Mass Shooting At Pittsburgh Synagogue

[Ilunga]

1 hour ago, Warhippy said:

I love Fat Mike <3

Other bands have come and gone in my over half a century on this planet however every NOFX record reasonates with me.

Especially after el Hefe joined the band in the early 90's.

They usually release an album every 3 years,2016 , last ditch effort,being their last.

They are due next year, I hope Mike has been gestating on Trump and releases a beauty.

[RUPERTKBD]

Can anyone think of another US President that was unwanted after a tragedy?

 

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/oct/29/pittsburgh-shooting-trump-not-welcome

 

This is what happens when you refer to white supremacists as "very fine people"...

[RottenCanuck22]

Couldn't help but notice within 3 posts there was a 24/7 forum NPC trying to point the finger at Trump.

 

Not surprised!

[RUPERTKBD]

12 hours ago, RottenCanuck22 said:

Couldn't help but notice within 3 posts there was a 24/7 forum NPC trying to point the finger at Trump.

 

Not surprised!

Also couldn't help but notice that a certain poster thought his opinion was so important, he felt compelled to start a new thread about how much he hates Justin Trudeau, despite the fact that a Thread about how unpopular JT is already exists.

 

Also, not surprised.

[Kragar]

On 10/28/2018 at 3:55 PM, Jimmy McGill said:

it is a social disease, thats unfortunately been politicized.

 

But really, who "needs" and AR-15 for personal use? no one. The logic has gone out the window a long time on guns. Gun people need their own gender they identify with them so much, maybe we can call them gunnies. 

 

I'm just happy we've managed to avoid the craziness up here for the most part in comparison with a few notable exceptions of course. 

What does "need" have to do with it?

[JM_]

8 minutes ago, Kragar said:

What does "need" have to do with it?

everything. 

[coastal.view]

On 10/28/2018 at 3:55 PM, Jimmy McGill said:

it is a social disease, thats unfortunately been politicized.

 

But really, who "needs" and AR-15 for personal use? no one. The logic has gone out the window a long time on guns. Gun people need their own gender they identify with them so much, maybe we can call them gunnies. 

 

I'm just happy we've managed to avoid the craziness up here for the most part in comparison with a few notable exceptions of course. 

nice

 

but maybe the usa could go a step further still

in line with trumpie's thinking and views

and just make it a legal requirement of every person in the usa

to carry a gun / weapon

so they can protect other law abiding citizens

from those bearing arms and using arms for not good purposes

[Warhippy]

3 hours ago, RUPERTKBD said:

Also couldn't help but notice that a certain poster thought his opinion was so important, he felt compelled to start a new thread about how much he hates Justin Trudeau, despite the fact that a Thread about how unpopular JT is already exists.

 

Also, not surprised.

People need attention.  Pre internet they'd simply be the quiet people at work.  Now they think that when they copy and paste someone else's opinion regardless of facts being completely incorrect that they've made a contribution.

 

Victim noises essentially made via digital medium.

[RUPERTKBD]

3 minutes ago, coastal.view said:

nice

 

but maybe the usa could go a step further still

in line with trumpie's thinking and views

and just make it a legal requirement of every person in the usa

to carry a gun / weapon

so they can protect other law abiding citizens

from those bearing arms and using arms for not good purposes

https://www.texasmonthly.com/politics/texas-town-makes-gun-ownership-the-law-sort-of/

 

 

Quote

 

Advocates for gun control want—according to opponents like the NRA—to take away your guns. While that’s probably not the case, leave it to a tiny Texas town to make gun ownership the law. Sort of. On Tuesday, the town, which happens to be named Gun Barrel City, passed a resolution to encourage all of its citizens to own a firearm.

Gun Barrel City, a small town on Cedar Creek Lake about 55 miles southeast of Dallas, made a statement in keeping with its Wild West name. The city council unanimously passed a nonbinding resolution urging its more than 5,000 residents to buy a firearm in order to show their support for the Second Amendment, reported NBC-DFW. Part of the resolution states:

In order to provide for and protect the safety, security, and general welfare of the city and its inhabitants, the city supports every head of household residing in the city limits to maintain a firearm, together with ammunition.

 

 

[RUPERTKBD]

2 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

People need attention.  Pre internet they'd simply be the quiet people at work.  Now they think that when they copy and paste someone else's opinion regardless of facts being completely incorrect that they've made a contribution.

 

Victim noises essentially made via digital medium.

TBH, I stopped reading at the word "traitor". Nothing shows that one has a pre-conceived bias better than a ridiculous overstatement intended to bolster an argument.

[Scottish⑦Canuck]

1 hour ago, Kragar said:

What does "need" have to do with it?

Need has everything to do with it.

[Kragar]

1 hour ago, Jimmy McGill said:

everything. 

Why?  There are plenty of things we have, or have access to, that we don't need yet are either inherently or potentially lethal to ourselves or others.  Why should AR-15s get special treatment?

 

Do we need sports cars?  Tobacco?  Alcohol?  Heroin?  Cocaine?  No, but we are trusted to use these things responsibly (of course, coke and heroin are not currently legal, but many advocate loosening restrictions), and all of which kill more than all long guns (not just AR-15s) down here.  And, given that there are about 15 million AR-15s in the US, it's not like were talking about a weapon that is particularly notorious (outside of the appearance the media gives them).

 

Apparently, all that really matters here are political optics.

 

Edit: adding @Scottish⑦Canuck, since it answers your recent reply too.

[Ryan Strome]

6 minutes ago, Kragar said:

Why?  There are plenty of things we have, or have access to, that we don't need yet are either inherently or potentially lethal to ourselves or others.  Why should AR-15s get special treatment?

 

Do we need sports cars?  Tobacco?  Alcohol?  Heroin?  Cocaine?  No, but we are trusted to use these things responsibly (of course, coke and heroin are not currently legal, but many advocate loosening restrictions), and all of which kill more than all long guns (not just AR-15s) down here.  And, given that there are about 15 million AR-15s in the US, it's not like were talking about a weapon that is particularly notorious (outside of the appearance the media gives them).

 

Apparently, all that really matters here are political optics.

 

Edit: adding @Scottish⑦Canuck, since it answers your recent reply too.

There is many who want to do far more than loosening restrictions. The guy you're debating with @Jimmy McGill proposes all drugs should be legal.

[Kragar]

11 minutes ago, Ryan Strome said:

There is many who want to do far more than loosening restrictions. The guy you're debating with @Jimmy McGill proposes all drugs should be legal.

I didn't want to make that assumption, but knew some here on CDC felt that way.

[PhillipBlunt]

13 minutes ago, Kragar said:

Why?  There are plenty of things we have, or have access to, that we don't need yet are either inherently or potentially lethal to ourselves or others.  Why should AR-15s get special treatment?

 

Do we need sports cars?  Tobacco?  Alcohol?  Heroin?  Cocaine?  No, but we are trusted to use these things responsibly (of course, coke and heroin are not currently legal, but many advocate loosening restrictions), and all of which kill more than all long guns (not just AR-15s) down here.  And, given that there are about 15 million AR-15s in the US, it's not like were talking about a weapon that is particularly notorious (outside of the appearance the media gives them).

 

Apparently, all that really matters here are political optics.

 

Edit: adding @Scottish⑦Canuck, since it answers your recent reply too.

Are any of the bolded items designed with the sole purpose of killing multiple human beings with the simple press of a trigger? No.

 

Certainly sports cars when driven improperly or recklessly can inflict fatal harm onto the driver and other occupants of the vehicle, as well as innocent bystanders. However the sports car is designed as a means of transportation.

 

Cigarettes are inherently useless, but for the most part, only inflict harm on those who smoke them, unless the person is rudely smoking in places where other people are. They are designed as a nicotine delivery system to get people hooked. They are horrible.

 

Alcohol is dangerous, if abused. Otherwise if consumed responsibly and in moderation, it's perfectly fine. Millions of people can have a glass of wine or beer and not lose their minds.

 

Cocaine and heroin are destructive substances and have been made illegal for that reason. Once again, the majority of the pain or damage caused is to the user only. There obviously is damage caused to the families of the addicts as well.

 

None of the aforementioned items have been used to kill multiple people in a fit of rage. A delivery van has been used, but once again, vehicles are designed as modes of transportation, and not weapons. An AR-15 has no other purpose. It's not an ideal gun for sustenance hunting. It's expressed purpose is to slaughter multiple human targets.

[PhillipBlunt]

21 minutes ago, Ryan Strome said:

There is many who want to do far more than loosening restrictions. The guy you're debating with @Jimmy McGill proposes all drugs should be legal.

Legalization of all substances has worked in countries in Europe, bringing down the level of deaths by overdose substantially. I'll look up some statistics and post later.

[Ryan Strome]

8 minutes ago, Kragar said:

I didn't want to make that assumption, but knew some here on CDC felt that way.

Oh I like Jimmy but I staunchly disagree with him on that and most things actually. I thought you made a very good point so I wanted to add that info and sit back and enjoy the debate.

[Ryan Strome]

2 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said:

Are any of the bolded items designed with the sole purpose of killing multiple human beings with the simple press of a trigger? No.

 

Certainly sports cars when driven improperly or recklessly can inflict fatal harm onto the driver and other occupants of the vehicle, as well as innocent bystanders. However the sports car is designed as a means of transportation.

 

Cigarettes are inherently useless, but for the most part, only inflict harm on those who smoke them, unless the person is rudely smoking in places where other people are. They are designed as a nicotine delivery system to get people hooked. They are horrible.

 

Alcohol is dangerous, if abused. Otherwise if consumed responsibly and in moderation, it's perfectly fine. Millions of people can have a glass of wine or beer and not lose their minds.

 

Cocaine and heroin are destructive substances and have been made illegal for that reason. Once again, the majority of the pain or damage caused is to the user only. There obviously is damage caused to the families of the addicts as well.

 

None of the aforementioned items have been used to kill multiple people in a fit of rage. A delivery van has been used, but once again, vehicles are designed as modes of transportation, and not weapons. An AR-15 has no other purpose. It's not an ideal gun for sustenance hunting. It's expressed purpose is to slaughter multiple human targets.

Heroine and cocaine imo.

[Ryan Strome]

1 minute ago, PhillipBlunt said:

Legalization of all substances has worked in countries in Europe, bringing down the level of deaths by overdose substantially. I'll look up some statistics and post later.

And you may be right but in this particular matter it won't change my mind. I want to see heavy drugs abolished not legalized.

[PhillipBlunt]

Just now, Ryan Strome said:

Heroine and cocaine imo.

They're designed to get people hooked on the drug and keep coming back for more. There is no doubt that both substances are destructive, but their purpose isn't to kill people.

 

That would be substances like anthrax or ricin that attack the body's systems upon ingestion or contact. Cocaine and heroin arguably cause the user to feel a state of euphoria initially, and then hook the user into a game of chase the dragon.