At least 11 people dead in California bar shooting..

[mobb_deep 917]

Something's fishy folks......

 

Group that survived Las Vegas massacre was at California Bar Shooting.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/california-bar-shooting-survivors-of-las-vegas-massacre-were-at-borderline-bar-and-grill/?utm_source=fark&utm_medium=website&utm_content=link&ICID=ref_fark&fbclid=IwAR2FJDnB5AFXkc2tutCFJ5nvSkju9SaTy9d0pjTeAYXK6l8PGvb_30WoyAM

It's the plot for Final Destination 10

[wiffleball 4,636]

 

Something's fishy folks......

 

Group that survived Las Vegas massacre was at California Bar Shooting. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/california-bar-shooting-survivors-of-las-vegas-massacre-were-at-borderline-bar-and-grill/?utm_source=fark&utm_medium=website&utm_content=link&ICID=ref_fark&fbclid=IwAR2FJDnB5AFXkc2tutCFJ5nvSkju9SaTy9d0pjTeAYXK6l8PGvb_30WoyAM

Tried to tell you.

 

They were also at Sandy Hook and Pulse.

 

...crisis actors..Alex Jones...

[iam90sbaby 2,122]

Tried to tell you.

 

They were also at Sandy Hook and Pulse.

 

...crisis actors..Alex Jones...

 

When I posted mine, I wasn't saying there was a conspiracy, the Las Vegas shooting was a huge event with many people attending, didn't seem out of the realm of possibility for someone to be the bar as well.

[TBayXXXVII 2,113]

The absolute percentages are small, but the fact remains, guns cause more harm than good.

 

Guns in the hands of the wrong people... yes, cause more harm that good. I don't like guns in the least bit, but I'm not going to advocate taking some peoples' rights away just because an infinitesimally small group of people.

[TBayXXXVII 2,113]

 

Something's fishy folks......

 

Group that survived Las Vegas massacre was at California Bar Shooting.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/california-bar-shooting-survivors-of-las-vegas-massacre-were-at-borderline-bar-and-grill/?utm_source=fark&utm_medium=website&utm_content=link&ICID=ref_fark&fbclid=IwAR2FJDnB5AFXkc2tutCFJ5nvSkju9SaTy9d0pjTeAYXK6l8PGvb_30WoyAM

 

 

In both instances, the shooter was former military with PTSD? That correct? Wrong? Sadly, I don't remember.

[wiffleball 4,636]

 

In both instances, the shooter was former military with PTSD? That correct? Wrong? Sadly, I don't remember.

Wrong. Degenerate Acctountant. Gambler.

[SUXBNME 1,324]

 

Plastics are poly-organic compounds which aren’t reactive to acid. To react with acid, a substance must be either a base or a reductant strong enough to be oxidized by hydronium ion. Most plastic are neither of them.

[mobb_deep 917]

Plastics are poly-organic compounds which aren’t reactive to acid. To react with acid, a substance must be either a base or a reductant strong enough to be oxidized by hydronium ion. Most plastic are neither of them.

Posting his link, since he likes to pretend he's smart. Dude hasn't had an original idea in his life.

 

https://www.quora.com/What-acid-does-not-melt-plastic

[seafoam1 1,878]

Posting his link, since he likes to pretend he's smart. Dude hasn't had an original idea in his life.

 

https://www.quora.com/What-acid-does-not-melt-plastic

So who was wrong here?

[tanatastic 2,061]

Tried to tell you.

They were also at Sandy Hook and Pulse.

...crisis actors..Alex Jones...

Well, unlike Scamdy Hoax, there’s actual bodies, blood and confirmed victims with this bar shooting. You won’t be seeing pics of them alive and well after the incident like the kids either.

[penultimatestraw 473]

Guns in the hands of the wrong people... yes, cause more harm that good. I don't like guns in the least bit, but I'm not going to advocate taking some peoples' rights away just because an infinitesimally small group of people.

Anyone can become the “wrong” person, and we have no good way to predict who and when. Carelessness, intoxication, changes in mood, accidents, etc. can happen to anyone. There have been multiple studies that prove gun ownership makes people less safe.

[TBayXXXVII 2,113]

Anyone can become the “wrong” person, and we have no good way to predict who and when. Carelessness, intoxication, changes in mood, accidents, etc. can happen to anyone. There have been multiple studies that prove gun ownership makes people less safe.

 

And yet, only 5 hundredths of a percent commit a crime... again, that's assuming that all gun related crimes are committed by legal gun owners, which we know isn't true.

[penultimatestraw 473]

And yet, only 5 hundredths of a percent commit a crime... again, that's assuming that all gun related crimes are committed by legal gun owners, which we know isn't true.

Its not just crime...when weighing risk vs. benefit of greater gun control (not wholesale confiscation of firearms) the correct answer in pretty clear. But whenever youre talking about public health measures to prevent harm, the absolute percentages of lives saved are small.

 

Ive said it before. I was neutral about gun control, assuming existing laws were enough and 2A was beyond reproach. Then I read a bunch of available studies on the subject. I suggest you do the same.

[TBayXXXVII 2,113]

Its not just crime...when weighing risk vs. benefit of greater gun control (not wholesale confiscation of firearms) the correct answer in pretty clear. But whenever youre talking about public health measures to prevent harm, the absolute percentages of lives saved are small.

 

Ive said it before. I was neutral about gun control, assuming existing laws were enough and 2A was beyond reproach. Then I read a bunch of available studies on the subject. I suggest you do the same.

 

I'm not opposed to stricter laws on guns, I'm only opposed to banning them and removing the 2nd Amendment as some are. Not saying you are, just that this opinion is "out there" and is trumpeted by many.

[penultimatestraw 473]

I'm not opposed to stricter laws on guns, I'm only opposed to banning them and removing the 2nd Amendment as some are. Not saying you are, just that this opinion is "out there" and is trumpeted by many.

This is how hot button issues remain unaddressed. Opposing viewpoints are only characterized by the extremes and/or some simpleton invokes the dreaded slippery slope. Meanwhile, the vast majority of people on both sides agree concerning sensible gun control measures.

 

No one on this forearm, and few elsewhere are advocating banning all firearms or removing 2A. Focusing on fringe viewpoints prevents compromise on issues where there is legitimate middle ground.

[TBayXXXVII 2,113]

This is how hot button issues remain unaddressed. Opposing viewpoints are only characterized by the extremes and/or some simpleton invokes the dreaded slippery slope. Meanwhile, the vast majority of people on both sides agree concerning sensible gun control measures.

 

No one on this forearm, and few elsewhere are advocating banning all firearms or removing 2A. Focusing on fringe viewpoints prevents compromise on issues where there is legitimate middle ground.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,619]

It appears this guy was a leftist. Look over here now.

[tanatastic 2,061]

Military with ptsd, had nothing to do with politics.

[TBayXXXVII 2,113]

Military with ptsd, had nothing to do with politics.

 

Significant majority agree... but the Leftist nut jobs all think these things are done by Trump supporters.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,619]

Military with ptsd, had nothing to do with politics.

True, but the other side ain't playing along. The Pittsburgh shooter was immediately blamed on Trump and his supporters, despite the fact that kook hated Trump.

[RLLD 3,455]

True, but the other side ain't playing along. The Pittsburgh shooter was immediately blamed on Trump and his supporters, despite the fact that kook hated Trump.

 

But I can still blame Trump if i want to, right? Can I use rhetoric, or is there a better/best option to use for this one TYIA

[wiffleball 4,636]

True, but the other side ain't playing along. The Pittsburgh shooter was immediately blamed on Trump and his supporters, despite the fact that kook hated Trump.

Have you seen his van?

 

Still, nuts gonna nut.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,619]

Have you seen his van?

 

Still, nuts gonna nut.

That was the fake bomber.

[RaiderHaters Revenge 3,573]

This is how hot button issues remain unaddressed. Opposing viewpoints are only characterized by the extremes and/or some simpleton invokes the dreaded slippery slope. Meanwhile, the vast majority of people on both sides agree concerning sensible gun control measures.

 

No one on this forearm, and few elsewhere are advocating banning all firearms or removing 2A. Focusing on fringe viewpoints prevents compromise on issues where there is legitimate middle ground.

 

and again you call us radical extreme simpletons, cause we ask, which laws in California (the strictest state in the union) would have prevented this

 

you attack on the slippery slope, but I ask you, California is already pack with gun laws, is adding a new one not a slippery slope? What about after the next shooting? When does it stop

 

I will propose

 

ban all clips over 8, ban all AR type weapons, but game over no discussing gun control for 100 years

[wiffleball 4,636]

That was the fake bomber.

Oh yeah...

[cyclone24 1,813]

We here at gfy industries know what an important day it is when you finally decide to snap and go kill a bunch of people. It's a big day. Almost as big as a wedding day. You want everything to be just right.

 

You can't be bogged down by trying to do social media in the middle of a killin to use the right hashtag amirite?

 

So for a nominal fee we here at GFY will post to all of your social media accounts in the middle of your spree to get your message out. We'll make sure to get the best Bang for your buck. You're welcome America.

[penultimatestraw 473]

 

and again you call us radical extreme simpletons, cause we ask, which laws in California (the strictest state in the union) would have prevented this

 

you attack on the slippery slope, but I ask you, California is already pack with gun laws, is adding a new one not a slippery slope? What about after the next shooting? When does it stop

 

I will propose

 

ban all clips over 8, ban all AR type weapons, but game over no discussing gun control for 100 years

I'm not calling you anything, just critiquing intellectually lazy arguments like the slippery slope. There are always compromises to be made, which should be revisited as society evolves. While some of your suggestions look reasonable, the 100 year stipulation is completely arbitrary and nonsensical. No other legislation comes with such qualifiers. When gun violence rates in the US approach that of the rest of the civilized world, we can put the brakes on.

 

Because they're fleetingly rare and never 100% avoidable, I've been consistent in not using mass shootings as rationale for gun control. Just because some nut can slip through the cracks in CA doesn't mean we should ignore the mounds of data which suggest gun control works - I've posted many of the studies previously. Personally I think longer waiting periods to allow better background checks, especially as they relate to mental health (preferably to a central registry), making owners more responsible for reporting lost/stolen firearms and eliminating assault-style rifles and high-capacity magazines is a good place to start.

[Cloaca du jour 2,064]

We have to thin the herd somehow.

[vuduchile 1,941]

Well, unlike Scamdy Hoax, theres actual bodies, blood and confirmed victims with this bar shooting. You wont be seeing pics of them alive and well after the incident like the kids either.

You get a little nuttier every week.

 

Seriously, get off the internet for awhile and go take a walk or something.

[vuduchile 1,941]

PTSD is a part of it, but some go into the military to channel their aggression. I did my psych rotation at an army facility, and in between people faking craziness to get out of the military there were some truly disturbing individuals.

Thats a more direct way of saying what I did when I said anyone who chooses to become a soldier......blah blah.

 

And just like civilians, some can control their aggression while others cant.

 

But we give them all guns, train them to kill then unleash them on our enemies.

 

Crazy or not, thats some pretty heavy lifting they do in defense of our country. We should have a better process for helping them adjust and attain a level of sanity after going through all that.

[penultimatestraw 473]

Significant majority agree... but the Leftist nut jobs all think these things are done by Trump supporters.

That’s funny, I coulda swore somebody just accused the shooter of being a “leftist”

[penultimatestraw 473]

True, but the other side ain't playing along. The Pittsburgh shooter was immediately blamed on Trump and his supporters, despite the fact that kook hated Trump.

I think you’re confusing far right anti-Semite with Trump supporter. While the Venn diagrams certainly overlap, it’s possible to hate both Jews and Trump.

[drobeski 3,061]

We have to thin the herd somehow.

they need to start doing these things at the antifa protest, at least they wont be called meaningless anymore.

[BLS 313]

I'm not calling you anything, just critiquing intellectually lazy arguments like the slippery slope. There are always compromises to be made, which should be revisited as society evolves. While some of your suggestions look reasonable, the 100 year stipulation is completely arbitrary and nonsensical. No other legislation comes with such qualifiers. When gun violence rates in the US approach that of the rest of the civilized world, we can put the brakes on.

 

Because they're fleetingly rare and never 100% avoidable, I've been consistent in not using mass shootings as rationale for gun control. Just because some nut can slip through the cracks in CA doesn't mean we should ignore the mounds of data which suggest gun control works - I've posted many of the studies previously. Personally I think longer waiting periods to allow better background checks, especially as they relate to mental health (preferably to a central registry), making owners more responsible for reporting lost/stolen firearms and eliminating assault-style rifles and high-capacity magazines is a good place to start.

 

For an educated, intelligent person, I cannot fathom how you can't be objective.

Crazy people sometimes do irrational things.

Their methods for performing their irrational things do not matter.

If you remove their access to those methods, I don't see how you can honestly believe that will curb the problem.

 

We've gone back and forth on this. A mad man could certainly kill many people with a truck.

Your solution is to remove the gun. But if a truck was later used, would you suggest removal of the trucks?

Or a psychological evaluation of those wishing to buy a truck?

 

Or would logic dictate that addressing the problem at it's root, makes more sense?

 

The problem is mental health. Let's start there.

[cbfalcon 824]

 

For an educated, intelligent person, I cannot fathom how you can't be objective.

Crazy people sometimes do irrational things.

Their methods for performing their irrational things do not matter.

If you remove their access to those methods, I don't see how you can honestly believe that will curb the problem.

 

We've gone back and forth on this. A mad man could certainly kill many people with a truck.

Your solution is to remove the gun. But if a truck was later used, would you suggest removal of the trucks?

Or a psychological evaluation of those wishing to buy a truck?

 

Or would logic dictate that addressing the problem at it's root, makes more sense?

 

The problem is mental health. Let's start there.

I understand all of the logic. Bad stuff will happen regardless, bad guys will be the only ones with guns, can we prove it would have stoppped event A or event B, etc.

 

Ive always felt those arguments were perfection being the enemy of inprovement. Some measures of gun control would add layers at which people can be caught, would make the horrible events less horrible on average by reducing a murderers efficiency, etc.

 

I have also never understand why we argue about where we should start (mental health, less guns, more security, etc), as its clearly just a stall tactic.

[penultimatestraw 473]

I understand all of the logic. Bad stuff will happen regardless, bad guys will be the only ones with guns, can we prove it would have stoppped event A or event B, etc.

Ive always felt those arguments were perfection being the enemy of inprovement. Some measures of gun control would add layers at which people can be caught, would make the horrible events less horrible on average by reducing a murderers efficiency, etc.

I have also never understand why we argue about where we should start (mental health, less guns, more security, etc), as its clearly just a stall tactic.

Yep.

 

Theres plenty of evidence more restrictive gun laws reduce deaths. Deaths which arent offset by stabbings, acid attacks, runaway vehicles, etc. And thats ignoring the impact gun control would have on the s word, which somehow is considered inconsequential by the pro-gun crowd.

 

While mental health certainly needs to be addressed, theres no reason we cant simultaneously figure out ways to limit access to the weapons crazy people prefer.

[wiffleball 4,636]

I don't have much time left, can you guys figure this out in the next 5-6 posts please?

 

Thx

[Baker Boy 1,484]

Gov. Brown blames climate ‘deniers’ for worsening wildfires – Scientific evidence refutes him: ‘Less fire today than centuries ago’ – Wildfires are NOT due to ‘climate change’ –

http://www.climatedepot.com/2018/11/12/gov-brown-blames-climate-deniers-for-worsening-wildfires-scientific-evidence-refutes-him-less-fire-today-than-centuries-ago-wildfires-are-not-due-to-climat/

[wiffleball 4,636]

Gov. Brown blames climate deniers for worsening wildfires Scientific evidence refutes him: Less fire today than centuries ago Wildfires are NOT due to climate change

http://www.climatedepot.com/2018/11/12/gov-brown-blames-climate-deniers-for-worsening-wildfires-scientific-evidence-refutes-him-less-fire-today-than-centuries-ago-wildfires-are-not-due-to-climat/

Well this thread seems the clear choice..

[RaiderHaters Revenge 3,573]

its actually the left, who refuses to allow deforesting and cleaning of debris that leaves tons of dead fuel available to burn

 

Republicans have suggested for years, that we use federal funding to clean out forests annually of all dead trees