• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

ban the fucking guns

DG3 said:
The difference is that I stated fact and your push the "RrrRRrrrRR NOT ISIS" bullshit. It wasn't an act of war. He was clearly a whacked out lone wolf. ISIS didn't tell him to do it, but they clearly accomplished their mission of indoctrinating an American national with their ideologies. Then he killed 50 innocent people. He didn't just wake up and hate the gay population.
Click to expand...

According to his dad, he's been ranting about gays for a couple of months since seeing two guys making out in Miami.

His ex-wife and people at the gym also mention there might be some roids involved as well.

His trips to Saudi Arabia were each during the hajj.
 
DG3 said:
The difference is that I stated fact and your push the "RrrRRrrrRR NOT ISIS" bullshit. It wasn't an act of war. He was clearly a whacked out lone wolf. ISIS didn't tell him to do it, but they clearly accomplished their mission of indoctrinating an American national with their ideologies. Then he killed 50 innocent people. He didn't just wake up and hate the gay population.
Click to expand...

You seem to believe that his hatred for gay people and his admiration for ISIS coincide? The articles written about him show him as a hateful man with well documented anger issues and known feelings about Islamic extremism. I don't see how crediting his motivations to ISIS specifically serves a purpose, when he wasn't a member of ISIS, they didn't plan the attack, and when they don't exactly hold the patent for Islamic terrorism. But hell, if it entertains you to just keep typing "ISIS", then have at it, otherwise I don't get what you're doing here.
 
ImTheCaptain said:
it's honestly surprising there aren't lone wolf attacks on a daily basis; they could absolutely cripple our society with a cheap rifle and a couple boxes of ammo
Click to expand...

There are lone wolf attacks on a daily basis. They just don't get as much coverage as this one.

998 mass shootings (four people shot besides the gunman) since Sandy Hook. Yet that's a small percentage of gun deaths overall.

Guns are involved in all of them. Islamic extremists are only involved in a few.
 
PhDeac said:
There are lone wolf attacks on a daily basis. They just don't get as much coverage as this one.

998 mass shootings (four people shot besides the gunman) since Sandy Hook. Yet that's a small percentage of gun deaths overall.

Guns are involved in all of them. Islamic extremists are only involved in a few.
Click to expand...

indeed; i just meant an organized campaign of ISIS/AQ/etc. lone wolves
 
jhmd2000 said:
Slow down, champ. The question is a jumping off point, not a refutation. No one is arguing that nothing has changed since 1789. Deep breaths, and point by point, deal?

1. 1789: "There was naturally a distrust of government power,...." I'm willing to argue that all but the highest office in the land (including governor's offices in Ohio, Michigan and New Jersey) might be a clue that what "was", still "is" in 2016.

2. Guns are amoral. They don't distinguish between public and private overreach. The old man in South Chicago who can't keep his deadbolt from getting kicked in by junkies isn't worried about being forced to quarter redcoats in his Chiraq abode. Your limitation of a gun's utility to defense from the government might not solve his problem.

3. Nobody is saying that. Read the thread.
Click to expand...

Yes guns are amoral. But the government is not overreaching. The idea that people need guns to protect themselves from the government is just patently ludicrous these days. Yet I see it being made with a straight face by right wingers all the time.

If the government really wanted to oppress you, you would have no chance even with all the guns that you could purchase legally. That's why you never see any of these mass shooters getting away and going on to live their lives.
 
ImTheCaptain said:
indeed; i just meant an organized campaign of ISIS/AQ/etc. lone wolves
Click to expand...

Probably because there not nearly as many radical Islamists in the US as people seem to think or they're just big talkers on the Internets.
 
RJKarl said:
If people on the watch list couldn't buy weapons, he wouldn't have been able to walk into a gun store and buy the handgun or AK 47.
Click to expand...

I don't think anybody can walk into a gun store and buy an AK-47.

And that right there is part of the problem. It is difficult to have a rational discussion when people think that this dude was able to walk into a store and buy an AK-47.
 
2&2 Slider To Leyritz said:
I don't think anybody can walk into a gun store and buy an AK-47.

And that right there is part of the problem. It is difficult to have a rational discussion when people think that this dude was able to walk into a store and buy an AK-47.
Click to expand...

OK AR 15 or whatever the brand. Trying to play a game of semantics in cases like is the problem. You know what was meant.
 
RJKarl said:
OK AR 15 or whatever the brand. Trying to play a game of semantics in cases like is the problem. You know what was meant.
Click to expand...

I don't know why people get caught up on the AR-15 thing. It is just a semi-automatic rifle. It just happens to by styled like a military assault weapon. You can buy all kinds of other semi-automatic rifles that are just hunting guns but that could do just as much damage and fire just as quickly. It might have had an extra-large ammo capacity, I don't know - but that is a different issue.
 
scooter84 said:
I don't know why people get caught up on the AR-15 thing. It is just a semi-automatic rifle. It just happens to by styled like a military assault weapon. You can buy all kinds of other semi-automatic rifles that are just hunting guns but that could do just as much damage and fire just as quickly. It might have had an extra-large ammo capacity, I don't know - but that is a different issue.
Click to expand...

right, so AR15 is simply being used to mean "semi automatic rifles"

you know, kind of like calling soda a Coke

moving on
 
RJKarl said:
OK AR 15 or whatever the brand. Trying to play a game of semantics in cases like is the problem. You know what was meant.
Click to expand...

RJ, it DOES matter. You can't just flippantly say things like "OK AR 15 or whatever the brand" because it completely undermines what you're actually trying to say/suggest.
To make coherent statements about regulation, you have to understand the subject. Otherwise, you sound dumb to the people who likely have the items and know specifically what they are and what they can do and any point you're trying to make will get written off because "whatever, that guy doesn't even understand what he's talking about."
 
scooter84 said:
I don't know why people get caught up on the AR-15 thing. It is just a semi-automatic rifle. It just happens to by styled like a military assault weapon. You can buy all kinds of other semi-automatic rifles that are just hunting guns but that could do just as much damage and fire just as quickly. It might have had an extra-large ammo capacity, I don't know - but that is a different issue.
Click to expand...

ImTheCaptain said:
right, so AR15 is simply being used to mean "semi automatic rifles"

you know, kind of like calling soda a Coke

moving on
Click to expand...

again, it does kind of matter. people get hung up on the AR15s because they look scary... but there are hand guns with just as much capability of firing quickly.
If you're going to have a legitimate conversation about regulation, it is important to understand the differences of the actual machines.
 
scooter84 said:
I don't know why people get caught up on the AR-15 thing. It is just a semi-automatic rifle. It just happens to by styled like a military assault weapon. You can buy all kinds of other semi-automatic rifles that are just hunting guns but that could do just as much damage and fire just as quickly. It might have had an extra-large ammo capacity, I don't know - but that is a different issue.
Click to expand...

OK semi-automatic, military style rifles. The brand is irrelevant.
 
lbE08 said:
again, it does kind of matter. people get hung up on the AR15s because they look scary... but there are hand guns with just as much capability of firing quickly.
If you're going to have a legitimate conversation about regulation, it is important to understand the differences of the actual machines.
Click to expand...

i guess; it's really just a red herring that gun nuts use to redirect a conversation. if it wasn't a complaint about semantics it would be something else.

"it wasn't an AR-15, it was a reconfigured Colt M4 or an S&W MP15. god, can't even get the gun right how can we have a conversation"
 
ImTheCaptain said:
i guess; it's really just a red herring that gun nuts use to redirect a conversation. if it wasn't a complaint about semantics it would be something else.

"it wasn't an AR-15, it was a reconfigured Colt M4 or an S&W MP15. god, can't even get the gun right how can we have a conversation"
Click to expand...

BINGO...

It's like when elkman was so indignant about whether it was a a drum, magazine or clip or another term. Everyone knew what we were talking about. No device that has a capacity of over 15 rounds should be permitted.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top