• 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!

Ongoing gun violence/injury thread

It's been part of their playbook for over 20 years. It is truly unbelievable that anyone not directly profiting from the NRA would support them. Very similar to the oil or cigarette industry. And it's from the same party that calls everyone sheep. :plos:

https://www.npr.org/2022/05/25/1101401106/the-nras-secret-tapes

They literally call their followers "fruit cakes" but just rake in the blood money.
 
Last edited:
Biden gives a list of changes he wants passed. Lindsay Graham says he wants a vote. Chuck Schumer - I'll just assume is on vacation.
 
Arm the priests like God intended!

 
This was my cousin’s church while her husband was the CFO at Iowa State.
 
And either way, the ease (rapidity) of access to assault-style firearms and the shooter being unable to imagine a better solution are both tremendously problematic.
 
ConnorEl said:
While I agree with the sentiment generally, “proper” is quite an assumption in this case. I’d go with “satisfactory”.
Click to expand...

I agree. I don't know the particulars of the healthcare they were seeking. Were they sent home with out any care because they have an appointment in three days? Were they denied additional pain killers because the insurance company wouldn't cover it?
 
The shooter just had an appointment at the clinic the day before the shooting…so access generally doesn’t appear to have been the problem.


From what I’ve read, he wasn’t getting satisfactory relief from pain. Apparently he blamed his surgeon, either for the pain or the lack of relief…or both.



Here’s a piece that highlights a little bit about the deceased: link.
 
I think the provision of access to good/needed healthcare is a problem…something we could and should do better. And the problems/solutions are largely political, with our seeming inability to successfully address them reflecting our dysfunctional politics.

And I think the relatively easy access to assault weapons is a problem…also with political solutions whut seem unpossible due to our dysfunctional politics.

And I think the blame falls more on one side than the other for the dysfunctions preventing us from progress.

So I can see the connection but take issue with the language applied to this particular case.
 
mel-gibson-stupid.gif
 
ConnorEl said:
I think the provision of access to good/needed healthcare is a problem…something we could and should do better. And the problems/solutions are largely political, with our seeming inability to successfully address them reflecting our dysfunctional politics.

And I think the relatively easy access to assault weapons is a problem…also with political solutions whut seem unpossible due to our dysfunctional politics.

And I think the blame falls more on one side than the other for the dysfunctions preventing us from progress.

So I can see the connection but take issue with the language applied to this particular case.
Click to expand...

Right, the point of the 240 character tweet was the relative ease for accessing guns vs healthcare. It is was easier to get a gun, no matter how you look at it. For health care access you need, appointments, insurance, referrals, trained personnel, prescriptions, etc, for a gun you need a store and a credit card. Perhaps "proper" is the wrong word, but, the idea is correct.
 
Facebook post today of someone I know…


Well, if it wasn't clear to you before last night, it should be now. They are coming for your guns and mine. They'll start with the most effective weapons you already have to fight tyranny.
If you think it will stop there, you are mistaken.

Please don't say that I didn't warn you. You should have considered yourself warned last night, if you were paying attention. In case you didn't get it, I am making sure you do now.

Ban on high capacity magazines, 'assault rifles', is bad enough. But they want a national red flag law. Where someone who says they know you (but doesn't have to prove it) can say you are about to use your weapons in an unlawful manner (without really proving how they might know), a judge (or maybe just a law clerk) will sign the order, and law enforcers will come to remove every firearm you own (and maybe some to which they think you might have access regardless of ownership). By the way, EVERY one of these that is presented will be signed. Why do I think that? Because what Judge (or law clerk) is going to take the risk that they could have 'stopped' something (assuming that something would ever happen)? They will rubber stamp these as easily (if not more easily) than they rubber stamp restraining orders now.

You'll get a chance to get your guns back, in court, with a lawyer, assuming you can prove your case. By the way when the courts get backed up (they will) it will be a lot longer than 10 days to get that hearing.
Make NO mistake, they are coming for your guns and mine, and they won't wait for an amendment to the US constitution to nullify 'shall not be infringed'.

But, they will magically keep their guns used to by bodyguards, law enforcement, etc. to protect politicians, celebrities, and other IMPORTANT people, just watch.
You have been warned!
Click to expand...


Good grief.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top