Just because white people commit mass shootings doesn't mean that they have a mental illness. History is filled with examples of white people committing mass atrocities. White people used to call it colonization and manifest destiny. Now they call it mental illness.

Anonymous wrote:https://www.cnn.com/us/live-news/illinois-shooting-july-fourth-parade-07-04-22/2022

I grew up around highland park. It's white, safe and lots of money there. I cannot believe this. Shootings really can happen anywhere, so scary.

Just like the community Littleton and Parkland- white safe and lots of money. I guess wealthy white people aren't supposed to victims of crimes or criminals.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If it wasn’t with guns it would be with a truck like in Waukesha

The problem is that 35% of boys from 18-30 are sexless virgins and rising rapidly. A society full of angry frustrated young men will burn it all down

Is this correct? Banning abortion isn’t going to get them more sex.

And pro choice folks remind us that banning abortion doesn’t mean there won’t be abortions being performed anyway.

But then the same people think that banning guns means no one will be able to get a gun.


Cognitive dissonance, anyone?

In the perfect world there would be fewer guns and fewer abortions (which are at historic lows). Looking forward to the gun fetishists stepping up to support universal high quality healthcare necessary for pregnant mothers and children, as well as free and easy access to contraception. Arkansas, Alabama, Louisiana and Mississippi lead the nation in the rates of maternal and infant mortality. Pro life indeed?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If it wasn’t with guns it would be with a truck like in Waukesha

The problem is that 35% of boys from 18-30 are sexless virgins and rising rapidly. A society full of angry frustrated young men will burn it all down

Is this correct? Banning abortion isn’t going to get them more sex.

My question when I read right wing blogs and such (and I do, it’s important info although loathsome) is what’s going to happen to women when they won’t “voluntarily” have sex with men anymore? How will they attempt to compel women?

Adrian Vermuele is a leader in this movement. Harvard. Patrick Deneen, Norte Dame. They aren’t advocating for more choice but less. How much will they get away with it before the pendulum swings back?

Get them pregnant young, married and SAHM.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Very "timely" fro Hogan with love to Marylanders. Larry, next time the mass shooting happens in Md, it's on you.

Libs say they want in-depth background checks and waiting periods for guns, right ? Yes or no?

If yes, then all the people applying for MD permits will be subject to VERY in-depth background checks (I’m doing it in MD right now. Requires photo, 8 hours classroom training, range training, a demonstration of proficiency test, a firearm laws test, fingerprints, 3 non-family references and a application fee. Wait time is currently 90-120 days)

So that’s basically what libs want for guns, right? This is the exact stuff they say should be required for a gun. And that’s what everyone applying for a MD permit is doing.


But NOW it’s not good enough. Now it’s a problem. All the stuff you all said you wanted in the past, isn’t enough now.


Please explain why the goalposts have wheels on them.

No moving of goalposts, these are laws that have been on the books for more than 100 years.

With respect to MD's in-depth background check, there is nothing there that could have prevented the recent mass shooters. But a good and reasonable clause would have.

Yes. Now it’s time to get rid of all personally owned firearms and ammunition, as well as the second amendment. Heller was a travesty. Too many people are dying.

So how do you think such a thing will be achieved?

Even if you repealed the second amendment - which is incredibly doubtful anyway - how do you propose to remove the 400,000,000 guns from the 90 million people who own them?

Existing criminals can’t even be disarmed right now. What expectations do you have for disarming 1/3 of this country’s population who were formerly law-abiding who you transformed *into being criminals* when you made their guns illegal?

It’s just not going happen.

And definitely the right thing to do about hard problems is to just throw our hands up in the air, say it's impossible, and, I guess, start sending our kids to school in flak jackets. This is a solvable problem if our society wanted to solve it. At issue isn't how we solve it, it's whether we want to.

This tells us everything (from: https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/10/2/16399418/america-mass-shooting-gun-violence-statistics-charts):

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Very "timely" fro Hogan with love to Marylanders. Larry, next time the mass shooting happens in Md, it's on you.

Libs say they want in-depth background checks and waiting periods for guns, right ? Yes or no?

If yes, then all the people applying for MD permits will be subject to VERY in-depth background checks (I’m doing it in MD right now. Requires photo, 8 hours classroom training, range training, a demonstration of proficiency test, a firearm laws test, fingerprints, 3 non-family references and a application fee. Wait time is currently 90-120 days)

So that’s basically what libs want for guns, right? This is the exact stuff they say should be required for a gun. And that’s what everyone applying for a MD permit is doing.


But NOW it’s not good enough. Now it’s a problem. All the stuff you all said you wanted in the past, isn’t enough now.


Please explain why the goalposts have wheels on them.

No moving of goalposts, these are laws that have been on the books for more than 100 years.

With respect to MD's in-depth background check, there is nothing there that could have prevented the recent mass shooters. But a good and reasonable clause would have.

Yes. Now it’s time to get rid of all personally owned firearms and ammunition, as well as the second amendment. Heller was a travesty. Too many people are dying.

So how do you think such a thing will be achieved?

Even if you repealed the second amendment - which is incredibly doubtful anyway - how do you propose to remove the 400,000,000 guns from the 90 million people who own them?

Existing criminals can’t even be disarmed right now. What expectations do you have for disarming 1/3 of this country’s population who were formerly law-abiding who you transformed *into being criminals* when you made their guns illegal?

It’s just not going happen.

she wants the police and military to go door and door and take massive casualties facing desertions and further radicalizing this country into a total war zone.

You buy them back. People who insist on retaining them illegally get prosecuted when caught in possession. Countless countries have done this successfully, many of them are developing countries.

i hope you have a passport out of the country if that ever happens

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Very "timely" fro Hogan with love to Marylanders. Larry, next time the mass shooting happens in Md, it's on you.

Libs say they want in-depth background checks and waiting periods for guns, right ? Yes or no?

If yes, then all the people applying for MD permits will be subject to VERY in-depth background checks (I’m doing it in MD right now. Requires photo, 8 hours classroom training, range training, a demonstration of proficiency test, a firearm laws test, fingerprints, 3 non-family references and a application fee. Wait time is currently 90-120 days)

So that’s basically what libs want for guns, right? This is the exact stuff they say should be required for a gun. And that’s what everyone applying for a MD permit is doing.


But NOW it’s not good enough. Now it’s a problem. All the stuff you all said you wanted in the past, isn’t enough now.


Please explain why the goalposts have wheels on them.

No moving of goalposts, these are laws that have been on the books for more than 100 years.

With respect to MD's in-depth background check, there is nothing there that could have prevented the recent mass shooters. But a good and reasonable clause would have.

Yes. Now it’s time to get rid of all personally owned firearms and ammunition, as well as the second amendment. Heller was a travesty. Too many people are dying.

So how do you think such a thing will be achieved?

Even if you repealed the second amendment - which is incredibly doubtful anyway - how do you propose to remove the 400,000,000 guns from the 90 million people who own them?

Existing criminals can’t even be disarmed right now. What expectations do you have for disarming 1/3 of this country’s population who were formerly law-abiding who you transformed *into being criminals* when you made their guns illegal?

It’s just not going happen.

she wants the police and military to go door and door and take massive casualties facing desertions and further radicalizing this country into a total war zone.

You buy them back. People who insist on retaining them illegally get prosecuted when caught in possession. Countless countries have done this successfully, many of them are developing countries.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Very "timely" fro Hogan with love to Marylanders. Larry, next time the mass shooting happens in Md, it's on you.

Libs say they want in-depth background checks and waiting periods for guns, right ? Yes or no?

If yes, then all the people applying for MD permits will be subject to VERY in-depth background checks (I’m doing it in MD right now. Requires photo, 8 hours classroom training, range training, a demonstration of proficiency test, a firearm laws test, fingerprints, 3 non-family references and a application fee. Wait time is currently 90-120 days)

So that’s basically what libs want for guns, right? This is the exact stuff they say should be required for a gun. And that’s what everyone applying for a MD permit is doing.


But NOW it’s not good enough. Now it’s a problem. All the stuff you all said you wanted in the past, isn’t enough now.


Please explain why the goalposts have wheels on them.

We will be litigating for the foreseeable future whether these requirements are deeply rooted in the nation’s history and traditions. The activist justices will again cherry-pick instances where there were no such restrictions and strike them down, one-by-one, just like they read “well-regulated militia” out of the Bill of Rights. Not even Robert Bork himself took that position. Did you need a background check to purchase a musket in 1790? Nope. Then it’s unconstitutional. Did you have to demonstrate proficiency and was training required? Nope. Then it’s unconstitutional.

I get it’s cool to play the victim but it was Heller that moved the goalposts after 200+ years. SCOTUS has kept moving them. And will continue to do so until there are no meaningful restrictions on openly carrying an automatic rifle anywhere other than the US Capitol snd Supreme Court buildings occupied by Trumpists.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If it wasn’t with guns it would be with a truck like in Waukesha

The problem is that 35% of boys from 18-30 are sexless virgins and rising rapidly. A society full of angry frustrated young men will burn it all down

Is this correct? Banning abortion isn’t going to get them more sex.

And pro choice folks remind us that banning abortion doesn’t mean there won’t be abortions being performed anyway.

But then the same people think that banning guns means no one will be able to get a gun.


Cognitive dissonance, anyone?

You clearly misunderstand what “cognitive dissonance” means. The two are not comparable. You know why no one uses machine guns anymore? Because they’re banned. Anthrax scares? Banned. Lawn darts? Banned. Most automatic weapons? Banned. Hand grenades? Banned.

Removing any item from the supply chair does in fact work and has always worked. That is in no way comparable to a simple medical procedure.

+1.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Very "timely" fro Hogan with love to Marylanders. Larry, next time the mass shooting happens in Md, it's on you.

Libs say they want in-depth background checks and waiting periods for guns, right ? Yes or no?

If yes, then all the people applying for MD permits will be subject to VERY in-depth background checks (I’m doing it in MD right now. Requires photo, 8 hours classroom training, range training, a demonstration of proficiency test, a firearm laws test, fingerprints, 3 non-family references and a application fee. Wait time is currently 90-120 days)

So that’s basically what libs want for guns, right? This is the exact stuff they say should be required for a gun. And that’s what everyone applying for a MD permit is doing.


But NOW it’s not good enough. Now it’s a problem. All the stuff you all said you wanted in the past, isn’t enough now.


Please explain why the goalposts have wheels on them.

No moving of goalposts, these are laws that have been on the books for more than 100 years.

With respect to MD's in-depth background check, there is nothing there that could have prevented the recent mass shooters. But a good and reasonable clause would have.

Yes. Now it’s time to get rid of all personally owned firearms and ammunition, as well as the second amendment. Heller was a travesty. Too many people are dying.

So how do you think such a thing will be achieved?

Even if you repealed the second amendment - which is incredibly doubtful anyway - how do you propose to remove the 400,000,000 guns from the 90 million people who own them?

Existing criminals can’t even be disarmed right now. What expectations do you have for disarming 1/3 of this country’s population who were formerly law-abiding who you transformed *into being criminals* when you made their guns illegal?

It’s just not going happen.

she wants the police and military to go door and door and take massive casualties facing desertions and further radicalizing this country into a total war zone.

Who is “she”?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If it wasn’t with guns it would be with a truck like in Waukesha

The problem is that 35% of boys from 18-30 are sexless virgins and rising rapidly. A society full of angry frustrated young men will burn it all down

Is this correct? Banning abortion isn’t going to get them more sex.

And pro choice folks remind us that banning abortion doesn’t mean there won’t be abortions being performed anyway.

But then the same people think that banning guns means no one will be able to get a gun.


Cognitive dissonance, anyone?

Cognitive dissonance on your part yes. Your comparison and logic is specious. Look at Australia and UK. Those are the models for gun control.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Very "timely" fro Hogan with love to Marylanders. Larry, next time the mass shooting happens in Md, it's on you.

Libs say they want in-depth background checks and waiting periods for guns, right ? Yes or no?

If yes, then all the people applying for MD permits will be subject to VERY in-depth background checks (I’m doing it in MD right now. Requires photo, 8 hours classroom training, range training, a demonstration of proficiency test, a firearm laws test, fingerprints, 3 non-family references and a application fee. Wait time is currently 90-120 days)

So that’s basically what libs want for guns, right? This is the exact stuff they say should be required for a gun. And that’s what everyone applying for a MD permit is doing.


But NOW it’s not good enough. Now it’s a problem. All the stuff you all said you wanted in the past, isn’t enough now.


Please explain why the goalposts have wheels on them.

No moving of goalposts, these are laws that have been on the books for more than 100 years.

With respect to MD's in-depth background check, there is nothing there that could have prevented the recent mass shooters. But a good and reasonable clause would have.

Yes. Now it’s time to get rid of all personally owned firearms and ammunition, as well as the second amendment. Heller was a travesty. Too many people are dying.

So how do you think such a thing will be achieved?

Even if you repealed the second amendment - which is incredibly doubtful anyway - how do you propose to remove the 400,000,000 guns from the 90 million people who own them?

Existing criminals can’t even be disarmed right now. What expectations do you have for disarming 1/3 of this country’s population who were formerly law-abiding who you transformed *into being criminals* when you made their guns illegal?

It’s just not going happen.

she wants the police and military to go door and door and take massive casualties facing desertions and further radicalizing this country into a total war zone.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If it wasn’t with guns it would be with a truck like in Waukesha

The problem is that 35% of boys from 18-30 are sexless virgins and rising rapidly. A society full of angry frustrated young men will burn it all down

Is this correct? Banning abortion isn’t going to get them more sex.

And pro choice folks remind us that banning abortion doesn’t mean there won’t be abortions being performed anyway.

But then the same people think that banning guns means no one will be able to get a gun.


Cognitive dissonance, anyone?

You clearly misunderstand what “cognitive dissonance” means. The two are not comparable. You know why no one uses machine guns anymore? Because they’re banned. Anthrax scares? Banned. Lawn darts? Banned. Most automatic weapons? Banned. Hand grenades? Banned.

Removing any item from the supply chair does in fact work and has always worked. That is in no way comparable to a simple medical procedure.