Board 8 > Shooting in El Paso, looks like 20 dead

(+) Yeah! (+)

Corrik7 posted...

Inviso posted...

Corrik, you're literally defending terrorists and murderers with "Yeah, but the left hit guys with bike locks, so everyone is just as bad!" So shut up, go have a drink or something, and step away from the keyboard.

You are literally defending violence.

Fine people on both sides. Both sides.
---

Corrik7 posted...

Inviso posted...

Corrik, you're literally defending terrorists and murderers with "Yeah, but the left hit guys with bike locks, so everyone is just as bad!" So shut up, go have a drink or something, and step away from the keyboard.

You are literally defending violence.

Am I? I've never once said antifa was good, or what they do is good. I just know that there's a difference between murder and assault...and the group committing assault is the only one of the two actually being condemned by the people in power.
---

Were saying murder is worse than violence something even a toddler knows. Corrik is terrorism ever justified?

Inviso posted...

Am I? I've never once said antifa was good, or what they do is good. I just know that there's a difference between murder and assault...and the group committing assault is the only one of the two actually being condemned by the people in power.

The question is why are you not condemning assault.

---

white supremacists kill 29 people
corrik: "why aren't you condemning assault by antifa?"
---

Corrik7 posted...

Inviso posted...

Am I? I've never once said antifa was good, or what they do is good. I just know that there's a difference between murder and assault...and the group committing assault is the only one of the two actually being condemned by the people in power.

The question is why are you not condemning assault.

A better question is why are you demanding peoples opinions on unrelated assaults in a topic about mass murder.
---

Corrik7 posted...

Inviso posted...

Am I? I've never once said antifa was good, or what they do is good. I just know that there's a difference between murder and assault...and the group committing assault is the only one of the two actually being condemned by the people in power.

The question is why are you not condemning assault.

Assault is bad. Murder is worse. And those murders are happening a LOT more than those assaults. So why aren't you condemning murder? Is it perhaps because of this:

https://twitter.com/MuhammadLila/status/1157965796695597056
---

Inviso posted...

Assault is bad. Murder is worse. And those murders are happening a LOT more than those assaults. So why aren't you condemning murder? Is it perhaps because of this:

https://twitter.com/MuhammadLila/status/1157965796695597056

So then you condemn Antifa's terrorist actions then? Correct? And, they should all be properly labeled as such and dealt with correct?

---

Corrik7 posted...

Inviso posted...

Assault is bad. Murder is worse. And those murders are happening a LOT more than those assaults. So why aren't you condemning murder? Is it perhaps because of this:

https://twitter.com/MuhammadLila/status/1157965796695597056

So then you condemn Antifa's terrorist actions then? Correct? And, they should all be properly labeled as such and dealt with correct?

Not until you condemn the violent terrorism of the group you belong to.
---

Lmao there's nothing to deal with from antifa. You're brain washed, buddy. Hate to break it to ya
---

Corrik's plan is for Inviso to say "yes I condemn antifa violence" and then he will be like "HAHA SIKE I don't condemn the white supremacists at all, but I just made you condemn your allies, I fucking tricked you and won and now I can be a white supremacist with no guilt!!!"
---

Lets be a little more productive

We all know that this will (and already has) increased cries for gun control

Is there actually any link to the way mass shooters tend to acquire guns that could be altered? Or is it the particular type of gun that maybe could be regulated better (were these AR-15s)?

Like what could actually have been done to help prevent these tragedies?
---

And please no one use the phrase common sense gun control because thats a deliberately ambiguous phrase politicians use so that whatever you think that is, you can agree
---

anyone saying antifa is on the level of right wing terrorism is a fucking idiot. Its also funny because usually the same people who say "but but antifa" are then the same people who lol at them during other times while saying "what a bunch of loser larpers".

---

Inviso posted...

Not until you condemn the violent terrorism of the group you belong to.

I don't belong to any groups. I didn't know you had to have conditions met to condemn violence.

---

Jakyl25 posted...

And please no one use the phrase common sense gun control because thats a deliberately ambiguous phrase politicians use so that whatever you think that is, you can agree

I think they need to do something. My idea for gun control was unpopular, but the only way I see to exact change while keeping the right to bear arms.

Even controls many of you would suggest doesn't stop that many of these shooters would pass stronger background checks still.

---

I wonder why Corrik didnt answer if terrorism is ever justified.

Corrik7 posted...

Jakyl25 posted...

And please no one use the phrase common sense gun control because thats a deliberately ambiguous phrase politicians use so that whatever you think that is, you can agree

I think they need to do something. My idea for gun control was unpopular, but the only way I see to exact change while keeping the right to bear arms.

Even controls many of you would suggest doesn't stop that many of these shooters would pass stronger background checks still.

Well we dont know if they would do we? Because after hundreds of mass shootings we still hear this well if we did do something it wouldnt matter bull. Well we dont know because we never did not one damn thing about it yet. Well I can tell you not doing anything isnt mattering either.

PerfectChaosZ posted...

I wonder why Corrik didnt answer if terrorism is ever justified.

The planets dyin, Cloud!
---

Jakyl25 posted...

Is there actually any link to the way mass shooters tend to acquire guns that could be altered? Or is it the particular type of gun that maybe could be regulated better (were these AR-15s)?

Like what could actually have been done to help prevent these tragedies?

You know how people are saying the focus on mental health is a distraction when there's a shooting? The focus on gun control is also a distraction. Background checks and banning AR 15s wouldn't stop any of these. These are coordinated terrorist acts planned over months, not unlike 9/11.

And the same people calling for more gun control in these situations are the ones who ridicule the rise of the TSA in response to 9/11. It's all the same security theater with the only tangible effect of vastly increasing the government's power and every day use of force against innocents. There is no evidence that any of it prevents terrorism.

People point to other countries where guns are banned and think we can just flip that switch and do it here, but they are ignoring the massive roots that gun-based authority has in the US. It all has to change together, otherwise the problem doesn't change. It's like looking at an electric car's battery and thinking you can make your gas car just as good by adding a battery. No, you have to rip out the engine and most of the other parts, THEN the battery can actually be used effectively. Otherwise it's just a shitty hybrid.

(Nevermind that other countries have the same or worse nationalist radicalization problems as the US, just the killings are less frequent)

It's totally doable to massively reduce or even eliminate the guns in the US though imo. It would coincide naturally with a reduction in gun-based authority from the government. Disarm the police, make the military reserve-only so only active military in declared wars have guns, THEN it makes sense to disarm the public via voluntary trade in. That's how other countries do it, not just banning civilian guns. The spirit of the 2nd amendment would even remain intact with some other conditions.
---

PerfectChaosZ posted...

Well we dont know if they would do we? Because after hundreds of mass shootings we still hear this well if we did do something it wouldnt matter bull. Well we dont know because we never did not one damn thing about it yet. Well I can tell you not doing anything isnt mattering either.

We do know in some cases.

I still think you should have to store all your guns at precinct and sign them out to use them. It stops spur of the moment rampages and gun usage in the heat of rage.

Also, it lets cops assess your well-being at the time of your pick up. You also know who exactly signed it out. They are responsible for it. And, you only have a certain time period to return it or you have a charge against you.

---

Or is it the particular type of gun that maybe could be regulated better (were these AR-15s)?

Regulating a list of specific firearms is complete futility. There are too many viable substitutes either already in existence or that would pop up immediately after a ban.
---

PerfectChaosZ posted...

Well I can tell you not doing anything isnt mattering either.

The opposite of "not doing anything" is not "doing anything". It's doing something effective. The difference is extremely important because when there's tragedies, the public is way too willing to go for the first terrible make-things-way-worse-in-the-long-run-and-also-in-the-short-run nonsense, just to feel like they're not "not doing anything".

We say never to forget 9/11 but it is constantly forgotten.
---

Corrik7 posted...

PerfectChaosZ posted...

Well we dont know if they would do we? Because after hundreds of mass shootings we still hear this well if we did do something it wouldnt matter bull. Well we dont know because we never did not one damn thing about it yet. Well I can tell you not doing anything isnt mattering either.

We do know in some cases.

I still think you should have to store all your guns at precinct and sign them out to use them. It stops spur of the moment rampages and gun usage in the heat of rage.

Also, it lets cops assess your well-being at the time of your pick up. You also know who exactly signed it out. They are responsible for it. And, you only have a certain time period to return it or you have a charge against you.

The only reason we have a right to bear arms is as a check against government tyranny.

Giving an arm of the government control over who gets that right and when is so antithetical to the Second Amendment that you may as well repeal it.
---

Corrik7 posted...

PerfectChaosZ posted...

Well we dont know if they would do we? Because after hundreds of mass shootings we still hear this well if we did do something it wouldnt matter bull. Well we dont know because we never did not one damn thing about it yet. Well I can tell you not doing anything isnt mattering either.

We do know in some cases.

I still think you should have to store all your guns at precinct and sign them out to use them. It stops spur of the moment rampages and gun usage in the heat of rage.

Also, it lets cops assess your well-being at the time of your pick up. You also know who exactly signed it out. They are responsible for it. And, you only have a certain time period to return it or you have a charge against you.

My father would consider that the government taking his guns away.

PerfectChaosZ posted...

My father would consider that the government taking his guns away.

Pretty much every republican would. But, it retains the right to bear arm arguably and is the best solution I can come up with. I believe at least one European nation alrdy has a similar law for guns.

---

Hi Officer, I would like to check my handgun out of its locker tonight because Im expecting a home invasion.
---

foolm0r0n posted...

PerfectChaosZ posted...

Well I can tell you not doing anything isnt mattering either.

The opposite of "not doing anything" is not "doing anything". It's doing something effective. The difference is extremely important because when there's tragedies, the public is way too willing to go for the first terrible make-things-way-worse-in-the-long-run-and-also-in-the-short-run nonsense, just to feel like they're not "not doing anything".

We say never to forget 9/11 but it is constantly forgotten.

Its not the first mass shooting or the hundredth. I think were well passed first terrible idea. Were not even trying to do anything about it. Its not even in the works. Absolutely **** nothing. For years.

PerfectChaosZ posted...

My father would consider that the government taking his guns away.

It is. It's the most bootlicking authoritarian shit you could come up with in response to this.
---

PerfectChaosZ posted...

Its not the first mass shooting or the hundredth. I think were well passed first terrible idea. Were not even trying to do anything about it. Its not even in the works. Absolutely **** nothing. For years.

How many 9/11s would justify the Iraq war?

And yes "ban guns from civilians" which is not unlike Corrik's idea is the first terrible idea anyone has when this happens.
---

Im trying to imagine what pretense anyone would have to check their gun out of the precinct except for hunting
---

I dont think take all citizens guns away is a plan from anyone outside of a Republicans fever dream.

Corrik7 posted...

Pretty much every republican would. But, it retains the right to bear arm arguably

hello, I'd like to check my gun out because I think my government is corrupt and I've decided to take up arms against them
---

Jakyl25 posted...

Hi Officer, I would like to check my handgun out of its locker tonight because Im expecting a home invasion.

Again. You all don't like my idea, but I think it is the best idea in regards to it.

---

Jakyl25 posted...

Im trying to imagine what pretense anyone would have to check their gun out of the precinct except for hunting

Are you serious? Gun ranges, target shooting, hunting is year round pretty much in some form or another. Etc.

The point is to get guns out of the hands of people who don't have a reason to have them. And to make sure they can't be used in the heat of the moment without visual examination by police before letting it be checked out.

---

Corrik7 posted...

Jakyl25 posted...

Hi Officer, I would like to check my handgun out of its locker tonight because Im expecting a home invasion.

Again. You all don't like my idea, but I think it is the best idea in regards to it.

Why do you trust police officers to properly assess someones state of mind? Are they trained psychiatrists?
---

Please stop speaking to Corrik.

Jakyl25 posted...

Why do you trust police officers to properly assess someones state of mind? Are they trained psychiatrists?

They don't have to be. They are just making a relatively visual inspection of if the person seems to be in a rational state of mind / sober. You seem to want to stop shootings, but you don't seem to know how you want to either.

---

Corrik7 posted...

Jakyl25 posted...

Im trying to imagine what pretense anyone would have to check their gun out of the precinct except for hunting

Are you serious? Gun ranges, target shooting, hunting is year round pretty much in some form or another. Etc.

The point is to get guns out of the hands of people who don't have a reason to have them. And to make sure they can't be used in the heat of the moment without visual examination by police before letting it be checked out.

There is no reason to have them that can be predicted ahead of time except hunting

Lol gun ranges
---

Paratroopa1 posted...

Please stop speaking to Corrik.

This is such a fascinating bad idea though
---

Jakyl25 posted...

There is no reason to have them that can be predicted ahead of time except hunting

Lol gun ranges

I am confused, do you think gun ranges don't exist or something?



Yeah, I don't think guns should be openly carried unless a trained officer, security, or member of the military. I see not very much reason for it. Unless under authorized from police activity.

---

Corrik7 posted...

Jakyl25 posted...

There is no reason to have them that can be predicted ahead of time except hunting

Lol gun ranges

I am confused, do you think gun ranges don't exist or something?



Yeah, I don't think guns should be openly carried unless a trained officer, security, or member of the military. I see not very much reason for it.

Im saying theres no need for gun ranges to exist in your hypothetical America. No one would need to learn how to shoot because theyd never have their gun.
---

No, just don't. Don't welcome him here.

PerfectChaosZ posted...

I dont think take all citizens guns away is a plan from anyone outside of a Republicans fever dream.

Talk to people more. Corrik is right in here saying it for example.
---

Well Corrik is a walking conservative fever dream

Jakyl25 posted...

Im saying theres no need for gun ranges to exist in your hypothetical America. No one would need to learn how to shoot because theyd never have their gun.

Well, sounds to me like you think guns are valid for self-defense and should be on Americans at all times.

That is a fine stance to have. Definitely republican in nature.

I, however, think guns do not help with self-defense beyond detterence. Also, they cause unnecessary escalation. I do not approve of guns within my home for this very reason. I don't think it solves anything but make potential harmful situations possibly fatal.

So, I see no reason to be carrying your gun unless going to an activity for using your gun. Gun ranges become even more popular with stricter gun laws, not less popular. They then become the go to place to shoot your weapons.

You can disagree with the idea, but simply making background checks harder means very little when we have so many shooters with no signs of mental or criminal history conducting shooting sprees as is.

---

PerfectChaosZ posted...

I dont think take all citizens guns away is a plan from anyone outside of a Republicans fever dream.

Why not?
---

Guess Ill post this here too:

https://twitter.com/kslane/status/1158036201330434049?s=21

---

were you trying to link to this brilliant picture

https://twitter.com/fenum9/status/1158043408814006273
---

So... does this mean that we might get mental health reform now? Please?
---