• 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!

Mt. Tabor High Shooting

Proof that it has rabies is also required!

I think you might have the harder task, you must prove that you and an armed populace can defeat the United States Military, and that 50% of the military will defect to your side by the end of the week or you are Phony.
 
if only 50% of the military had defected to Malheur then we really could have stopped that government overreach on public land for ranchers
 
I'm interested to hear you expound on why you think high capacity magazines and automatic weapons (under your strange, limited exemption) are hands off?

No, I'm saying that Rafi's position is going to be inconsistent with my desire for unlimited magazine capacity.

Here's where I'm at generally - I think most of the lib-lefts on this board (it's basically just me that's lib-right in this thread), are worried about (1) [white] kids getting shot by other kids, and (2) gun violence much more generally. I question their resolve on (2), because I don't see them going to Chicago on the reg, or flipping out everytime two gang members kill each other.

Please, keep in mind that I defend felons in possession of a firearm every day. Gang violence isn't going to abate because we eliminate guns. We already 100% ban the possession (not the use; the mere possession) of a gun by (A) people who smoke marijuana [ever gang member ever], or (B) are under a DVPO (domestic violence stuffs). We do this now. Right now. A lot.

As to point (1), kids are going to do stupid things. We all know that. Kids certainly have inappropriate access to firearms. That's not a debatable point. "Banning" guns from schools, or otherwise legislating some form of gun "control" isn't going to stop kids from doing stupid things like shooting up a school.

So, I think as someone pointed out earlier (creamy?), it's a sociology issue. We could start by removing the incentives for shooting up a school (eliminate media-induced fame), and establish a stronger culture of "work out your aggressive differences in a different way.

For what it's worth, I think School zero tolerance policies toward fighting have increased gun violence. To an undeveloped teenage mind, if they are going to get suspended/expelled for a big fight, they might as well make it worth it. I'm not saying all kids think like this, but I'd be very interested in hearing interviews of one-off shootings like the one at Mt. Tabor.

I would really like to have the answer to the question, "if you were allowed to get in a fist fight with the boy/man you shot without anything more than the threat of detention, would you have still shot him?" "What if there were no consequences for the fight?"
 
Can you explain how/why it matters how many guns someone owns?

This the argument that I just don't understand. You can't effectively use more than one gun at a time. Why is everyone so bent out of shape about owning more than one?

It matters because the number of guns directly correlates to the size of the penis. One gun = tiny penis, but ten guns = micropenis.

Seriously, though, limiting the number of guns a person can own would reduce gun trafficking.


Also, sorry about your penis.

I go to Chicago on the reg (I'm there right now), and the Supreme Court's shit decision in McDonald that prevents common sense gun control, along with the inability to stop guns coming in from nearby podunk states like Indiana, are a very large part of the reason for the gun deaths here.
 
Last edited:
I used to go coon hunting all the time with a buddy of mine. He claimed he had the most cold nosed dog in 3 counties. Then one night it killed a skunk and my friend reacted like he found out his kid was prostituting himself out for meth. I've never seen anyone so disappointed. Plus my buddy didn't believe in dog boxes so the dog had to ride home in the cab of the pickup with us. The smell was so overwhelming that we had to pull over to the side of the road to puke twice.

Same dog bit a hole through my ear in the truck two weeks later, without even growling or anything. Just leaned over and bit a hole straight through the top of my ear.

So to answer your question, I'd probably shoot that coondog.
 
I think you might have the harder task, you must prove that you and an armed populace can defeat the United States Military, and that 50% of the military will defect to your side by the end of the week or you are Phony.

Wouldn't need 50%, or anywhere near that.

Can you imagine our military functioning without 25% of it's officers? Not only functioning without 25% of it's officers, but having a percentage of that percentage actively working against the remaining 75%?
 
If we armed the fetuses, the abortions would probably become a lot more complicated.
 
Can you explain how/why it matters how many guns someone owns?

This the argument that I just don't understand. You can't effectively use more than one gun at a time. Why is everyone so bent out of shape about owning more than one?

I don’t think people are bent out of shape on it, it’s just that having that many guns makes a lot of the arguments for needing guns sound ridiculous. It’s a collection of things that are fun to collect. Like having a collection of vintage cars, but arguing that they’re all needed because I have to drive to my job.
 
if only 25% of the military officers had defected to Malheur then we really could have stopped that government overreach on public land for ranchers
 
Wouldn't need 50%, or anywhere near that.

Can you imagine our military functioning without 25% of it's officers? Not only functioning without 25% of it's officers, but having a percentage of that percentage actively working against the remaining 75%?

This is what you, Skinny, and Ammon Bundy fantasize about on the reg.
 
I don’t understand this fetish for guerrilla warfare. It’s the same as prepping your bunker for nuclear winter. If shit has devolved into that outcome, everything is fucked, just take one of your 1000000 bullets and end it now.
 
For what it's worth, I think School zero tolerance policies toward fighting have increased gun violence. To an undeveloped teenage mind, if they are going to get suspended/expelled for a big fight, they might as well make it worth it. I'm not saying all kids think like this, but I'd be very interested in hearing interviews of one-off shootings like the one at Mt. Tabor.

I would really like to have the answer to the question, "if you were allowed to get in a fist fight with the boy/man you shot without anything more than the threat of detention, would you have still shot him?" "What if there were no consequences for the fight?"

Really? To address this odd turn - there are many fights at Mt Tabor. That's how this started.
 
People like this should not be allowed to own guns. There is never ever a need to come into a place of business armed in such a way. It's just to intimidate others and flex.

5eb842b59c1fb.image.jpg
 
It matters because the number of guns directly correlates to the size of the penis. One gun = tiny penis, but ten guns = micropenis.

Seriously, though, limiting the number of guns a person can own would reduce gun trafficking.


Also, sorry about your penis.

I go to Chicago on the reg (I'm there right now), and the Supreme Court's shit decision in McDonald that prevents common sense gun control, along with the inability to stop guns coming in from nearby podunk states like Indiana, are a very large part of the reason for the gun deaths here.

Limiting the number of guns that a person can own would have no impact on the gun trafficking activity that I observe in the federal district where I work.

I have a tiny penis. It has nothing to do with how many guns I own. I wish it did.
 
logical conclusion to this line of thinking manifests in shit like jan 6

where the number of cops and military officers who joined the coup fetish act didn't actually secure any sort of reduction in government power
 
No, I'm saying that Rafi's position is going to be inconsistent with my desire for unlimited magazine capacity.

Here's where I'm at generally - I think most of the lib-lefts on this board (it's basically just me that's lib-right in this thread), are worried about (1) [white] kids getting shot by other kids, and (2) gun violence much more generally. I question their resolve on (2), because I don't see them going to Chicago on the reg, or flipping out everytime two gang members kill each other.

I don't understand this. What would going to Chicago accomplish?

I can only speak for myself, but I am against all forms of gun violence. I strongly suspect everyone on here is.
 
People like this should not be allowed to own guns. There is never ever a need to come into a place of business armed in such a way. It's just to intimidate others and flex.

5eb842b59c1fb.image.jpg

This is not responsible gun use, and looks like it would be illegal in North Carolina.
 
Back
Top