Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
you mean for someone who doesn't know shit about firearms but thinks he has the right to tell others what forearms they need or don't need.The post never said it was. Wow, this is why people complsin with stupid people running around with these weapons.The .223 is a 22 caliber round you idiotPretty dogs carry the black plague… There are far too many of them, they deserve to die...
PRAIRIE dogs...can be hunted with a friggin .22. Hell you can use a tube loaded semi-auto for all I care. You can use a lever action 30-30 if you want to pay a buck a shot.
You DON'T need an assault weapon.
But note...Rustic SELLS guns so it's in his interest to sell as many as possible
LUsh said use a .22 instead of a .223 you moron so obviously he she it doesn't realize that a .223 is a .22 caliber round
Easy mistake for someone not obsessed with firearms. Talk about velocity and size of magazine being used, and the type of long gun being used.
Yep, and then after we've saved ourselves in a crime situation that 99.9 % of the time the lefties created for us, we will just be sitting back and waiting for the law to arrive while they are still out there making wrong turns after they leave the donut shop trying to get here to us.The gun manufacturers solutions to mass shootings?
MORE, FREAKING GUNS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What happened to the perp you ask ???
Well let's just say that the perp needs an ambulance, and that was the second call after the call to the police went out.
Except that's not how it works in reality. In LaLa Land, every dude with a gun is a good guy and always does good. In reality, not everyone is a good guy with a gun and sometimes petty arguments are settle with the gun. I don't know where you got your 99.9 figure from but I can bet it would be quite painful if you place it back in the area from whence it came.
But wouldn't you agree that most Americans (regardless of the percentage you think) use their guns for recreational or good purposes?
It's like the internet we are communicating on now. It's very beneficial for most of us. But some will use this great tool for nefarious ways. Some will be looking up how to make a bomb, some will be downloading child porn, some will use it to bully or get even with somebody on social media, some will use it to scam people out of money or steal their credit cards.
This wonderful internet cost lives as well, but we don't need government regulation to try and fix the problems. Like guns, it won't work. Like guns, you would be taking away liberty from hundreds of millions of good folks. Like guns, you would be giving them limitations as to where they are allowed to go. Like guns, you would be taking the enjoyment of using this great technology.
Thus, hoplophobes are causing mass shootings.Crimea 2 weeks ago, 5 shot, pump action shotgun against college students.... 21 dead.
Can you read?
IN THIS COUNTRY
The Crimea attack occurred across the street from a police station and the response was incredibly slow.
The Pittsburg shooting that just occurred was responded to in like TWO minutes
W Virginia was NOT a shotgun attack stupid. You evene noted that
And you refuse to understand it isn't the weapon...it is the choice of target....mainly the gun free status.
I showed you that the 5 shot, pump action shotgun, an actual weapon of war, killed more people than the AR-15 at Parkland, showing that you have no point...your argument has no basis in fact...
And again...the Synagogue shooting...AR-15.... 11 people killed.
Crimea...pump action shotgun, 5 shot before reloading....21 people killed.
Virginia Tech...2 pistols.....32 people killed.
Luby's cafe....2 pistols....24 people killed.
And you keep pretending gun-free zones are not raising the body count.The point that flew right over your blunt little head is that a person hell bent on killing people doesn't need a rifle and if you ban one weapon then that person who is hell bent on murder will simply use a different weapon
And you keep pretending that all weapons are equal.
They aren't
A baseball bat is a weapon...but much less lethal than a machine gun. No?
A shot gun is lethal...but far less lethal than a semi-auto magazine fed assault weapon
BullshitIf we had strong gun control there probably wouldn’t have been a shooting at all. These things are rare with strong gun control. Also the guy killed a highly trained officer. Someone probably would have met the same fate.If someone in that bar had been armed besides the gunman many of those people would be alive now.
Great plan. A fortress door for everyone. All because you fucking idiots need a semi automatic rifle to play with. Get all beered Up & shoot bottles.and nothing you propose will do that
Get rid of a rifle and a different rifle will be used
Get rid of that rifle and a different rifle will be used
A mass shooter will just walk in to a school with a couple handguns and a shitload of magazines or a bullpup shotgun with an 18 shot capacity etc etc etc
The only thing that's going to stop anyone from shooting up a place is to not let them in in the first place
Ban these rifles, limit the capacity of all magazines. Take guns from people with violent records, Advance mental screening for concealed carry.
And you have been shown through actual research that banning these rifles is stupid, and that magazine bans are stupid too, they do nothing at all.....yet you blindly hate guns and will do anything you can to ban them....
Assault weapon ban....
https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/204431.pdf
The decline in the use of AWs has been due primarily to a reduction in the use of assault pistols (APs), which are used in crime more commonly than assault rifles (ARs). There has not been a clear decline in the use of ARs, though assessments are complicated by the rarity of crimes with these weapons and by substitution of post-ban rifles that are very similar to the banned AR models.
--------
Should it be renewed, the ban’s effects on gun violence are likely to be small at best and perhaps too small for reliable measurement. AWs were rarely used in gun crimes even before the ban.
Magazine capacity...no bearing on the deaths in mass shootings...
SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class journal research
Large-Capacity Magazines and the Casualty Counts in Mass Shootings: The Plausibility of Linkages by Gary Kleck :: SSRN
Do bans on large-capacity magazines (LCMs) for semiautomatic firearms have significant potential for reducing the number of deaths and injuries in mass shootings?
The most common rationale for an effect of LCM use is that they allow mass killers to fire many rounds without reloading.
LCMs are used is less than 1/3 of 1% of mass shootings.
News accounts of 23 shootings in which more than six people were killed or wounded and LCMs were used, occurring in the U.S. in 1994-2013, were examined.
There was only one incident in which the shooter may have been stopped by bystander intervention when he tried to reload.
In all of these 23 incidents the shooter possessed either multiple guns or multiple magazines, meaning that the shooter, even if denied LCMs, could have continued firing without significant interruption by either switching loaded guns or by changing smaller loaded magazines with only a 2-4 second delay for each magazine change.
Finally, the data indicate that mass shooters maintain slow enough rates of fire such that the time needed to reload would not increase the time between shots and thus the time available for prospective victims to escape.
--------
We did not employ the oft-used definition of “mass murder” as a homicide in which four or more victims were killed, because most of these involve just four to six victims (Duwe 2007), which could therefore have involved as few as six rounds fired, a number that shooters using even ordinary revolvers are capable of firing without reloading.
LCMs obviously cannot help shooters who fire no more rounds than could be fired without LCMs, so the inclusion of “nonaffectable” cases with only four to six victims would dilute the sample, reducing the percent of sample incidents in which an LCM might have affected the number of casualties.
Further, had we studied only homicides with four or more dead victims, drawn from the FBI’s Supplementary Homicide Reports, we would have missed cases in which huge numbers of people were shot, and huge numbers of rounds were fired, but three or fewer of the victims died.
For example, in one widely publicized shooting carried out in Los Angeles on February 28, 1997, two bank robbers shot a total of 18 people - surely a mass shooting by any reasonable standard (Table 1).
Yet, because none of the people they shot died, this incident would not qualify as a mass murder (or even murder of any kind).
Exclusion of such incidents would bias the sample against the proposition that LCM use increases the number of victims by excluding incidents with large numbers of victims. We also excluded shootings in which more than six persons were shot over the entire course of the incident but shootings occurred in multiple locations with no more than six people shot in any one of the locations, and substantial periods of time intervened between episodes of shooting. An example is the series of killings committed by Rodrick Dantzler on July 7, 2011.
Once eligible incidents were identified, we searched through news accounts for details related to whether the use of LCMs could have influenced the casualty counts.
Specifically, we searched for
(1) the number of magazines in the shooter’s immediate possession,
(2) the capacity of the largest magazine,
(3) the number of guns in the shooter’s immediate possession during the incident,
(4) the types of guns possessed,
(5) whether the shooter reloaded during the incident,
(6) the number of rounds fired,
(7) the duration of the shooting from the first shot fired to the last, and (8) whether anyone intervened to stop the shooter.
Findings How Many Mass Shootings were Committed Using LCMs?
We identified 23 total incidents in which more than six people were shot at a single time and place in the U.S. from 1994 through 2013 and that were known to involve use of any magazines with capacities over ten rounds.
Table 1 summarizes key details of the LCMinvolved mass shootings relevant to the issues addressed in this paper.
(Table 1 about here) What fraction of all mass shootings involve LCMs?
There is no comprehensive listing of all mass shootings available for the entire 1994-2013 period, but the most extensive one currently available is at the Shootingtracker.com website, which only began its coverage in 2013.
-----
-----
The offenders in LCM-involved mass shootings were also known to have reloaded during 14 of the 23 (61%) incidents with magazine holding over 10 rounds.
The shooters were known to have not reloaded in another two of these 20 incidents and it could not be determined if they reloaded in the remaining seven incidents.
Thus, even if the shooters had been denied LCMs, we know that most of them definitely would have been able to reload smaller detachable magazines without interference from bystanders since they in fact did change magazines.
The fact that this percentage is less than 100% should not, however, be interpreted to mean that the shooters were unable to reload in the other nine incidents.
It is possible that the shooters could also have reloaded in many of these nine shootings, but chose not to do so, or did not need to do so in order to fire all the rounds they wanted to fire. This is consistent with the fact that there has been at most only one mass shootings in twenty years in which reloading a semiautomatic firearm might have been blocked by bystanders intervening and thereby stopping the shooter from doing all the shooting he wanted to do. All we know is that in two incidents the shooter did not reload, and news accounts of seven other incidents did not mention whether the offender reloaded.
----
For example, a story in the Hartford Courant about the Sandy Hook elementary school killings in 2012 was headlined “Shooter Paused, and Six Escaped,” the text asserting that as many as six children may have survived because the shooter paused to reload (December 23, 2012). ''
The author of the story, however, went on to concede that this was just a speculation by an unnamed source, and that it was also possible that some children simply escaped when the killer was shooting other children.
There was no reliable evidence that the pauses were due to the shooter reloading, rather than his guns jamming or the shooter simply choosing to pause his shooting while his gun was still loaded.
The plausibility of the “victims escape” rationale depends on the average rates of fire that shooters in mass shootings typically maintain.
If they fire very fast, the 2-4 seconds it takes to change box-type detachable magazines could produce a slowing of the rate of fire that the shooters otherwise would have maintained without the magazine changes, increasing the average time between rounds fired and potentially allowing more victims to escape during the betweenshot intervals.
On the other hand, if mass shooters fire their guns with the average interval between shots lasting more than 2-4 seconds, the pauses due to additional magazine changes would be no longer than the pauses the shooter typically took between shots even when not reloading.
In that case, there would be no more opportunity for potential victims to escape than there would have been without the additional magazine changes
-----
SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class journal research
In sum, in nearly all LCM-involved mass shootings, the time it takes to reload a detachable magazine is no greater than the average time between shots that the shooter takes anyway when not reloading.
Consequently, there is no affirmative evidence that reloading detachable magazines slows mass shooters’ rates of fire, and thus no affirmative evidence that the number of victims who could escape the killers due to additional pauses in the shooting is increased by the shooter’s need to change magazines.
IF LARGER MAGAZINES GIVE NO ADVANTAGE WHY THE FUCK DO YOU NEED THEM.
If large mags give no advantage WHY THE FUCK DO YOU WANT TO BAN THEM
Here we go again. In our Aurora Theater shooting, he used a 100 round capacity mag. It jammed right around 50 rounds in. He switched to a shotgun and a handgun (semi auto). Believe it or not, this kept the body count down. And he was a terrible shot. He relied on the amount of ammo that the AR could put out to compensate for his lack of markmanship. And it did until it jammed. Almost all the dead and wounded were from the AR.
An unjacketed round fired at the same velocity will do as much damage to soft tissue as a jacketed roundThe only real difference is the muzzle velocity of the rounds
Wow...you really are stupid on this subject. They are jacketed and muzzle velocity is a big deal dumfuk
Because progressives don’t know their ass from a hole in the ground… They’re all just sporting rifles
Which shoots your "we need them to defend against the gubmint) claim all to shit
What we have here is too fringe groups yelling at each other while they are so LOUD that the rest of us have trouble discussing anything. You people aren't necessarily right, you are just LOUD.
Well......loud is how you are heard. The left is loud via MSM. We don't have that, so we need to yell louder. All we really have is AM radio and Fox news. The MSM, Hollywood, education, the internet is all dominated by the left.
But because we yell louder doesn't mean we are wrong either.
In an 8 hour period in there, I saw just a couple or three posts by a few people. But there were 64 posts by the same 4 people trying to yell down everyone else though insulting posts. Your bunch tries to bury everyone elses inputs. It's hard to weed through all the Insulting Posts to get to the meat of the subject. Once your posts goes into the loud venue, people just stop reading it and your real message is lost whether its right or not.
So what you are saying is the left does not "yell?"
What you're really upset about is not the number of posts, but that you are outnumbered. The majority on this subject are pro-gun. Therefore for every one post a leftist makes, it's battled with four opposition posts regardless of who posts them. Insults? That comes from both sides if you've been here long enough to realize it. I object to insulting posts unless one is reacting to a personal attack. I do that myself, but I never draw first blood.
I like civil discussions when it comes to politics. Insults are teen chat room exchanges. I avoid participating with flamers if possible. Speaking for myself only of course, I conduct myself here as if we were discussing issues at a bar or club in person. I don't believe in hiding behind a keyboard and tossing insults at people that may be 500 miles or more from where I live.
I am so difficult to handle there ain't enough of you to go around. So you just get LOUD. I am not loud but I do have a message without the petty insults to try and make myself look smarter, better looking, etc.. I have noticed that you are easier to read than most. I just don't particularly agree with everything you have to say. But, hey, that's what makes life interesting.
Yes, the Left Yells but I don't. But I find, in here, the major source of "Yelling" is from the fringe group of guncrazies. Rather than discuss and actually coming up with a solution (and yes, any solution I see I will pass on to other voters) they start in insulting and degrading the other person. I can't speak for MSN since I don't listen to that. I can't speak for Talk Radio since I don't listen to that. And I can't speak for
Pauxsnews since I don't watch nor listen to that. I speak for myself and the community for which I live in who have made changes to confront all the evils that are being shouted out to cover up an chance of coming to a solution. Newsflash: There is always a solution for most problems if we stop yelling and insulting each other long enough.
Right now, the Right needs to clean it's act in here and out of here. Do it before you lose more than you can afford to lose. And put a cork on the NRA meddling in local elections. One of the reasons so many Dems were elected into the house is that the NRA put money against the other side and the voters said enough. And the people voted in are Moderates. That should scare the hell out of everyone that is in the fringe on both sides.
Very few people base their vote on gun issues unless the left is once again making threats.
You want NRA money out of our politics? Fine with me, I'll work on that and you work on getting that union money out of the hands of Democrats; that trial lawyer money so our manufacturers can't get sued because somebody took their new toaster in the shower with them; that Sierra Club money that leads to very costly and job killing regulations.
This is not a one-way street you know.........
True, ARs are least of the country’s worries... After all they are just sporting riflesWe get to keep our AR 15. Go ahead and cry you pussies.
You wil never ever EVER get another "assault weapons" ban. That was your best shot and it turned oht to be a huge loser.
Scared? GOOD. Fuck you.
We really need to break up this shitty, dead union. I do not want to share a nation with all these gun-grabbing fucktards. I fucking hate them. They are not human beings. They have no value and must be eliminated forever.
.
You don't get to keep your ARs in certain Cities. And if it' keeps being used as the primary Mass Shooting Tool, look for at least a few states to follow. If you want to keep your AR and continue to be a law abiding citizen I suggest you work on the social issues of the AR Cult which you are a member of.
The AR-15 is not the primary tool of mass shooters...you keep stating that and it isn't even close to being true...
you mean for someone who doesn't know shit about firearms but thinks he has the tight to tell others what forearms they need or don't need.
The .223 is a higher velocity round sure but it is still a .22 caliber
The NRA is not pro gun enough...Well......loud is how you are heard. The left is loud via MSM. We don't have that, so we need to yell louder. All we really have is AM radio and Fox news. The MSM, Hollywood, education, the internet is all dominated by the left.
But because we yell louder doesn't mean we are wrong either.
In an 8 hour period in there, I saw just a couple or three posts by a few people. But there were 64 posts by the same 4 people trying to yell down everyone else though insulting posts. Your bunch tries to bury everyone elses inputs. It's hard to weed through all the Insulting Posts to get to the meat of the subject. Once your posts goes into the loud venue, people just stop reading it and your real message is lost whether its right or not.
So what you are saying is the left does not "yell?"
What you're really upset about is not the number of posts, but that you are outnumbered. The majority on this subject are pro-gun. Therefore for every one post a leftist makes, it's battled with four opposition posts regardless of who posts them. Insults? That comes from both sides if you've been here long enough to realize it. I object to insulting posts unless one is reacting to a personal attack. I do that myself, but I never draw first blood.
I like civil discussions when it comes to politics. Insults are teen chat room exchanges. I avoid participating with flamers if possible. Speaking for myself only of course, I conduct myself here as if we were discussing issues at a bar or club in person. I don't believe in hiding behind a keyboard and tossing insults at people that may be 500 miles or more from where I live.
I am so difficult to handle there ain't enough of you to go around. So you just get LOUD. I am not loud but I do have a message without the petty insults to try and make myself look smarter, better looking, etc.. I have noticed that you are easier to read than most. I just don't particularly agree with everything you have to say. But, hey, that's what makes life interesting.
Yes, the Left Yells but I don't. But I find, in here, the major source of "Yelling" is from the fringe group of guncrazies. Rather than discuss and actually coming up with a solution (and yes, any solution I see I will pass on to other voters) they start in insulting and degrading the other person. I can't speak for MSN since I don't listen to that. I can't speak for Talk Radio since I don't listen to that. And I can't speak for
Pauxsnews since I don't watch nor listen to that. I speak for myself and the community for which I live in who have made changes to confront all the evils that are being shouted out to cover up an chance of coming to a solution. Newsflash: There is always a solution for most problems if we stop yelling and insulting each other long enough.
Right now, the Right needs to clean it's act in here and out of here. Do it before you lose more than you can afford to lose. And put a cork on the NRA meddling in local elections. One of the reasons so many Dems were elected into the house is that the NRA put money against the other side and the voters said enough. And the people voted in are Moderates. That should scare the hell out of everyone that is in the fringe on both sides.
Very few people base their vote on gun issues unless the left is once again making threats.
You want NRA money out of our politics? Fine with me, I'll work on that and you work on getting that union money out of the hands of Democrats; that trial lawyer money so our manufacturers can't get sued because somebody took their new toaster in the shower with them; that Sierra Club money that leads to very costly and job killing regulations.
This is not a one-way street you know.........
The Unions are not against you buying a gun of any kind. But the NRA directly works for the Gun Manufacturers and comes up with some pretty strange things to help bolster those sales. The Unions have a very broad concept (whether you agree with them or not) but the NRA only has one single concept, PR to sell more guns. Apples and Oranges.
BTW, I was a member of a few Unions and don't hold that a Union should be able to use my Dues to pay for the "Leaders" political views. This is just plain wrong. It would be nice if they were left completely out of Politics but, like any other Corporation, they find ways around that. What we need to do is tighten up the 501 laws to prevent any of these from getting into Politics. Unfortunately, the SCOTUS has made them equal to a human being. Put an end to that and we get a huge amount of money out of Politics.
you mean for someone who doesn't know shit about firearms but thinks he has the right to tell others what forearms they need or don't need.The post never said it was. Wow, this is why people complsin with stupid people running around with these weapons.The .223 is a 22 caliber round you idiotPRAIRIE dogs...can be hunted with a friggin .22. Hell you can use a tube loaded semi-auto for all I care. You can use a lever action 30-30 if you want to pay a buck a shot.
You DON'T need an assault weapon.
But note...Rustic SELLS guns so it's in his interest to sell as many as possible
LUsh said use a .22 instead of a .223 you moron so obviously he she it doesn't realize that a .223 is a .22 caliber round
Easy mistake for someone not obsessed with firearms. Talk about velocity and size of magazine being used, and the type of long gun being used.
The .223 is a higher velocity round sure but it is still a .22 caliber
Good points, and you hit them where it hurts when challenging their wants and needs in their technologies. They are quick to ignore those problems, because they know that those problems are mostly hidden from the naked eye of society, otherwise they can control it (so they are ok with it) even if they know it's bad also.Yep, and then after we've saved ourselves in a crime situation that 99.9 % of the time the lefties created for us, we will just be sitting back and waiting for the law to arrive while they are still out there making wrong turns after they leave the donut shop trying to get here to us.The gun manufacturers solutions to mass shootings?
MORE, FREAKING GUNS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What happened to the perp you ask ???
Well let's just say that the perp needs an ambulance, and that was the second call after the call to the police went out.
Except that's not how it works in reality. In LaLa Land, every dude with a gun is a good guy and always does good. In reality, not everyone is a good guy with a gun and sometimes petty arguments are settle with the gun. I don't know where you got your 99.9 figure from but I can bet it would be quite painful if you place it back in the area from whence it came.
But wouldn't you agree that most Americans (regardless of the percentage you think) use their guns for recreational or good purposes?
It's like the internet we are communicating on now. It's very beneficial for most of us. But some will use this great tool for nefarious ways. Some will be looking up how to make a bomb, some will be downloading child porn, some will use it to bully or get even with somebody on social media, some will use it to scam people out of money or steal their credit cards.
This wonderful internet cost lives as well, but we don't need government regulation to try and fix the problems. Like guns, it won't work. Like guns, you would be taking away liberty from hundreds of millions of good folks. Like guns, you would be giving them limitations as to where they are allowed to go. Like guns, you would be taking the enjoyment of using this great technology.
Sure, I mean people do risky things all the time, but we don't ban those risky things. If you drive a motorcycle, you can end up dead or in a wheelchair the rest of your life paralyzed from the neck down. If you go swimming, you risk drowning. If you drive a car, you risk killing yourself or other people. If you take a job as a police officer, you can end up dead or find yourself going to jail for murder. Lots of things are chances in life. We can't expect the government to fix each and every potential problem.
Matters not if you liberallies were tougher on criminals, but noooooooooooooooo you liberallies find somehow to sympathize with the criminal elements, you know like that mean old whitey caused you to become a criminal you would say or that mean old rich man caused you to be a phsycopath, and on and on and on you all stir the crap trying to justify the bullcrap for the love of power at any cost.am glad mass shooting idiots have not figured this out yet. With buckshot, one magizine could kill 50-100 people in a tight crowed.
We've had shotgun attacks in this country and they invariably lead to lower body counts.
We've SEEN what assault weapons can do to a crowd
They have a documentary series on Showtime called "Active Shooter" where they actually interviewed the people in the theater..... they also spoke to the Pschiatrist who examined the shooter...
We also know he targeted that theater because it was a gun free zone, he originally wanted to target the airport but they had too much armed security....
Back to the shooting........ he told the Shrink that he wanted the shooting to be completely impersonal....so when he walked into the theater and began shooting, he did not shoot the people right in front of him, you know, the easist victims to shoot...he fired over their heads and into the rows in the back, and, in fact, when he was leaving, he looked into the eyes of a girl right in front of him, she laughed...he asked the shrink about that and the Shrink told him it was likely a nervous reaction....the shooter stated since he made eye contact with the girl, he did not shoot her, it would have been too personal...
Also....he was wearing a gas mask which blocked his vision and he also threw smoke grenades, also obscuring his vision .....
What saved lives was the dark theater, he couldn't see any better than the victims..... and with the AR-15 he wasn't able to do better than 12 people.....the shooter in Crimea using a 5 shot, pump action shotgun murdered 21 people, college students, not kindergarteners......
Lolyou mean for someone who doesn't know shit about firearms but thinks he has the tight to tell others what forearms they need or don't need.
The .223 is a higher velocity round sure but it is still a .22 caliber
Wow. I thought you actually knew something about the subject. Obviously you don't
Not only are .223s jacketed (ya know like a military round) they have far more propellant and are bigger. The average size of a .223 is 50gr. They can be bigger. The largest .22 long rifle is 40 gr. Longs and shorts are obviously smaller. Typically .22 LR is not jacketed...so has less penetration power.
.22 LR are "effective" to only 150 yds. the .223 is effective to 300 yards...a testament to its increased power
You really need to just stop talking
The NRA is not pro gun enough...In an 8 hour period in there, I saw just a couple or three posts by a few people. But there were 64 posts by the same 4 people trying to yell down everyone else though insulting posts. Your bunch tries to bury everyone elses inputs. It's hard to weed through all the Insulting Posts to get to the meat of the subject. Once your posts goes into the loud venue, people just stop reading it and your real message is lost whether its right or not.
So what you are saying is the left does not "yell?"
What you're really upset about is not the number of posts, but that you are outnumbered. The majority on this subject are pro-gun. Therefore for every one post a leftist makes, it's battled with four opposition posts regardless of who posts them. Insults? That comes from both sides if you've been here long enough to realize it. I object to insulting posts unless one is reacting to a personal attack. I do that myself, but I never draw first blood.
I like civil discussions when it comes to politics. Insults are teen chat room exchanges. I avoid participating with flamers if possible. Speaking for myself only of course, I conduct myself here as if we were discussing issues at a bar or club in person. I don't believe in hiding behind a keyboard and tossing insults at people that may be 500 miles or more from where I live.
I am so difficult to handle there ain't enough of you to go around. So you just get LOUD. I am not loud but I do have a message without the petty insults to try and make myself look smarter, better looking, etc.. I have noticed that you are easier to read than most. I just don't particularly agree with everything you have to say. But, hey, that's what makes life interesting.
Yes, the Left Yells but I don't. But I find, in here, the major source of "Yelling" is from the fringe group of guncrazies. Rather than discuss and actually coming up with a solution (and yes, any solution I see I will pass on to other voters) they start in insulting and degrading the other person. I can't speak for MSN since I don't listen to that. I can't speak for Talk Radio since I don't listen to that. And I can't speak for
Pauxsnews since I don't watch nor listen to that. I speak for myself and the community for which I live in who have made changes to confront all the evils that are being shouted out to cover up an chance of coming to a solution. Newsflash: There is always a solution for most problems if we stop yelling and insulting each other long enough.
Right now, the Right needs to clean it's act in here and out of here. Do it before you lose more than you can afford to lose. And put a cork on the NRA meddling in local elections. One of the reasons so many Dems were elected into the house is that the NRA put money against the other side and the voters said enough. And the people voted in are Moderates. That should scare the hell out of everyone that is in the fringe on both sides.
Very few people base their vote on gun issues unless the left is once again making threats.
You want NRA money out of our politics? Fine with me, I'll work on that and you work on getting that union money out of the hands of Democrats; that trial lawyer money so our manufacturers can't get sued because somebody took their new toaster in the shower with them; that Sierra Club money that leads to very costly and job killing regulations.
This is not a one-way street you know.........
The Unions are not against you buying a gun of any kind. But the NRA directly works for the Gun Manufacturers and comes up with some pretty strange things to help bolster those sales. The Unions have a very broad concept (whether you agree with them or not) but the NRA only has one single concept, PR to sell more guns. Apples and Oranges.
BTW, I was a member of a few Unions and don't hold that a Union should be able to use my Dues to pay for the "Leaders" political views. This is just plain wrong. It would be nice if they were left completely out of Politics but, like any other Corporation, they find ways around that. What we need to do is tighten up the 501 laws to prevent any of these from getting into Politics. Unfortunately, the SCOTUS has made them equal to a human being. Put an end to that and we get a huge amount of money out of Politics.
This is a better organization
Home
Yep, and then after we've saved ourselves in a crime situation that 99.9 % of the time the lefties created for us, we will just be sitting back and waiting for the law to arrive while they are still out there making wrong turns after they leave the donut shop trying to get here to us.The gun manufacturers solutions to mass shootings?
MORE, FREAKING GUNS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What happened to the perp you ask ???
Well let's just say that the perp needs an ambulance, and that was the second call after the call to the police went out.
Except that's not how it works in reality. In LaLa Land, every dude with a gun is a good guy and always does good. In reality, not everyone is a good guy with a gun and sometimes petty arguments are settle with the gun. I don't know where you got your 99.9 figure from but I can bet it would be quite painful if you place it back in the area from whence it came.
But wouldn't you agree that most Americans (regardless of the percentage you think) use their guns for recreational or good purposes?
It's like the internet we are communicating on now. It's very beneficial for most of us. But some will use this great tool for nefarious ways. Some will be looking up how to make a bomb, some will be downloading child porn, some will use it to bully or get even with somebody on social media, some will use it to scam people out of money or steal their credit cards.
This wonderful internet cost lives as well, but we don't need government regulation to try and fix the problems. Like guns, it won't work. Like guns, you would be taking away liberty from hundreds of millions of good folks. Like guns, you would be giving them limitations as to where they are allowed to go. Like guns, you would be taking the enjoyment of using this great technology.
Using the gun for legal hunting is neither good nor bad. It just is. And the conventional hunting rifle is protected but it has limitations like what caliber you can use, the number of rounds held in it, etc.. This helps to keep the Illegal Hunter from becoming wide spread. Sooner or later, a lawful hunter will see this and call the game warden to have him check it out. The Law Abiding Citizen works within the law and hunting is neither good nor bad usually. The only good thing about it is the game control that results from it. Better to get killed by a bullet for meat or sport than slowly die because there isn't enough food for all the animals.
Is the Internet Good or Bad? It's neither. It just is. It's what you use it for that is either good or bad or neither good nor bad.
