The Outrage Thread

[Smitty]

I have no desire to speculate on what did/didn't work decades ago. I know what doesn't work now.

So do we.

 

[Smitty]

This is actually how you stop gun violence.

Stop reporting on these shootings.

The sickos want the attention. Stop giving it to them and it will disappear.

 

[Cotton]

An AR-15 is a weapon of war

This is exactly why we can't have a rational discussion about this in this country. This is a lie.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

This is actually how you stop gun violence.

Stop reporting on these shootings.

The sickos want the attention. Stop giving it to them and it will disappear.

There is definitely truth to this.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

This is exactly why we can't have a rational discussion about this in this country. This is a lie.

Just buzzwords created to influence people's opinions

 

[Prodigal_Son]

I think that's a bit unfair to say. Just because you want rights and freedoms doesn't mean you're selfish. I don't own an AR but I don't want an outright ban. So how can that be defined as selfish? We give up some rights for personal safety. But we all draw the line somewhere. You have a right against unlawful search and seizure but maybe we are just being selfish. We would all be safer if you give up that right.

I think labeling it as just selfish incorrectly frames what's going on.

Apples and Oranges. Unlawful search and seizure could potentially make things safer, but it fucks up the whole legal process and doesn't hold cops accountable.

Banning guns doesn't hurt anyone other than people who just want to own them. It's selfish because they choose their own feelings over that of the greater good.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

This is actually how you stop gun violence.

Stop reporting on these shootings.

The sickos want the attention. Stop giving it to them and it will disappear.

Yep, it's much like the networks not showing streakers at games. They know the attention would just spur others on to do the same.

Difference is, most of our media enjoy these stories. The more gruesome and spectacular, the better for them. And that's even aside from the political angle.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

Banning guns doesn't hurt anyone other than people who just want to own them. It's selfish because they choose their own feelings over that of the greater good.

I wish you'd been around for Covid. I bet you had some great takes on how many grandmothers we were murdering.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

I wish you'd been around for Covid. I bet you had some great takes on how many grandmothers we were murdering.

I work in a hospital and saw people dying daily. I'm sure you were telling everyone it was just a cold.

 

[Irving Cowboy]

Yep, it's much like the networks not showing streakers at games. They know the attention would just spur others on to do the same.

Difference is, most of our media enjoy these stories. The more gruesome and spectacular, the better for them. And that's even aside from the political angle.

If it bleeds it leads

 

[Chocolate Lab]

I work in a hospital and saw people dying daily. I'm sure you were telling everyone it was just a cold.

Actually I never said that, so wrong again.

 

[Sheik]

I don’t think that is viable, not in this country. I think some measure that makes it a leeeeetle harder to get an military grade weapon would be at least a start. The truly insane will find a way. But if it gets a weaker insane person to not go shoot up a mall, isn’t that a start?

I want kids to be safe in school and all to be safe in public. I do think it’s sensible to look at all possible solutions, so yeah.

Sorry to say it, but this is the world we live in now. I do think if the end goal is to make it more difficult for someone to commit an atrocity with a gun, you can do that certainly.

I also think that if a sick individual wants to make a name for him or herself, they’ll find an easier way to do it. If they can’t get a firearm of their choice, they’ll borrow moms SUV and drive it into a crowd.

I don’t think it’s a coincidence that this over medicated generation are the ones acting out in this way. The children who were a little rambunctious and instead of an ass beating they got a prescription to calm them down. I think it’s all coming back to bite us in the ass.

 

[Cotton]

Banning guns doesn't hurt anyone

Wrong.

 

[Cotton]

Everybody think back to the very first thing the Nazi party did to the people. They took their guns. It's the fastest way to control the population and it worked well.

 

[Sheik]

Apples and Oranges. Unlawful search and seizure could potentially make things safer, but it fucks up the whole legal process and doesn't hold cops accountable.

Banning guns doesn't hurt anyone other than people who just want to own them. It's selfish because they choose their own feelings over that of the greater good.

Banning guns doesn’t hurt anyone other than people who just want them?

How about it hurts anyone who finds themselves staring down the barrel of a gun of someone who would not abide by a law that says you cannot own a firearm?

That’s a wildly naive stance. It’s a hell of an idea that may have worked when we were still wiping our asses with leaves, but you and nobody else has any idea how to disappear 100s of millions of guns from society.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

Banning guns doesn't hurt anyone other than people who just want to own them. It's selfish because they choose their own feelings over that of the greater good.

Anytime you give up civil rights to the government there is absolutely harm being done. Again, we give up rights to the government, it's just how far you are willing to go with that. And I do think limiting a person's ability to defend themselves absolutely hurts people.

We aren't like Japan. Guns will be here even if they are banned. So yes, you are hurting the law abiding citizens. I guess I own a shotgun so it makes me part of the selfish that don't want to give up their guns. But it's really just in my possession for sentimental purposes. Because that's part of our culture.

 

[Sheik]

Laws do not eradicate behavior, they simply exist to define a persons behavior.

 

[boozeman]

Laws do not eradicate behavior, they simply exist to define a persons behavior.

Of course they don't eradicate thought, behavior or nature.

But each time that law as a deterrent steers an individual decision, it is a win.

If getting a high powered weapon is more difficult, those that are truly dangerous may go and drive a car into a crowd etc. But they are also just as likely to refocus their mania onto something else. The simple fact is that it is too easy for a disturbed person to get their hands on that kind of weapon to do that kind of quick destruction.

It is not about TAKIN MAH GUNZ. It is about making it more complex and detailed that that there is a vetting mechanism, even if it is simple time inconvenience

Doing nothing and saying that any kind of new restrictions just won't work is a cop out. There is no perfect solution, but doing nothing isn't even close to trying.

 

[Cotton]

Laws do not eradicate behavior, they simply exist to define a persons behavior.

God damn, Sheik, that was some deep shit. And I agree 100%.

 

[Cotton]

If getting a high powered weapon is more difficult,

What's your plan to do that? I hear people say this all the damn time and they never have a solution. And, I can tell you, the solution isn't taking guns, unless you want another civil war.