At least 8 people shot & killed in Allen, TX mall today

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Perhaps dems should take republicans at their word and propose some bills to require extensive mental health exams before you can get a firearms license, with annual re-exams.

Here’s an easy mental health test. The kind of people who want to own assault weapons are the exact people we shouldn’t be selling them to. Has anyone ever given a reasonable explanation as to why civilians need to own military grade assault weapons? You can’t hunt with them. You don’t need an assault weapon to kill a single intruder. No, assault weapons are only for killing many people very quickly. Red flag right there.

I can tell you don't own a firearm.

They are hunting rifles. And, many people buy them for self defense.
These are not "military grade assault weapons."
Study up.
https://www.nssf.org/msr/

Hunting grade school kids…amirite?

[Anonymous]

Marjorie Taylor Greene was going on about the shooter having "gang tattoos."

I guess she would know... because they're her gang.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Perhaps dems should take republicans at their word and propose some bills to require extensive mental health exams before you can get a firearms license, with annual re-exams.

Here’s an easy mental health test. The kind of people who want to own assault weapons are the exact people we shouldn’t be selling them to. Has anyone ever given a reasonable explanation as to why civilians need to own military grade assault weapons? You can’t hunt with them. You don’t need an assault weapon to kill a single intruder. No, assault weapons are only for killing many people very quickly. Red flag right there.

I can tell you don't own a firearm.

They are hunting rifles. And, many people buy them for self defense.
These are not "military grade assault weapons."
Study up.
https://www.nssf.org/msr/

What a bunch of BS. I came from a military family, and we are hunters. We do not need nor use AR-15s for hunting, nor for self defense. In fact you don't even need a semi-auto rifle. Bolt actions work just fine for those of us who know what we're doing. AR-15s are for nutjobs and poseurs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Perhaps dems should take republicans at their word and propose some bills to require extensive mental health exams before you can get a firearms license, with annual re-exams.

Here’s an easy mental health test. The kind of people who want to own assault weapons are the exact people we shouldn’t be selling them to. Has anyone ever given a reasonable explanation as to why civilians need to own military grade assault weapons? You can’t hunt with them. You don’t need an assault weapon to kill a single intruder. No, assault weapons are only for killing many people very quickly. Red flag right there.

I can tell you don't own a firearm.

They are hunting rifles. And, many people buy them for self defense.
These are not "military grade assault weapons."
Study up.
https://www.nssf.org/msr/

What a bunch of BS. I came from a military family, and we are hunters. We do not need nor use AR-15s for hunting, nor for self defense. In fact you don't even need a semi-auto rifle. Bolt actions work just fine for those of us who know what we're doing. AR-15s are for nutjobs and poseurs.

Yep, they’re mainly for folks who want to play “pretend soldier”.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Marjorie Taylor Greene was going on about the shooter having "gang tattoos."

I guess she would know... because they're her gang.

Also: he lived with his mother and identified as an "incel."

But who are we to stand between incel mass shooters who want to take out their loserdom on innocent people?

Our precious Second Amendment! AR-15s for everyone! MAGA!

Keep voting Republican ladies!

[Anonymous]

What a bunch of BS. I came from a military family, and we are hunters. We do not need nor use AR-15s for hunting, nor for self defense. In fact you don't even need a semi-auto rifle. Bolt actions work just fine for those of us who know what we're doing. AR-15s are for nutjobs and poseurs.


Yep, they’re mainly for folks who want to play “pretend soldier”.

But don't forget: Mass shooters and school shooters loooovvve AR-15s. And they're soooo easy to get. You do you, America!

[Anonymous]

I still want to know what a female court is. PP hasn’t answered.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Perhaps dems should take republicans at their word and propose some bills to require extensive mental health exams before you can get a firearms license, with annual re-exams.

Here’s an easy mental health test. The kind of people who want to own assault weapons are the exact people we shouldn’t be selling them to. Has anyone ever given a reasonable explanation as to why civilians need to own military grade assault weapons? You can’t hunt with them. You don’t need an assault weapon to kill a single intruder. No, assault weapons are only for killing many people very quickly. Red flag right there.

I can tell you don't own a firearm.

They are hunting rifles. And, many people buy them for self defense.
These are not "military grade assault weapons."
Study up.
https://www.nssf.org/msr/

And, many people buy them for self defense.

And some people buy them to commit mass shootings.

Incel ammosexuals unite! An AR-15 is better than a girlfriend! MAGA!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Perhaps dems should take republicans at their word and propose some bills to require extensive mental health exams before you can get a firearms license, with annual re-exams.

Here’s an easy mental health test. The kind of people who want to own assault weapons are the exact people we shouldn’t be selling them to. Has anyone ever given a reasonable explanation as to why civilians need to own military grade assault weapons? You can’t hunt with them. You don’t need an assault weapon to kill a single intruder. No, assault weapons are only for killing many people very quickly. Red flag right there.

I can tell you don't own a firearm.

They are hunting rifles. And, many people buy them for self defense.
These are not "military grade assault weapons."
Study up.
https://www.nssf.org/msr/

I can tell you are a douchebag.

Can't get a girlfriend, but can get an AR-15. You guys are soooo cool.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So he’s a Hispanic white supremacist who targeted whites ?

“The FBI’s “review and triage of the subject’s social media accounts revealed hundreds of postings and images to include writings with racially or ethnically motivated violent extremist rhetoric, including neo-Nazi materials and material espousing the supremacy of the white race,” the bulletin reads.

The document also says the alleged shooter was discharged from the military in 2008 amid “mental health concerns.”

Investigators believe the shooter was a neo-Nazi and an “incel,” according to an internal email circulated by Texas law enforcement.”

so, the military knew he had mental health issues but he was still able to buy a gun. MAGA.

And, he worked as a state-licensed armed security guard to boot, meaning Texas would have trusted him enough to guard an elementary school.

This country has to take screening of people entrusted with guns much, much more seriously.

Right, the Army didn’t trust him, but security firms did. And I know many people in our deep blue area who want to put security firms into the role of school resource officers. No thank you!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The families of victims need to be able to sue the manufacturers of assault weapons. Remove the profitability of those weapons. It’s the only chance we have of making real change.

Sandy Hook parents have started this process… there’s a slight chance this could happen.

It’s been 10 yrs! I think there are currently laws preventing this -protecting the manufacturers!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:BAN MAIMING AMMUNITION - specifically 5.56x45mm NATO and .223 Remington rounds. Go after the *specifically and purposefully maiming ammunition used by modular semiautomatic rifles,* just as we've successfully done with armor-piercing ammunition.

Firearm experts are correct when they say that the semiautomatic AR-15 rifle is not a military weapon. The actual Army M4 RIFLE
can fire in fully-automatic and three-shot burst modes. *BUT,* both fire the *SAME MILITARY ROUND.*

*5.56x45mm NATO and .223 Remington rounds* should be illegal outside of military contexts. It's not a hunting round, and it's not necessary to remove limbs, destroy all internal organs, or obliterate heads in order to pursue self-protection.

This is correct, and the only thing that may work imo.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Perhaps dems should take republicans at their word and propose some bills to require extensive mental health exams before you can get a firearms license, with annual re-exams.

But this is exactly what they don’t want. They’ve struck down restrictions aimed at limiting access for those with mental health issues, criminal records, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Perhaps dems should take republicans at their word and propose some bills to require extensive mental health exams before you can get a firearms license, with annual re-exams.

But this is exactly what they don’t want. They’ve struck down restrictions aimed at limiting access for those with mental health issues, criminal records, etc.

+1 This was literally the first thing the Republicans did when they got the House, Senate and White House in 2017.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The families of victims need to be able to sue the manufacturers of assault weapons. Remove the profitability of those weapons. It’s the only chance we have of making real change.

Sandy Hook parents have started this process… there’s a slight chance this could happen.

It’s been 10 yrs! I think there are currently laws preventing this -protecting the manufacturers!

The Sandy Hook families got a huge settlement a year ago despite the laws. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/15/nyregion/sandy-hook-families-settlement.html