Gun Control

>no motive
War vets don't shoot up country music concerts at nightclubs for no fucking reason.
>died in the melee, not clear how
The shooter was reported to be in a fucking firefight with the police at the end and 'you don't know how'. Uh huh. It's not like you can't see something like a gunshot wound and pretty quickly figure out from location and such whether he did it himself or whether he was shot by an officer. This already reeks of bullshit.
>"The country-themed venue was filled with college students when Long tossed a smoke bomb and opened fire at around 11:20 p.m. local time."
either that's a typo or this dude literally traveled many hours into the fucking future to commit this shooting
EDIT: ok, it STARTED on the night of Nov 7th and apparently dragged on into the twilight hours of the 8th, now it makes sense. Whoever wrote this article could stand to have clarified that.

Keep in mind that the witness ABC7 interviewed described him as a big guy, dressed in black, wearing a vest. No "white" or "Caucasian" or anything like that. Unless this dude was dressed like a fucking ninja how the fuck do you miss that.

And now people are saying he had mental health issues, possibly serious PTSD. Yes, of course, we need to strip gun rights from everyone because the fucking military breaks people and throws them back into civilian life like nothing bad could possibly happen. Government screws up, citizenry needs to pay for it though. Fuck you.
 
Last edited:
I would dispute the idea that the military 'breaks' people. Most folks, including a great deal of my friends, have no issues readjusting to civilian life. The problem is the liberal hollywood machine and goddamned hippies love to make a big deal about those who have issues returning. If you watch war movies, it is as if every single veteran coming home cries himself to sleep or dives for cover after hearing loud noises.

http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2011/12/08/the-difficult-transition-from-military-to-civilian-life/

https://www.bls.gov/careeroutlook/2017/article/veterans.htm
 
Last edited:
What happened to blaming the individual? Guns, knives, swords, axes, bats, spears, you name it--they're all just tools. They require a human agent to use.

I'm as far left as a libertarian can be (tending toward anarcho-socialism), and I'm against gun control. The right to bear arms--ALL arms, whether currently existing or yet to be invented--protects the proletariat from the bourgeoisie. Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels would have agreed with the Second Amendment:

"To be able forcefully and threateningly to oppose this party, whose betrayal of the workers will begin with the very first hour of victory, the workers must be armed and organized. The whole proletariat must be armed at once with muskets, rifles, cannon and ammunition, and the revival of the old-style citizens’ militia, directed against the workers, must be opposed. Where the formation of this militia cannot be prevented, the workers must try to organize themselves independently as a proletarian guard, with elected leaders and with their own elected general staff; they must try to place themselves not under the orders of the state authority but of the revolutionary local councils set up by the workers. Where the workers are employed by the state, they must arm and organize themselves into special corps with elected leaders, or as a part of the proletarian guard. Under no pretext should arms and ammunition be surrendered; any attempt to disarm the workers must be frustrated, by force if necessary. The destruction of the bourgeois democrats’ influence over the workers, and the enforcement of conditions which will compromise the rule of bourgeois democracy, which is for the moment inevitable, and make it as difficult as possible – these are the main points which the proletariat and therefore the League must keep in mind during and after the approaching uprising."

Source: The Address of the Central Committee to the Communist League, London, 1850.
 
Why blame the tool instead of the person? We don't blame the knife when there's a stabbing. We don't blame the car when there's a car crash. Nobody blamed the lightsaber when Anakin Skywalker (d.b.a. Darth Vader) killed those Jedi younglings. So why do we go and blame the gun when there's a shooting?
 
End of the day, its the fundamental question: Do you favor Freedom or Security more? They are both innately dangerous taken to their conclusions. Freedom leaves responsibility for dealing with things - even bad luck - purely upon your own shoulders at its natural conclusion, allows you anything - no matter how destructive, and allows dangerous people to abuse and misuse the items/tools/mechanisms of society that you interact with and enjoy in good faith. Security leaves you without freedom to deal with things yourself - even good luck - because it could endanger the system of security and others, it allows you nothing remotely dangerous even if its enjoyable, and allows whoever becomes the designator of 'safe' to abuse and misuse the system, which you obey for the betterment of others, to better themselves. The scale between them slides, few people being purely for one or the other to the absolute extension (for example I think a governmental duty is protection of private property rights. They being a type of security.) Still, whichever one you favor more tends to fundamentally answer how you think guns should be handled.

For my part, I tend to favor freedom and think that death and harm are an expected result of having it, particularly when its an explicitly stated right in the constitution. The attempts to roll back that freedom for security, usually with quite innocent and even good intentioned, seem punitive on the whole for the minority to me. They seem dangerous to approach as each one can be easily enough misused for all the good they may or may not do - even stuff on the books like background checks could be abused and seem to frequently fail their intentions - like when the military fails to report dishonorable discharges on them or they fail to include histories of spousal abuse or violence. I also don't think they'll do as good as some would think they'd do as we move into the future and closer and closer to a day when we can just print guns that work consistently enough to do damage. (I don't necessarily think this day is *super* soon, as the currently printable ones are rather iffy, but it's also closer than a lot of law writers probably think.)

Not that I'm saying anything profound or unknown. I just also think that the argument tends to evolve on its own and people think they can convince others to give up their innate preferences of one or the other. They likely can't, and the best and most wise thing people could do is stop demonizing those with a different place in the scale - as none are doing it purely out of malice, at least up until the point you start demonizing them because then they'll squat in your coffee and laugh - and vote and protest in manner they think will improve things. Then let a freakin' system built to try and work this stuff out - slowly but work it out - and functioning as it can. Including the concept that sometimes a majority opinion also isn't an accepted one and won't get implemented. There's a reason we're not a direct democracy too.

Also, to be fair, by no means do I avoid hypocrisy for my view: I favor freedom because I can not trust those like me. Given power and opportunity I'd happily sit upon the world and its people, a proverbial dragon on his hoard. I'd be a pretty noble, kind, and gentle dragon, I like to think, but name a dictator who didn't think they were that - self delusion is quite a drug.

EDIT: I should probably add that this, by no means, should imply that the debates shouldn't ever happen. Exposing yourself to different views is important to keeping eachother's humanity and positions in mind, but sometimes it does the opposite when the argument becomes just yelling, which happens when we think we can just argue down fundamental viewpoints. People have to change those themselves, the best you can ever do is encourage them to consider it and even then they'll likely slide back towards that original position.
 
Last edited:
These latter comments are a pretty wordy way of saying "just do your thing", but sadly keep falling on the pitfall of thinking that pro control means something way more drastic and out there than the reality of it, that generally being basic shit the large majority of countries are up to date with that don't happen to have a mass shooting for almost every day in the year. Pretty sure that absolutely nobody is actually against better background cheking.
 
WeissYohji said:
Why blame the tool instead of the person? We don't blame the knife when there's a stabbing. We don't blame the car when there's a car crash. Nobody blamed the lightsaber when Anakin Skywalker (d.b.a. Darth Vader) killed those Jedi younglings. So why do we go and blame the gun when there's a shooting?
Click to expand...

Lol, try to recreate Las Vegas with just a knife...
 
Arnust said:
These latter comments are a pretty wordy way of saying "just do your thing", but sadly keep falling on the pitfall of thinking that pro control means something way more drastic and out there than the reality of it, that generally being basic shit the large majority of countries are up to date with that don't happen to have a mass shooting for almost every day in the year. Pretty sure that absolutely nobody is actually against better background cheking.
Click to expand...

It's not background checking. California already requires you to shit through a screen door just to get a firearm. Fundamentally it's a matter of universal healthcare (which actually saves us money) and ensuring people have access to mental healthcare (therapy most of all which is super effective at dealing with stress). Background checks are just unreliable because we don't live in the Minority Report world where psykers can read minds and determine something bad is going to go down in your future. These problems can develop after passing a bg check.
 
BigGuyCIA said:
It's not background checking. California already requires you to shit through a screen door just to get a firearm. Fundamentally it's a matter of universal healthcare (which actually saves us money) and ensuring people have access to mental healthcare (therapy most of all which is super effective at dealing with stress). Background checks are just unreliable because we don't live in the Minority Report world where psykers can read minds and determine something bad is going to go down in your future. These problems can develop after passing a bg check.
Click to expand...
Agree, but if it wasn't clear that was just an example of an instance. And you can just do both, shit ain't mutually exclusive.
 
Drunk bar patrons open fire on a bar. Jemel Roberson, the bar’s black male security guard, saves the day by returning fire and apprehending one of the men. Cops show up, see Jermel holding a gun...and murder him on the spot.

https://wgntv.com/2018/11/11/multiple-wounded-in-robbins-bar-shooting-police-say/
Witnesses say a Midlothian police officer responding to a shooting inside a south suburban bar shot and killed the wrong person early Sunday morning.

After security asked a group of drunk men to leave Manny’s Blue Room Bar around 4 a.m. Sunday, witnesses say someone came back with a gun and opened fire. Security returned fire, and according to witnesses, 26-year-old armed security guard Jemel Roberson apprehended one of the men involved outside.

"He had somebody on the ground with his knee in back with his gun in his back like, 'don’t move,'" witness Adam Harris said.

Soon after, witnesses say an officer responding to the shooting fired at Roberson after arriving on the scene.

"Everybody was screaming out, 'he was a security guard,' and they basically saw a black man with a gun and killed him," Harris said.

Authorities are releasing few details Sunday night. Four other people, including the suspected shooter, suffered non-life threatening injuries.

Friends say Roberson was an upstanding guy who was also a musician, playing keyboard and drums at several Chicago-area churches, who had plans to become a police officer.

"Every artist he’s ever played for every musician he’s ever sat beside, we’re all just broken because we have no answers," said Pastor Patricia Hill, Purposed Church. "He was getting ready to train and do all that stuff, so the very people he wanted to be family with took his life.

"Once again it’s the continued narrative that we see of shoot first, ask questions later," said Pastor LeAundre Hill, Purposed Church.
Click to expand...
This is too fucking sad to bother remarking the absolute irony of it.
 
Arnust said:
Drunk bar patrons open fire on a bar. Jemel Roberson, the bar’s black male security guard, saves the day by returning fire and apprehending one of the men. Cops show up, see Jermel holding a gun...and murder him on the spot.

https://wgntv.com/2018/11/11/multiple-wounded-in-robbins-bar-shooting-police-say/

This is too fucking sad to bother remarking the absolute irony of it.
Click to expand...

You know what they say, "only thing that can stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun". And apparently the only thing that can stop a good guy with a gun is a US cop.

Dude was black though so I don't expect NRA to say anything about this though.
 
Daily mass shootings are good, it's Hyperdarwinism.
Seriously though, police shooting the bouncer that fended off an attacker with a gun is beyond retarded if the whole crowd is shouting "HE'S SECURITY" to the cops. I get that going into an active shooter situation is terrifying and shooting first, asking questions later is the most safe option for the policemen, but come the fuck on. Did they really just shoot him in what would basically be a hostage situation if he had been a bad guy? That doesn't sound right.
 
I have to admit some of our cops are beyond fucking stupid.

We had some girl cop go home to the wrong fucking house, somehow walk/break in to this other mans house, and then shoot and kill said black man in his own home, SMH.
 
MutantScalper said:
Whatever. Looks like you've given up the thread subject itself since you can't deny the reality of the daily mass shootings in USA.
Click to expand...

Wrong.

DarkCorp said:
I have to admit some of our cops are beyond fucking stupid.
Click to expand...

A similar event happened at a bar but I can't chalk this up to police negligence. They were shooting a movie and hadn't notified the city nor the people around the neighborhood of what they were doing. A gun prop was used, people observed what appeared to be a dude entering a bar to rob it, police were called, and the first responder opened fire on what appeared to be a guy with a gun exiting the bar.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top