Mass Shootings Maine

[thegeneral 2,910]

3 minutes ago, shorepatrol said:

On the internet. 

Well sure. Thats just rude in real life.

[shorepatrol 1,870]

3 minutes ago, thegeneral said:

Well sure. Thats just rude in real life.

You mean "I know I'd get my azz beat" 

[GobbleDog 984]

17 minutes ago, Blue Horseshoe said:

 

The Bruen ruling is based on 2nd Amendment principles. 

To get what you want, or say what you want, Bruen needs to be overturned. That can only happen by repealing the 2nd Amendment of US Constitution. Bruen exists because of gross overreach, particularly in Blue strongholds, that try to "game" around the fact that they can't legally fully ban firearms period. This is NO DIFFERENT than in Texas, where abortion laws are gamed to the point where it's effectively attempting to outlaw abortion without technically completely trying to wipe it off the board. I'm Conservative leaning, and I'm actually criticizing the Texas GOP for their abortion stances and attempted public policy at it, because it's in bad faith. (i.e. just try to outright ban it if you want it completely banned in your state, don't game it so you can fundraise off if it and try not to incite the Pro Choice voters in your districts) 

Kathy Hochul in New York, had a midnight session of the NY State Legislature after the Bruen ruling meet together. They came up with the CCIA 2022, which demanded anyone applying for a gun permit in NY to submit to releasing all their social media accounts, then doxx everyone who has ever lived with them in any household, while setting public gun restrictions so widely, that it would be impossible to carry a firearm outside your home. This was struck down legally, of course it would, it defies Bruen and SCOTUS openly. But Hochul want to fundraise off of it since she barely beat out Lee Zeldin after taking over for the ousted Cuomo. When this failed, Hochul pushed to have ammunition only be sold if the buyers could be vetted and approved, which again, is a delaying tactic to attempt to choke out ammunition period in New York, which makes firearms useless by extension. ( I.E. if they can't ban guns, they'll try to ban bullets. This happened in the Obama Adminstration, where his DOD was told to order trillions of rounds, while changing environmental standards to make it harder for companies to make ammo period. Since these companies are obligated to fulfill government/military contracts first, they were running 365/24/7 to fill those orders, choking out the civilian ammunition market on purpose. This is also around the timeline that Obama and Biden told Eric Holder to send the Sinaloa drug cartel countless AK47s and anti-material rifles, with our tax dollars no less, in Operation Fast And Furious) 

So no, this does not depend on SCOTUS. Even a hard left leaning SCOTUS, with that kind of majority, would not simply run over the 2nd Amendment on their own. They aren't going to, not even as woke zealots, burn their own judicial legacy, on setting the Constitution on fire, when NO ONE WOULD COMPLY. Every major law enforcement agency in the country would simply refuse to act on it. They are going to send in their street cops, already embattled and defunded, into potential firefight after firefight to grab guns in a pathway that is clearly does not align with the actual Constitution? 

If you want what you say you want, you need an Amendment to the US Constitution to wipe the 2nd Amendment off the map. That's it. I've laid it out for you. So, again, nothing you say here makes any sense legally. You can't just pretend the parts of the Constitution you don't like simply don't exist at all. 

All those words, ya never said what "the "Bruen ruling" was about? Thought maybe an old case about a product being banned deprived the public somehow.

To be honest, my dad is a retired respected attorney. I once gave him my "ban commercial fire arms" idea. Also said "that might be unconstitutional."  Didn't cite rulings.

I don't know if it could pass constitutional mustard or not... probably doesn't matter, it'd never pass political mustard. Unfortunate because it's the most rational/effective plan given the situation. Ain't no "taking guns" in America. Make them guns rare and worth lots of money.

[KSB2424 3,148]

53 minutes ago, KSB2424 said:

Root Cause Analysis : Let’s set a timeline.  When did these school shootings and mass random shootings start?  In my lifetime that was Columbine.  Which was what? 1999. 

There has always been random murder or even things like the Kent State shootings but that seems more random than now. 
 

 

I’m all ears.  More access to guns?  Social Media? More Pharmaceuticals? More dense population? 

[shorepatrol 1,870]

1 minute ago, GobbleDog said:

 it's the most rational/effective plan given the situation. 

Pathetic 

[thegeneral 2,910]

2 minutes ago, shorepatrol said:

You mean "I know I'd get my azz beat" 

Meet me at the bike racks, pal!

[Strike 5,186]

2 minutes ago, GobbleDog said:

All those words, ya never said what "the "Bruen ruling" was about? Thought maybe an old case about a product being banned deprived the public somehow.

To be honest, my dad is a retired respected attorney. I once gave him my "ban commercial fire arms" idea. Also said "that might be unconstitutional."  Didn't cite rulings.

I don't know if it could pass constitutional mustard or not... probably doesn't matter, it'd never pass political mustard. Unfortunate because it's the most rational/effective plan given the situation. Ain't no "taking guns" in America. Make them guns rare and worth lots of money.

Bruen is a recent ruling, last year IIRC. You should google it.

[shorepatrol 1,870]

Just now, thegeneral said:

Meet me at the bike racks, pal!

Something you've never been a part of. 

[thegeneral 2,910]

1 minute ago, shorepatrol said:

Something you've never been a part of. 

I bike a lot actually. 

[Blue Horseshoe 348]

9 minutes ago, GobbleDog said:

All those words, ya never said what "the "Bruen ruling" was about? Thought maybe an old case about a product being banned deprived the public somehow.

To be honest, my dad is a retired respected attorney. I once gave him my "ban commercial fire arms" idea. Also said "that might be unconstitutional."  Didn't cite rulings.

I don't know if it could pass constitutional mustard or not... probably doesn't matter, it'd never pass political mustard. Unfortunate because it's the most rational/effective plan given the situation. Ain't no "taking guns" in America. Make them guns rare and worth lots of money.

 

What's stopping you from looking it up?

You are telling people they are wrong, based on opposing your "suggestions" that have no practical legal pathway. Then you want others to spoonfeed you as to why there's no legal pathway.  I've given you more than enough contextual background to look it all up yourself. 

Kathy Hochul / CCIA 2022

Operation Fast And Furious

Bruen / SCOTUS

"May Issue" provisions as public policy to proxy ban guns, mostly in Blue strongholds via their state legislatures

In diem vivere in lege sunt detestabilis - Basically the "justice delayed/justice denied" principle

Again, what's stopping you from looking it up yourself? It appears you are attempting to offload trying to actually subvert the actual US Constitution by accusing me of not spoon feeding you since you refuse to spend the two minutes on Google to read it all yourself. 

[TimHauck 2,620]

27 minutes ago, KSB2424 said:

I’m all ears.  More access to guns?  Social Media? More Pharmaceuticals? More dense population? 

I think you’d need to compare to other countries that have those things but not common mass shootings.  Which would probably rule out social media and dense population.  Not familiar with the pharmaceutical availability other places.

More access to guns certainly seems like one possibility.

[GobbleDog 984]

4 minutes ago, Blue Horseshoe said:

Again, what's stopping you from looking it up yourself? It appears you are attempting to offload trying to actually subvert the actual US Constitution by accusing me of not spoon feeding you since you refuse to spend the two minutes on Google to read it all yourself. 

I give ya credit for citing cases. Sounds like ya know what you're talking about. I will say the SCOTUS ain't the "stone" it was (probably should be), changes happen. 

[SUXBNME 1,457]

1 hour ago, GutterBoy said:

Alright, so we build all these mental institutions and start locking people up, we get rid of social media, institute a system of red flags, fully fund the FBI and police, did I miss anything?  That should do it right?  We'll keep all the guns, but let's just do everything else and hope that works. And let's not even look at data from around the world.  As long as we have these cool rifles for pics we're good.

Data from around the world is completely irrelevant  to us and always will be until we have an apples to apples comparison of other countries vs ours. 
There are none at the moment. 

[GobbleDog 984]

7 minutes ago, SUXBNME said:

Data from around the world is completely irrelevant  to us and always will be until we have an apples to apples comparison of other countries vs ours. 
There are none at the moment. 

Every country compares itself to other countries... gun violence rates, GDP, or whatever.

You're implying "different demographics" or "different economics" makes comparison with US impossible. I disagree, but which is it?

[The Real timschochet 6,424]

19 minutes ago, GobbleDog said:

 Sounds like ya know what you're talking about 

Trust me it may sound that way. He doesn’t. 

[Engorgeous George 2,131]

12 hours ago, thegeneral said:

Sean Hannity will use kung fu

That may work, I suppose, but I would find it inconvenient to have to carry Sean Hannity around with me when I go out.  I am also unclear on how I would safely store my Sean Hannity when not in use so that criminals could not get their hands on him and misuse him in their criminal enterprises.

 

If I got my Sean Hannity I would want to customize it with a silencer.  

[Engorgeous George 2,131]

7 hours ago, Voltaire said:

Usually these things end soon after they start. We're not use to seeing a guy who can elude the law this long.

I've been eluding the law for over six decades.

[Engorgeous George 2,131]

6 hours ago, GobbleDog said:

All those words, ya never said what "the "Bruen ruling" was about? Thought maybe an old case about a product being banned deprived the public somehow.

To be honest, my dad is a retired respected attorney. I once gave him my "ban commercial fire arms" idea. Also said "that might be unconstitutional."  Didn't cite rulings.

I don't know if it could pass constitutional mustard or not... probably doesn't matter, it'd never pass political mustard. Unfortunate because it's the most rational/effective plan given the situation. Ain't no "taking guns" in America. Make them guns rare and worth lots of money.

With 400 million guns in circulation them becoming rare would take quite a bit of time.  I have guns 70 years old which are still in excellent working condition.

[thegeneral 2,910]

9 minutes ago, Engorgeous George said:

That may work, I suppose, but I would find it inconvenient to have to carry Sean Hannity around with me when I go out.  I am also unclear on how I would safely store my Sean Hannity when not in use so that criminals could not get their hands on him and misuse him in their criminal enterprises.

Haninity’s don’t kill people. Bad Hannity owners kill people!

[avoiding injuries 1,511]

7 hours ago, KSB2424 said:

I’m all ears.  More access to guns?  Social Media? More Pharmaceuticals? More dense population? 

I don’t know the answer, but would an average Joe, who most of these shooters are, dare to try and shoot up a place with armed and trained people inside? Probably not. They pick safe, no gun zone places where nobody will fight back against them. It takes a real puzzy to do something like that. If you can’t stop the gun, embrace it. 

[TimHauck 2,620]

14 minutes ago, avoiding injuries said:

I don’t know the answer, but would an average Joe, who most of these shooters are, dare to try and shoot up a place with armed and trained people inside? Probably not. They pick safe, no gun zone places where nobody will fight back against them. It takes a real puzzy to do something like that. If you can’t stop the gun, embrace it. 

Most of the time sure, but there have been recent mass shootings at places that presumably had armed and trained people nearby such as a bank, hospital, and college campus.

[Hardcore troubadour 14,935]

Leaders on the left talk about mass amounts of people needing to be “de-programmed” and think they aren’t feeding into peoples concerns that they need the 2a to protect themselves from the government.  Just sayin. 

[GutterBoy 2,898]

 

[Hardcore troubadour 14,935]

3 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

 

Still waiting on the accounts the tranny shooter in Tennessee visited. 

[GutterBoy 2,898]

 

[BirdGang 385]

Anyone find this jabrony yet?

[5-Points 3,389]

9 hours ago, KSB2424 said:

Root Cause Analysis : Let’s set a timeline.  When did these school shootings and mass random shootings start?  In my lifetime that was Columbine.  Which was what? 1999. 

There has always been random murder or even things like the Kent State shootings but that seems more random than now. 
 

 

Columbine does seem to be when the modern mass shooting phenomenon began. After that we had one of these events about once a year. From there they became more frequent with whackjobs trying to outdo each other to get their names and faces plastered all over the TV. 

There has to be a common thread amongst the losers who turn psycho and decide killing a bunch of strangers is the only way to right the perceived wrongs they've endured. 

But it takes time and effort to analyze all that data. It's easier to blame an inanimate object and demonize those who object to giving up their rights in order to give others a false sense of safety. 

[edjr 6,578]

How did Massachusetts shootings happen in Maine? This headline is confusing. 

[Alias Detective 1,389]

20 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

 

Was 6 years ago and in front of a religious crowd.  Some make it look like it just happened last evening.  Like you.  Idiot.

[Alias Detective 1,389]

3 minutes ago, 5-Points said:

Columbine does seem to be when the modern mass shooting phenomenon began. After that we had one of these events about once a year. From there they became more frequent with whackjobs trying to outdo each other to get their names and faces plastered all over the TV. 

There has to be a common thread amongst the losers who turn psycho and decide killing a bunch of strangers is the only way to right the perceived wrongs they've endured. 

But it takes time and effort to analyze all that data. It's easier to blame an inanimate object and demonize those who object to giving up their rights in order to give others a false sense of safety. 

Clearly it’s Trump 

[GutterBoy 2,898]

1 minute ago, Alias Detective said:

Was 6 years ago and in front of a religious crowd.  Some make it look like it just happened last evening.  Like you.  Idiot.

So things said 6 years ago or older don't count?

[Alias Detective 1,389]

9 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

So things said 6 years ago or older don't count?

I’d say context is what counts.  

[Hawkeye21 2,382]

This guy is in an area where it would be so easy to evade authorities.  He has the wilderness of Maine, he could go into Canada and he could be out on the ocean.  Could be a while before they find him.

[GutterBoy 2,898]

Just now, Alias Detective said:

I’d say context is what counts.  

Ok put it in context for me

[Hawkeye21 2,382]

We really need to make it easier to get mental health care.  Should be free or something.  It is badly needed in our country.

[Hardcore troubadour 14,935]

38 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

So things said 6 years ago or older don't count?

Like when you said we should declare war on Muslims? Does that count? 

[Tree of Knowledge 1,702]

If elected President I would replace all “how to be queer” curriculum with “how to win a gunfight” curriculum.  Upon passage each child will be issued Colt .45 Revolver, carry permit, Stetson, and holster.  
 

Problem solved.  

[HellToupee 1,588]

Ron Flipkowski is to gutter as Kyle griffin is to squissy

[Tree of Knowledge 1,702]

10 minutes ago, HellToupee said:

Ron Flipkowski is to gutter as Kyle griffin is to squissy

Hopefully, both go away 1/20/25. 

[Hardcore troubadour 14,935]

11 minutes ago, HellToupee said:

Ron Flipkowski is to gutter as Kyle griffin is to squissy

He likes some guy in a truck too.