunch of crazies took over. The owning of weapons for "home defence" or similar is more of an 80's crack epidemic and 24hr news feature than a long standing tradition (with obvious caveat, farmer in the middle of nowhere with shotgun in the house is a reasonably accurate trope).
I have met people from US through work who have not been "into" guns and didn't carry them around (although even then, some did have them).
Farmers owning shotguns is very different to 18year old suburbanites owning handguns and AR15s.
I think owning guns it’s ok but there needs to be background checks and a good reason to own them. Also certain types of gun have no excuse to owned.
An AR15 type gun is not a self defence weapon by design. Shotguns, hunting rifles, small handheld guns/revolvers that’s more than enough.
Less guns the better but I don’t think banning them is necessary
An AR15 type gun is not a self defence weapon by design. Shotguns, hunting rifles, small handheld guns/revolvers that’s more than enough.
Less guns the better but I don’t think banning them is necessary
CrgT16 said:
I think owning guns it’s ok but there needs to be background checks and a good reason to own them. Also certain types of gun have no excuse to owned.
An AR15 type gun is not a self defence weapon by design. Shotguns, hunting rifles, small handheld guns/revolvers that’s more than enough.
Less guns the better but I don’t think banning them is necessary
I don't follow. Why do you draw the line at an AR15? An AR15 type gun is not a self defence weapon by design. Shotguns, hunting rifles, small handheld guns/revolvers that’s more than enough.
Less guns the better but I don’t think banning them is necessary
A hunting rifle is not for self-defense, it's for sport / hunting. Handguns can be used for self-defense or for carrying out targeted attacks.
By design, guns are intended to maim or kill.
g4ry13 said:
I don't follow. Why do you draw the line at an AR15?
A hunting rifle is not for self-defense, it's for sport / hunting. Handguns can be used for self-defense or for carrying out targeted attacks.
By design, guns are intended to maim or kill.
Handguns are responsible for 65% of all gun-related deaths in the US. A hunting rifle is not for self-defense, it's for sport / hunting. Handguns can be used for self-defense or for carrying out targeted attacks.
By design, guns are intended to maim or kill.
JonChalk said:
Tom Logan said:
dvs_dave said:
Better. Fences. SMH
That list, jesus.What a load of f
king gash.How much is Fox in hock to the NRA for?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff