Anonymous wrote:

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.

We in fact own several machineguns. Some are mine, the others are family heirlooms, including an MG-34 that my W’s grandfather captured in Bastogne after he singlehandedly killed the pair of Germans operating it, earning him a Bronze Star with V-Device.

Oh, we still have some lawn darts, too.

Anthrax? Nah. No use for that.

Wow, man. Such history. I’m saluting you and your wife and her heirlooms from here. Sir, you are a reasonable and exceedingly intelligent person. I think everyone should have heirlooms and darts, and should, legally, be able to define those things as they choose and exercise their ownership of same in a well-regulated manner. Thank you, sir, for the service you allegedly married into, in a tale worthy of Hogan’s Heroes, and for making these issues so simple. Thank you.

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Ok, let’s go along with this for a second:


Make all guns illegal. Prosecute (and then imprison) anyone caught possessing one.


How many prisons do you plan on building? There’s currently 2 million people incarcerated in the country right now.

There are 90 million adults in this country who own guns. Let’s say 20% of them just refuse to give them up. Let’s say half of that group get prosecuted for it and sent to jail.

That’s 9 million people you’ll have to put in prison. The entire population of NYC.


Where are you going to put all of them? What’s going to happen to the economy when you take that many people out of it? What about their families/dependents? Who takes care of them? Do their kids go into foster care? What becomes of their property? Will 9 million foreclosures affect your home value? Extrapolate this into every segment of society that will be affected by a sudden void of millions of people.

How’s this work? I’d really like to hear your answers.


But what you’ll probably do is just call me a “racist” or a “fascist” or maybe both, instead.

why put them in prison? just deduct a monthly fine directly from their pay check and publish their names

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is this in the politics forum?

Because it raises the question of America's rampant unregulated gun crisis.

" mental Health " services are clearly needed- as is paid 18 month maternity leave, subsidized child care and free health care so that parents can be something other than working slaves....( both parents working 12 hour days with kids in day care)

BUT , in meantime, since these interventions will take YEARS to make an impact : Ban the Assault Weapons now

because , clearly, as this Highland Park case demonstrates - this disturbed white male was able to buy multiple assault rifles EVEN AFTER the Police were called to his house in 2019 and confiscated 17 knives....

Just Ban the damn Assault Weapons Nationwide or resign from Congress because you have failed your country !

Illinois law enforcement interacted with shooting suspect Robert E. Crimo III twice before a mass shooting at a Fourth of July parade in Highland Park on Monday, police said.

Crimo is in custody and has not yet been charged in connection to the shooting.

Deputy Chief Christopher Covelli, a spokesperson for the Lake County Sheriff’s Office, said in April 2019, someone contacted the Highland Park Police Department a week after learning that Crimo had attempted to die by suicide.

Since it was a delayed report, Covelli said police went to his house and spoke with Crimo and his parents.

"The matter was being handled by mental health professionals at that time. There was no law enforcement action to be taken. It was a mental health issue handled by those professionals," Covelli said.

He said the second interaction happened in September 2019 when a family member reported that Crimo had a collection of knives and he said "he was going to kill everyone."

"The police responded to his residence. The police removed 16 knives, a dagger and a sword from Crimo's home," Covelli said, adding that at that time, there was no probable cause to arrest Crimo because there were no complaints that were signed by any of the victims.

Anonymous wrote:

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?

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?

Why would they support your rights that YOU care about?

You didn’t support them in the rights THEY cared about. You’ve actively worked and advocated to take them away.

Now you expect them to come to your side?

Smooth Brain Society

Ah, yes. The latest mass shooting thread. They are all starting to blur a little. So quickly these threads get bogged down by trolls with an agenda until they fall off page 1 of the politics forum.
Maybe one day, there will be so many of these threads, they won't be able to hide all of them.

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.

Ok, let’s go along with this for a second:


Make all guns illegal. Prosecute (and then imprison) anyone caught possessing one.


How many prisons do you plan on building? There’s currently 2 million people incarcerated in the country right now.

There are 90 million adults in this country who own guns. Let’s say 20% of them just refuse to give them up. Let’s say half of that group get prosecuted for it and sent to jail.

That’s 9 million people you’ll have to put in prison. The entire population of NYC.


Where are you going to put all of them? What’s going to happen to the economy when you take that many people out of it? What about their families/dependents? Who takes care of them? Do their kids go into foster care? What becomes of their property? Will 9 million foreclosures affect your home value? Extrapolate this into every segment of society that will be affected by a sudden void of millions of people.

How’s this work? I’d really like to hear your answers.


But what you’ll probably do is just call me a “racist” or a “fascist” or maybe both, instead.

A 7th victim has died.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

np. No, but most people don't get engaged with an issue until they feel the consequences. This makes it very real for that demographic.

A deranged shooter fired 200 rounds into a NW DC school in April and it barely made the national news.

I was wondering what happened with the Van Ness shooter investigation as it seemed that there were common threads with this Highland Park murderer (but I am not super familiar with these online groups that these young men are following).

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?

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?

Why would they support your rights that YOU care about?

You didn’t support them in the rights THEY cared about. You’ve actively worked and advocated to take them away.

Now you expect them to come to your side?

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.

We in fact own several machineguns. Some are mine, the others are family heirlooms, including an MG-34 that my W’s grandfather captured in Bastogne after he singlehandedly killed the pair of Germans operating it, earning him a Bronze Star with V-Device.

Oh, we still have some lawn darts, too.

Anthrax? Nah. No use for that.

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.

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):

+100. We can solve the problem, but we don't want to. The pro-death-by-firearm minority just doesn't care. We could lose a classroom full of 1st graders every day, and their right to carry a gun would still be more important.

Just don’t dare attempt to exercise your First Amendment rights near the home of a Supreme Court justice.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

np. No, but most people don't get engaged with an issue until they feel the consequences. This makes it very real for that demographic.

A deranged shooter fired 200 rounds into a NW DC school in April and it barely made the national news.

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.

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):

The gslaxybrains inhabiting the rightwing multiverse think the answer lies in a single door, teachers strapped with semiautomatic pistols and highly armed combat veterans patrolling our schools. Perfect.

Anonymous wrote:

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.

np. No, but most people don't get engaged with an issue until they feel the consequences. This makes it very real for that demographic.