Another mass shooting in CA

[dogcows 1,029]

46 minutes ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

We're talking actual murders with guns.  Let's start with taking out suicide by gun and how many do you have now?  That's just for starters, we'll be able to parry down that list real quick and separate ACTUAL murders with guns instead of your smoke screen, misdirection stat.

You disingenuous POS.

So you don’t care about suicides? Good to know.

[peenie 1,690]

17 minutes ago, Alias Detective said:

Who is the they’re?

Whoever labeled or classified the shooting. 

[Alias Detective 1,179]

19 minutes ago, peenie said:

Whoever labeled or classified the shooting. 

Media. I wonder why… Do you have an idea?

[EternalShinyAndChrome 2,513]

53 minutes ago, dogcows said:

So you don’t care about suicides? Good to know.

Not when it comes to you being disingenuous about actual gun deaths.  Suicidal people will kill themselves with other things if guns weren't there so to include them in your hysterical rants is deliberate on your part to make it seem like actual gun deaths (murder) are much more than they are in reality.  We're talking deliberate use of a firearm to kill someone else.

So get bent with your distortions of facts.

[dogcows 1,029]

11 minutes ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

Not when it comes to you being disingenuous about actual gun deaths.  Suicidal people will kill themselves with other things if guns weren't there so to include them in your hysterical rants is deliberate on your part to make it seem like actual gun deaths (murder) are much more than they are in reality.  We're talking deliberate use of a firearm to kill someone else.

So get bent with your distortions of facts.

So suicide is not an “actual gun death.” Hmm…

 I’m not distorting facts. I just gave the raw data of how many human beings in America died due to being shot with a gun. You are the one spinning.

[EternalShinyAndChrome 2,513]

2 minutes ago, dogcows said:

So suicide is not an “actual gun death.” Hmm…

 I’m not distorting facts. I just gave the raw data of how many human beings in America died due to being shot with a gun. You are the one spinning.

Nope, suicidal people will kill themselves with anything, so to include them in the number when were talking about murder is, of course, you being a hysterical ninny to make it look like the number is larger than it actually is.

You are distorting facts because the argument isn't "gun deaths" overall, it's "gun deaths" by a deliberate act to murder another human.

Your logic only works on other sheep like yourself or small children, not logical and critical thinking adults.

[RaiderHaters Revenge 3,578]

20 hours ago, The Real timschochet said:

Gun control laws in one state don’t work very well: if a gun is illegal to possess (such as, for instance, the one used in Monterey Park), the bad guy can simply drive to Nevada and purchase it. And even if, as in many cases, the bad guy is a convicted violent felon, it still doesn’t matter because he can simply go to a gun show in Nevada and no background check is required for a private sale. 
 

This is why those of us who believe in SOME gun control laws want them federalized. So to answer Strikes question, the laws we have in California don’t work very well for us. 

can you show me a mass shooting that came from a "gun show" loophole that you leftists complain about?

 

[RaiderHaters Revenge 3,578]

1 minute ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

Nope, suicidal people will kill themselves with anything, so to include them in the number when were talking about murder is, of course, you being a hysterical ninny to make it look like the number is larger than it actually is.

You are distorting facts because the argument isn't "gun deaths" overall, it's "gun deaths" by a deliberate act to murder another human.

Dogsh1t would lump drunk driving deaths with all vehicular deaths as well

is someone who commits suicide jumping of a bridge included in skydiving deaths?

 

[EternalShinyAndChrome 2,513]

2 minutes ago, RaiderHaters Revenge said:

can you show me a mass shooting that came from a "gun show" loophole that you leftists complain about?

I hear a lot of lefties talk about "the gun show loophole" but when you ask them to explain it they can't.  So it's clear it's used just as a daily talking point - they have no idea how or where guns are bought and sold or the data behind it.

[EternalShinyAndChrome 2,513]

2 minutes ago, RaiderHaters Revenge said:

Dogsh1t would lump drunk driving deaths with all vehicular deaths as well

is someone who commits suicide jumping of a bridge included in skydiving deaths?

Right?  We should ban vehicles immediately!!! OMG!!

[RaiderHaters Revenge 3,578]

Just now, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

I hear a lot of lefties talk about "the gun show loophole" but when you ask them to explain it they can't.  So it's clear it's used just as a daily talking point - they have no idea how guns are bought and sold.

people that talk about the gun show loophole have never been to a gun show, nor have they ever purchased a firearm at a gun show

the 3 firearms I bought at a gun show, 2 of them were from dealers and had to be sent to my nearest firearm dealer for background checks, and the 3rd was a 1882 Winchester 

[EternalShinyAndChrome 2,513]

3 minutes ago, RaiderHaters Revenge said:

people that talk about the gun show loophole have never been to a gun show, nor have they ever purchased a firearm at a gun show

the 3 firearms I bought at a gun show, 2 of them were from dealers and had to be sent to my nearest firearm dealer for background checks, and the 3rd was a 1882 Winchester 

Exactly.  The TWO guns I recently sold I didn't sell at a gun show at all and it wasn't to anybody I knew.  And I still demanded a background check which I paid for (if successful) where we went to my FFL dealer and he did it.  The guys buying the gun had ZERO issues with this.

It's hilarious to see guys who know nothing about guns, how guns are bought or how guns are sold talking about guns.  It's like watching a child trying to explain the moon landing to you.  It's cute and funny but has no basis in reality.

[Dizkneelande 839]

18 hours ago, The Real timschochet said:

No but that’s where private sales are the most common. Private sales outside of gun shows are usually between people who know each other, so that’s less of a problem. At gun shows, you get sales between total strangers.

Here is another topic you know absolutely nothing about yet, you portray yourself to be an expert in something because you heard some talking head on MSNBC repeat this lie. You’ve never been to a gun show in your life. I’ve been to dozens of them. I’ve never seen a vendor that wasn’t an FFL. You really think there are private individuals renting tables at gun shows to sell their personal firearms? It doesn’t happen, ever. They are all licensed vendors and if it were to happen it would create an ATF sh!tstorm. Even more comical you would think it happens at such a high rate that it’s creating and impact. 

[RaiderHaters Revenge 3,578]

5 minutes ago, Dizkneelande said:

Here is another topic you know absolutely nothing about yet, you portray yourself to be an expert in something because you heard some talking head on MSNBC repeat this lie. You’ve never been to a gun show in your life. I’ve been to dozens of them. I’ve never seen a vendor that wasn’t an FFL. You really think there are private individuals renting tables at gun shows to sell their personal firearms? It doesn’t happen, ever. They are all licensed vendors and if it were to happen it would create an ATF sh!tstorm. Even more comical you would think it happens at such a high rate that it’s creating and impact. 

the only privates I have seen are those selling collectibles, firearms that you put on display but I would love to see someone try a crime with one of those flintlocks 

[Engorgeous George 1,160]

15 minutes ago, Dizkneelande said:

Here is another topic you know absolutely nothing about yet, you portray yourself to be an expert in something because you heard some talking head on MSNBC repeat this lie. You’ve never been to a gun show in your life. I’ve been to dozens of them. I’ve never seen a vendor that wasn’t an FFL. You really think there are private individuals renting tables at gun shows to sell their personal firearms? It doesn’t happen, ever. They are all licensed vendors and if it were to happen it would create an ATF sh!tstorm. Even more comical you would think it happens at such a high rate that it’s creating and impact. 

Tim believes we can do nothing about illegals because the number is overwhelming, being around 10 to 20 million.  He wants, however, for us to do something about gunowners and firearms, legal, constitutuionally protected gun owners when there are around 80 million of them holding around 400 million firearms.  The lesser number is impossible to attack but the higher number isn't in his world. He, like many, wants to mess with a legislative override of the constitution, or a legislative work around of the constitution arguing points he does not fully understand on products he does not understand, involving processes he does not understand.

He will argue that he knows the hearts and minds of all americans, something he has ascertained from one study or another.  He will say something like 70% of all americans and growing agree with him.  Well with numbers like that a constitutional amendment should be easy, yet he will say that is impossible.

In the end who cares what he purports to think since he does not think, he feels.

[Dizkneelande 839]

6 minutes ago, RaiderHaters Revenge said:

the only privates I have seen are those selling collectibles, firearms that you put on display but I would love to see someone try a crime with one of those flintlocks 

Exactly plus knives, Trump shirts and beef jerky 

[Engorgeous George 1,160]

7 minutes ago, RaiderHaters Revenge said:

the only privates I have seen are those selling collectibles, firearms that you put on display but I would love to see someone try a crime with one of those flintlocks 

I think you mean privately held firearms.  I imagine you have seen hundreds of privates.

[RaiderHaters Revenge 3,578]

1 minute ago, Engorgeous George said:

I think you mean privately held firearms.  I imagine you have seen hundreds of privates.

I did get to the end of pornhub during covid

[EternalShinyAndChrome 2,513]

Just now, Dizkneelande said:

Exactly plus knives, Trump shirts and beef jerky 

Do you know how many people die from beef jerky?  Take a guess.

BTW, I'm going to include everyone dying of heart disease and cancer in that stat to inflate the numbers.

[Engorgeous George 1,160]

Just now, RaiderHaters Revenge said:

I did get to the end of pornhub during covid

Impressive.

[EternalShinyAndChrome 2,513]

3 minutes ago, RaiderHaters Revenge said:

I did get to the end of pornhub during covid

You, good sir, are a God among men.

[dogcows 1,029]

46 minutes ago, Engorgeous George said:

Tim believes we can do nothing about illegals because the number is overwhelming, being around 10 to 20 million.  He wants, however, for us to do something about gunowners and firearms, legal, constitutuionally protected gun owners when there are around 80 million of them holding around 400 million firearms.  The lesser number is impossible to attack but the higher number isn't in his world. He, like many, wants to mess with a legislative override of the constitution, or a legislative work around of the constitution arguing points he does not fully understand on products he does not understand, involving processes he does not understand.

He will argue that he knows the hearts and minds of all americans, something he has ascertained from one study or another.  He will say something like 70% of all americans and growing agree with him.  Well with numbers like that a constitutional amendment should be easy, yet he will say that is impossible.

In the end who cares what he purports to think since he does not think, he feels.

Dunno about Tim, but if you know anything about the 2nd amendment, you should know that before 2008, the 2nd amendment had never been interpreted to confer an individual right of gun ownership for self defense. It was Scalia leading that charge to discard the first half of the 2nd amendment.

Quote

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
 

How many gun owners are members of a well regulated militia? And these 400 million guns aren’t doing anything necessary to the security of a free state. Gun deaths per capita in America are massively higher than in any other country… because we have massively more guns than any other country. It’s funny that the Supremes try to adjust the meaning of the amendment based on the fact that militias at the time of the Constitution’s ratification, were supplanted by the military and the police. So instead of interpreting it that police and military should not lose their right to bear arms in defense of country, they change it to say individuals should have a personal right to defend themselves with guns. So hey, they are the Supremes, so we have to deal with it. But we saw that they can reverse themselves, as with Roe v Wade. So who knows what will happen in 20 or 50 years.

[Engorgeous George 1,160]

28 minutes ago, dogcows said:

Dunno about Tim, but if you know anything about the 2nd amendment, you should know that before 2008, the 2nd amendment had never been interpreted to confer an individual right of gun ownership for self defense. It was Scalia leading that charge to discard the first half of the 2nd amendment.

How many gun owners are members of a well regulated militia? And these 400 million guns aren’t doing anything necessary to the security of a free state. Gun deaths per capita in America are massively higher than in any other country… because we have massively more guns than any other country. It’s funny that the Supremes try to adjust the meaning of the amendment based on the fact that militias at the time of the Constitution’s ratification, were supplanted by the military and the police. So instead of interpreting it that police and military should not lose their right to bear arms in defense of country, they change it to say individuals should have a personal right to defend themselves with guns. So hey, they are the Supremes, so we have to deal with it. But we saw that they can reverse themselves, as with Roe v Wade. So who knows what will happen in 20 or 50 years.

I do know a little bit about the second amendment.  In my past I have been asked to draft legislation to restrict sale of firearms at pawn shops and to restrict pawn shops from buying weapons for sale through interstate commerce.  I did my best.  I was then asked to draft a white paper tearing that self-same regulation apart. I did. In law school I drafted a paper on the state of arms covered by the second amendment and I, unlike the common debate, noted that at the time the constitution authorized marques of reprisal, meaning our founders understood that ship of war could be privately owned, not just flintlocks or even community cannon, but ships of war.  Also when I read the first clause I note that if it were to be controlling the second clause would have read "the right of the people to keep arms for the benefit of the state shall not be infringed."  That is, of course, not what it says.  It gives the right to the people to keep them and to bear them.  It supposes if the people are in support of the free state they would gladly do so, but it allows them to withhold that support.

I appreciate that a new court may change its view of the second.  I believe Heller got it right, but a new court can easily believe the constitution is a living and breathing document.  I view that as dangerous outside of the amendment process.  If you want it to live, to breath, to grow use the amendment process.  I would personally likely support a redrafting or overwriting of the second.  I do not support trying to legislate around it.

 

Oh, I appreciate the discussion.  I also presume the discussion will never be resolved.  Even were a new amendment to be passed there would be those who would work for an amendment to replace the new amendment and to reinstitute the original.  A nation concieved in armed conflict, which grew, survived, and prospered under arms is unlikely to grow beyond a love of arms easily.  Perhaps in another dozen generations or so. 

[5-Points 2,726]

Always with the "well regulated militia" and never acknowledging "the right of the people."

It's as if these constitutional scholars forgot that "the people" made up the "militia" and the whole "being necessary to the security of a free state" meant "being necessary to the security of a state of freedom." 

 

 

 

 

 

[BuckSwope 654]

1 hour ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

Not when it comes to you being disingenuous about actual gun deaths.  Suicidal people will kill themselves with other things if guns weren't there so to include them in your hysterical rants is deliberate on your part to make it seem like actual gun deaths (murder) are much more than they are in reality.  We're talking deliberate use of a firearm to kill someone else.

So get bent with your distortions of facts.

This has been shown to be largely untrue.  

Now I don't care when we are talking about the issue if the person I am talking to say "deaths" or "homicides", I just want to know.   

Im just pointing out stats show success is way higher with access to guns vs most other methods and most don't reattempt after a failed attempt.  

 

[craftsman 1,045]

Liberals dream of a world where only bad guys should have access to firearms. 

[The Real timschochet 2,925]

1 hour ago, Dizkneelande said:

Here is another topic you know absolutely nothing about yet, you portray yourself to be an expert in something because you heard some talking head on MSNBC repeat this lie. You’ve never been to a gun show in your life. I’ve been to dozens of them. I’ve never seen a vendor that wasn’t an FFL. You really think there are private individuals renting tables at gun shows to sell their personal firearms? It doesn’t happen, ever. They are all licensed vendors and if it were to happen it would create an ATF sh!tstorm. Even more comical you would think it happens at such a high rate that it’s creating and impact. 

I’ve been to 2 gun shows in my life. I don’t really understand why that’s relevant, but whatever. 
 

The “gun show loophole” is simply shorthand for “private sales loophole” which means that private sales and transfers of guns do not require a background check for the purchaser. Most gun show purchases involved registered dealers so there are background checks, but some don’t. And there are plenty of private sales that take place outside of gun shows as well.

I believe that any transfer or sale of a gun, including private, should involve a background check. Furthermore I believe all firearms should be registered. I do not think this will have any real effect on mass shootings, but I do believe it will reduce overall gun violence in this country. And I don’t think my ideas infringe upon the 2nd Amendment or gun rights in general. 
 

Of course you’re free to disagree with my ideas and I expect you will. But I don’t think I have any of my facts wrong and I do regard myself as pretty well informed on this issue. If you think I got some issue of fact wrong please let me know. 

[Hardcore troubadour 12,627]

5 minutes ago, craftsman said:

Liberals dream of a world where only bad guys should have access to firearms. 

And that if the bad guys of a favored group are found to be in possession of an illegal firearm or commit a crime using one they get a slap on the wrist. Even better. , don’t even enforce the law in areas with illegal fire arms. In some places you can’t even run after them. 

[Dizkneelande 839]

31 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

I’ve been to 2 gun shows in my life. I don’t really understand why that’s relevant, but whatever. 
 

The “gun show loophole” is simply shorthand for “private sales loophole” which means that private sales and transfers of guns do not require a background check for the purchaser. Most gun show purchases involved registered dealers so there are background checks, but some don’t. And there are plenty of private sales that take place outside of gun shows as well.

I believe that any transfer or sale of a gun, including private, should involve a background check. Furthermore I believe all firearms should be registered. I do not think this will have any real effect on mass shootings, but I do believe it will reduce overall gun violence in this country. And I don’t think my ideas infringe upon the 2nd Amendment or gun rights in general. 
 

Of course you’re free to disagree with my ideas and I expect you will. But I don’t think I have any of my facts wrong and I do regard myself as pretty well informed on this issue. If you think I got some issue of fact wrong please let me know. 

None of that happens. You think people are dealing guns to strangers in the parking lot? Idiotic. Also idiotic you think there is a cluster of lawful gun owners that are selling firearms privately to people with questionable motives. I’ll lead you to water. Most illegal gun purchases are straw purchases and they are rarely prosecuted. If you need some more help, this is where someone purchases a firearm for someone that can’t pass a background check through federally licensed firearms dealer. They most likely know each other. There should be laws against doing that hmmmmm……::

[Ron 'Tator Salad' White 82]

3 hours ago, RaiderHaters Revenge said:

people that talk about the gun show loophole have never been to a gun show, nor have they ever purchased a firearm at a gun show

the 3 firearms I bought at a gun show, 2 of them were from dealers and had to be sent to my nearest firearm dealer for background checks, and the 3rd was a 1882 Winchester 

Ditto as well just bought from a gun show. Had to wait in line 2 hours for background checks and it was a handgun so of course I needed to show my permit to carry as well. There were no loopholes I could see. 

[The Real timschochet 2,925]

1 hour ago, Dizkneelande said:

None of that happens. You think people are dealing guns to strangers in the parking lot? Idiotic. Also idiotic you think there is a cluster of lawful gun owners that are selling firearms privately to people with questionable motives. I’ll lead you to water. Most illegal gun purchases are straw purchases and they are rarely prosecuted. If you need some more help, this is where someone purchases a firearm for someone that can’t pass a background check through federally licensed firearms dealer. They most likely know each other. There should be laws against doing that hmmmmm……::

The facts from this article, and dozens like it, seem to contradict your personal experience: 

https://gunsandamerica.org/story/19/01/29/what-the-so-called-gun-show-loophole-really-looks-like/

Nonetheless, if you believe that private sales at gun shows and elsewhere don’t exist, then you should have no problem making them illegal without background checks. 

[Strike 3,957]

Amy Klobuchar using the tragedies in CA to push an Assault Weapons ban, despite those incidents having been carried out with handguns:

 

[Dizkneelande 839]

1 hour ago, The Real timschochet said:

The facts from this article, and dozens like it, seem to contradict your personal experience: 

https://gunsandamerica.org/story/19/01/29/what-the-so-called-gun-show-loophole-really-looks-like/

Nonetheless, if you believe that private sales at gun shows and elsewhere don’t exist, then you should have no problem making them illegal without background checks. 

Get out of here you’re horrible. And nonetheless? That’s not your argument. You equated a fake gun show loophole with increase in gun violence.

Your articles only source is David Chipman. Do you even know who he is? He’s a political activist and Biden had to withdraw his nomination to direct the ATF. He works for gun grabbers Giffords and Everytown. Your article has zero facts and is filled with anecdotes. 

From your article -

“It’s also true that most vendors at gun shows are licensed dealers.”

“But many gun shows allow people who aren’t licensed dealers to rent tables too. Some exhibitors are gun collectors who aren’t considered to be selling firearms as a business, but have plenty of guns to sell as they consolidate their collection.”

This is conjecture. 

Show some facts or F off.