Why hasn't the NRA been blamed for the youtube shootings

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Well I may have misspoken. I know the Ar-15 used by the Parkland shooter had a 10-round mag but that might be what Florida requires and all states don't?

California has a 10 round max for handguns and I thought I heard that one of the concessions the state of Florida got with that new gun legislation they just passed was a restriction of the round size of the magazines.

You would be incorrect.

 

[S.J.]

She's not white, she's not male, she's not a conservative, not a Christian, can't be spun into looking like any of those "villains", so pretend like it didn't happen and hope another one happens (only by a white guy), then the NRA becomes the devil again.

She looks pretty white to me. What are you seeing?

I'm seeing a Persian woman named Nasim Aghdam, and she doesn't look white to me.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

She's not white, she's not male, she's not a conservative, not a Christian, can't be spun into looking like any of those "villains", so pretend like it didn't happen and hope another one happens (only by a white guy), then the NRA becomes the devil again.

She looks pretty white to me. What are you seeing?

I'm seeing a Persian woman named Nasim Aghdam, and she doesn't look white to me.

Persians are white! Iranians are Aryan, which is about as white as it gets! Ask your local Neo-Nazi!

Maybe you should have studied harder in school.

 

[Foxfyre]

So, if someone went crazy and started shooting up the local mall - would they kill more people with an AR-15, or a .22 cal revolver?

I would imagine whichever one holds the most rounds, but I don't know which that would be.

Most Ar-15 rifles sold commercially these days have 10-round capacity magazines.

lol! I've never seen an AR for sale that didn't have at least a 20 round mag.

Well I may have misspoken. I know the Ar-15 used by the Parkland shooter had a 10-round mag but that might be what Florida requires and all states don't?

The Parkland shooter had 30 round magazines. He left fully loaded magazines in his bag that he left behind after the shootings.

Report: Parkland Shooter Did Not Use High Capacity Magazines | National Review

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

California has a 10 round max for handguns and I thought I heard that one of the concessions the state of Florida got with that new gun legislation they just passed was a restriction of the round size of the magazines. You would be incorrect.

Yep

Florida Gun Bill: What’s in It, and What Isn’t
By MAGGIE ASTORMARCH 8, 2018

The gun control bill that the Florida Legislature passed on Wednesday was, in many respects, a major victory for the new activists of Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School. It was passed in defiance of the National Rifle Association and, if Gov. Rick Scott signs it, will be the first successful gun control measure in Florida in more than 20 years.

But it left out many of the biggest provisions the students and their supporters had sought, including bans on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. Here is a look at what is in the final bill, and what is not.

What the bill does
• Raise the minimum age. The bill would change the minimum age for all gun purchases to 21 from 18 — a provision that would have prohibited the Parkland gunman, Nikolas Cruz, 19, from legally buying the rifle he used in his massacre. This is a divergence from federal law, under which people cannot buy handguns from licensed dealers until they are 21, but can buy shotguns and rifles — often much deadlier than handguns — at 18. (Unlicensed sales, such as at gun shows, have looser restrictions.) Governor Scott and Senator Marco Rubio, a fellow Republican, endorsed the age increase last month.

• Create a waiting period. Prospective gun buyers would have to wait three days, or until a background check is completed, whichever is longer. There would be some exceptions, including for police officers, members of the military, licensed hunters and licensed concealed carriers.

Continue reading the main story
• Ban bump stocks. Bump stocks are devices that can be attached to rifles to enable them to fire faster, and they will no longer be legal in Florida if the bill is signed. (You can learn more about them here.) They came to public attention in October, after a gunman in Las Vegas used them to kill 58 people and wound hundreds; with the devices, his semiautomatic weapons were able to fire almost as fast as fully automatic machine guns. After that massacre, the N.R.A. said it supported a national ban on bump stocks, an extremely rare gun control endorsement by the group. But the proposal languished in Congress, and while President Trump told the Justice Department last month to issue new regulations, thus far it has not.
Florida Gun Bill: What’s in It, and What Isn’t​

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

I would imagine whichever one holds the most rounds, but I don't know which that would be.

Most Ar-15 rifles sold commercially these days have 10-round capacity magazines.

lol! I've never seen an AR for sale that didn't have at least a 20 round mag.

Well I may have misspoken. I know the Ar-15 used by the Parkland shooter had a 10-round mag but that might be what Florida requires and all states don't?

The Parkland shooter had 30 round magazines. He left fully loaded magazines in his bag that he left behind after the shootings.

Report: Parkland Shooter Did Not Use High Capacity Magazines | National Review

Sorry, but that is not a reliable source because it is second hand info from a state senator.

 

[jillian]

Didn't fit the narrative. That and she was a moon bat leftist

Shooting kids is bad.
Shooting adults is not newsworthy.

or it could be because kids are the subject of so many mass shootings and expect their government to do it's job and not pander to NRA money.

 

[Two Thumbs]

Wonder why? Nothing has changed at the NRA. They still support gun rights. Anyone care to chime in on this? Does this show the media bias on guns and shootings seeing how many of the lib loons were blaming the NRA before the facts came out?

she was a horrible shot

members of the NRA are usually we versed in their weapons.

 

[jillian]

Wonder why? Nothing has changed at the NRA. They still support gun rights. Anyone care to chime in on this? Does this show the media bias on guns and shootings seeing how many of the lib loons were blaming the NRA before the facts came out?

she was a horrible shot

members of the NRA are usually we versed in their weapons.

when people are obsessed with an item, they usually are. it doesn't make them normal.

 

[JoeB131]

Wonder why? Nothing has changed at the NRA. They still support gun rights. Anyone care to chime in on this? Does this show the media bias on guns and shootings seeing how many of the lib loons were blaming the NRA before the facts came out?

because no one died except for the shooter, that's why it's not such a big deal.

The sad thing is, with 33,000 gun deaths a year, a single suicide just doesn't rate very high. You actually have to get a high body count to get attention.

 

[JoeB131]

she was a horrible shot

members of the NRA are usually we versed in their weapons.

You mean like Adam Lanza?

 

[Two Thumbs]

Wonder why? Nothing has changed at the NRA. They still support gun rights. Anyone care to chime in on this? Does this show the media bias on guns and shootings seeing how many of the lib loons were blaming the NRA before the facts came out?

she was a horrible shot

members of the NRA are usually we versed in their weapons.

when people are obsessed with an item, they usually are. it doesn't make them normal.

so people that collect;
stamps
books
antiques
money
etc etc

are not normal.


so basically everyone is not normal.

 

[miketx]

Wonder why? Nothing has changed at the NRA. They still support gun rights. Anyone care to chime in on this? Does this show the media bias on guns and shootings seeing how many of the lib loons were blaming the NRA before the facts came out?

because no one died except for the shooter, that's why it's not such a big deal.

The sad thing is, with 33,000 gun deaths a year, a single suicide just doesn't rate very high. You actually have to get a high body count to get attention.

Fake news. Lumped in with gang shootings and murders and suicides.

 

[miketx]

Wonder why? Nothing has changed at the NRA. They still support gun rights. Anyone care to chime in on this? Does this show the media bias on guns and shootings seeing how many of the lib loons were blaming the NRA before the facts came out?

she was a horrible shot

members of the NRA are usually we versed in their weapons.

How good a shot were other mass shooters?

 

[miketx]

Didn't fit the narrative. That and she was a moon bat leftist

Shooting kids is bad.
Shooting adults is not newsworthy.

or it could be because kids are the subject of so many mass shootings and expect their government to do it's job and not pander to NRA money.

So why didn't they do their job in Florida? Did the NRA tell them to let Cruz alone? Did the NRA tell the scumbag sheriff to stand down? Did the NRA make the spineless cops hide until the shooting stopped? Tell us exactly how the NRA is responsible?

 

[hadit]

Didn't fit the narrative. That and she was a moon bat leftist

Shooting kids is bad.
Shooting adults is not newsworthy.

or it could be because kids are the subject of so many mass shootings and expect their government to do it's job and not pander to NRA money.

There are organizations whose politician buying make the NRA's efforts look totally amateurish, yet they escape notice. Probably because their agendas are politically correct.

 

[dblack]

Wow? Really??

If you really believe that an assault rifle is no more deadly than a pistol, you should be lobbying congress to quit wasting money on them for our military. Just give them all pistols, eh?

Jesus H Christ, you people are so fucking clueless about the things you want to ban.

You people? I'm not even advocating for the gun-grabbers. But I am calling bullshit on bullshit.

When gun rights people try to pretend, with a straight face, that there's no such a thing as "more dangerous" or "less dangerous" when it comes to guns - that a pistol is just as dangerous as an assault rifle, that's just dumb. It makes you all look like idiots, and it makes it easier to dismiss otherwise sane defense of the Second Amendment.

What's bullshit is you thinking civilian AR-15's are the same thing that our military uses. Quit talking about things you don't understand.

3 for 3 ... no wonder we have people actually considering repealing the 2nd Amendment.

Yep! People like you are so stupid on the topic that you should not be allowed to vote!

Listen, dipshit, I'm all too aware of the inaccuracies and inconsistencies that you're so eager to point out regarding labeling of a "assault rifles". I know that the "Assault Weapons Ban" was nonsense. But you douchebags are using it as an excuse to ostrich up and ignore the central argument of the gun control question - the fact that some weapons are much more dangerous than others. If the killer in Las Vegas had been armed with a 9mm pistol, instead of a room full rapid-fire rifles, a lot of deaths would have been avoided.

This isn't even a controversial observation (among sane people). Clearly, we already accept this notion. Most of us agree we don't want our neighbor to have the legal right to own a nuclear bomb. So, somewhere between nuclear weapons and a butter knife, we draw a line on what weapons will be legally available for individuals. The question isn't over whether this line should be drawn, but where.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Jesus H Christ, you people are so fucking clueless about the things you want to ban.

You people? I'm not even advocating for the gun-grabbers. But I am calling bullshit on bullshit.

When gun rights people try to pretend, with a straight face, that there's no such a thing as "more dangerous" or "less dangerous" when it comes to guns - that a pistol is just as dangerous as an assault rifle, that's just dumb. It makes you all look like idiots, and it makes it easier to dismiss otherwise sane defense of the Second Amendment.

What's bullshit is you thinking civilian AR-15's are the same thing that our military uses. Quit talking about things you don't understand.

3 for 3 ... no wonder we have people actually considering repealing the 2nd Amendment.

Yep! People like you are so stupid on the topic that you should not be allowed to vote!

Listen, dipshit, I'm all too aware of the inaccuracies and inconsistencies that you're so eager to point out regarding labeling of a "assault rifles". I know that the "Assault Weapons Ban" was nonsense. But you douchebags are using it as an excuse to ostrich up and ignore the central argument of the gun control question - the fact that some weapons are much more dangerous than others. If the killer in Las Vegas had been armed with a 9mm pistol, instead of a room full rapid-fire rifles, a lot of deaths would have been avoided.

This isn't even a controversial observation (among sane people). Clearly, we already accept this notion. Most of us agree we don't want our neighbor to have the legal right to own a nuclear bomb. So, somewhere between nuclear weapons and a butter knife, we draw a line on what weapons will be legally available for individuals. The question isn't over whether this line should be drawn, but where.

Rapid fire rifles? What are you? Five years old?

If he had been armed with a 9mm, he would have just changed tactics. As has been pointed out many times, the Virginia Tech shooter used two handguns and had a significant death toll.

The Las Vegas shooter was employing "spray and pray" with his bump stocks. He was not targeting individuals. He was not a good enough shot to do that!

Those 9mms sure are deadly too. The Youtube shooter managed to kill herself but no one else because she had no clue as to what she was doing.

That line you are discussing is defined by the Second Amendment. No further discussion is required. THAT is your problem, gun grabber!

 

[dblack]

You people? I'm not even advocating for the gun-grabbers. But I am calling bullshit on bullshit.

When gun rights people try to pretend, with a straight face, that there's no such a thing as "more dangerous" or "less dangerous" when it comes to guns - that a pistol is just as dangerous as an assault rifle, that's just dumb. It makes you all look like idiots, and it makes it easier to dismiss otherwise sane defense of the Second Amendment.

What's bullshit is you thinking civilian AR-15's are the same thing that our military uses. Quit talking about things you don't understand.

3 for 3 ... no wonder we have people actually considering repealing the 2nd Amendment.

Yep! People like you are so stupid on the topic that you should not be allowed to vote!

Listen, dipshit, I'm all too aware of the inaccuracies and inconsistencies that you're so eager to point out regarding labeling of a "assault rifles". I know that the "Assault Weapons Ban" was nonsense. But you douchebags are using it as an excuse to ostrich up and ignore the central argument of the gun control question - the fact that some weapons are much more dangerous than others. If the killer in Las Vegas had been armed with a 9mm pistol, instead of a room full rapid-fire rifles, a lot of deaths would have been avoided.

This isn't even a controversial observation (among sane people). Clearly, we already accept this notion. Most of us agree we don't want our neighbor to have the legal right to own a nuclear bomb. So, somewhere between nuclear weapons and a butter knife, we draw a line on what weapons will be legally available for individuals. The question isn't over whether this line should be drawn, but where.

Rapid fire rifles? What are you? Five years old?

If he had been armed with a 9mm, he would have just changed tactics. As has been pointed out many times, the Virginia Tech shooter used two handguns and had a significant death toll.

The Las Vegas shooter was employing "spray and pray" with his bump stocks. He was not targeting individuals. He was not a good enough shot to do that!

Those 9mms sure are deadly too. The Youtube shooter managed to kill herself but no one else because she had no clue as to what she was doing.

That line you are discussing is defined by the Second Amendment. No further discussion is required. THAT is your problem, gun grabber!

More dodging, FTW!!

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

What's bullshit is you thinking civilian AR-15's are the same thing that our military uses. Quit talking about things you don't understand.

3 for 3 ... no wonder we have people actually considering repealing the 2nd Amendment.

Yep! People like you are so stupid on the topic that you should not be allowed to vote!

Listen, dipshit, I'm all too aware of the inaccuracies and inconsistencies that you're so eager to point out regarding labeling of a "assault rifles". I know that the "Assault Weapons Ban" was nonsense. But you douchebags are using it as an excuse to ostrich up and ignore the central argument of the gun control question - the fact that some weapons are much more dangerous than others. If the killer in Las Vegas had been armed with a 9mm pistol, instead of a room full rapid-fire rifles, a lot of deaths would have been avoided.

This isn't even a controversial observation (among sane people). Clearly, we already accept this notion. Most of us agree we don't want our neighbor to have the legal right to own a nuclear bomb. So, somewhere between nuclear weapons and a butter knife, we draw a line on what weapons will be legally available for individuals. The question isn't over whether this line should be drawn, but where.

Rapid fire rifles? What are you? Five years old?

If he had been armed with a 9mm, he would have just changed tactics. As has been pointed out many times, the Virginia Tech shooter used two handguns and had a significant death toll.

The Las Vegas shooter was employing "spray and pray" with his bump stocks. He was not targeting individuals. He was not a good enough shot to do that!

Those 9mms sure are deadly too. The Youtube shooter managed to kill herself but no one else because she had no clue as to what she was doing.

That line you are discussing is defined by the Second Amendment. No further discussion is required. THAT is your problem, gun grabber!

More dodging, FTW!!

Dodging what?I answered your post. You just don't like the answer. Suck it up, buttercup!