The Tragedy in Las Vegas

[El]

I've picked examples showing the magnitude of the problem. The plain fact is that unless something is done, people will continue to die. Why is that so hard to understand? Why is it that so many people will deflect and compare guns to vehicles or refer to dated legislation when they should be outraged?

Some of it's that it's been culturally packaged into the same clusterfuck of ideals as white american evangelical christianity and masculinity- the idea that real men love god, their country, and their guns.  (Also, they kind of hate women, kind of love fetuses, healthcare is something only dirty commies want to have be affordable, and foreigners and non-foreign brown and black people are ruining everything, as is every poor person they don't personally know.)

Don't know why the fuck sir les is infected with that that, he's halfway across the fucking planet.

[Yuri Bezmenov]

I've picked examples showing the magnitude of the problem. The plain fact is that unless something is done, people will continue to die. Why is that so hard to understand? Why is it that so many people will deflect and compare guns to vehicles or refer to dated legislation when they should be outraged?

Some of it's that it's been culturally packaged into the same clusterfuck of ideals as white american evangelical christianity and masculinity- the idea that real men love god, their country, and their guns.  (Also, they kind of hate women, kind of love fetuses, healthcare is something only dirty commies want to have be affordable, and foreigners and non-foreign brown and black people are ruining everything, as is every poor person they don't personally know.)

Don't know why the fuck sir les is infected with that that, he's halfway across the fucking planet.

Typical leftist regressive race-baiting tripe.      

This is the type of straw-man argument parroted by non-thinking pod people.

[Al Swearegen]

I've picked examples showing the magnitude of the problem. The plain fact is that unless something is done, people will continue to die. Why is that so hard to understand? Why is it that so many people will deflect and compare guns to vehicles or refer to dated legislation when they should be outraged?

Some of it's that it's been culturally packaged into the same clusterfuck of ideals as white american evangelical christianity and masculinity- the idea that real men love god, their country, and their guns.  (Also, they kind of hate women, kind of love fetuses, healthcare is something only dirty commies want to have be affordable, and foreigners and non-foreign brown and black people are ruining everything, as is every poor person they don't personally know.)

Don't know why the fuck sir les is infected with that that, he's halfway across the fucking planet.

Respectfully, Elle, you are a moron and ideologically off your rocker.

What exactly am I infected by? Yes, yes you ran through an imagined group collective mentality for enforcing a set of views you say they do on the basis they are white, Christians and males.

So we have this right, the people that would want to defend gun rights in America are White American Evangelical Christians? Well, what do you have to fear then? IF this IS true, then only 25% of America is Evangelical. Of that, you specifically said only men (I know you only point to men because you are a sexist but it works in making my point) so we will say that 25% is down by 51% to 12.25% but then you also stipulated that they had to be white (Because you are trying to make the ridiculous Progressive stack argument that white men are the font of all evil, because you are a bigot) so we will need to take into account the evangelists in America that are not white, so we are down to maybe 9% - 10%.

So genius, that is the first problem with what you said. IF it was just this block and 90% of Americans had different views, this block of people would be negligible. It is not though, and you know that. This clusterfuck of ideals is simply what YOUR founding Fathers (despicable white men, I am sure BUT the ones who paved the way for every privilege you enjoy in your life and everything you hold dear) set down in their experiment called America. So people who respect these founding principles that are protected under the constitution are not women hating, fetus loving, racists and only the stupidest of the stupid would even infer this. You did though.

I would actually like you to make some rudimentary attempt to make a case for 

(Also, they kind of hate women, kind of love fetuses, healthcare is something only dirty commies want to have be affordable, and foreigners and non-foreign brown and black people are ruining everything, as is every poor person they don't personally know.)

applying to all white male evangelist Christians.

You could not even clear the lowest bar on intellectual discourse here, God only knows why you commented?

Lastly, what I said and what I am apparently infected by. Well, what exactly did I say that got you fired up about? Odeon put it about that it should be easy for guns to be removed from America. I asked exactly how this could happen given all the cultural factors, resistance to Government interference and wide availability and a small thing about Constitutional protections. He did not have an answer and pivoted away to other measures which seemed a lot more reasonable and less extreme. I bought him back to his initial statement and now in YOU come with your textual vomit.

The truth of the matter is "Someone should do something" is virtue signalling and nothing more. Saying "all guns are bad" or " Guns are killing you, take them away" is stupid. At the end of the day the rational will look at ways to approach and meet in the middle.

The problem seems to me that the Left do what both you and Odeon seem to be doing and the Right gets mighty attached to their constitution and goes all "from my cold dead hands" on the foaming mouthed Liberals. Both are decidedly unhelpful. The Left, unfortunately, makes no qualms about it saying that it wants to restrict and keep restricting guns and will do away with them entirely if given the chance which gives the Right the impression that they do not care about the Second Amendment at all. The Right is of course correct. The Right does not want the Left to use any concession as a thin end of the wedge to petition for more and more restrictions, which the Right and Left know they absolutely will.

What they need is open forum and some reasonable idea and discuss what would be acceptable. Clearly, guns have evolved since the 1700's. Being able to hunt or defend your home via the Castle Doctrine or defend yourself from a tyrannical government does not seem to mean you should have the ability to unload round after round uninterrupted for 5 minutes, spraying hundreds of rounds. However, the ability to hunt and defend yourself means you need to be able to have access to weapons to do this. Restricting people to have only Matchlock rifles, for example, is not a solution.

In the same way that there are speed limits decided and drinking limits decided and so on means that there is likely to be things that could be agreed on by most people IF they only let the conversion not get sidetracked with emotional responses and bigotry and virtue signalling "outrage".

Oh and Elle, you will have to make a case for me having the sexist, religious, racist ideal you presume people of this presumed clusterfuck of ideals have

[Queen Victoria]

Just to let you ALL know I am doing my part to keep America safe:

The PR

Has the intellect of an eight or nine year old
Has the emotional age of a six year old
Has been diagnosed with moderate to severe depression
Has unpredictable rages
Has threatened violence against certain people


I have not told her she is legally able to buy a gun in Louisiana. 

You are welcome.

P.S.  This is a sincere post.  I'll not reply to any responses positive or negative.

[odeon]

Anything but changing a dated piece of 18th century stupidity.

Federal gun laws are in fact different now than they were back then, and those differences serve as a prime example to show the constitution doesn't have to be rewritten or even infringed upon in order to enact and enforce new regulations. Though the government isn't exactly doing a decent job of enforcing state participation in the most recent federal gun regulations. 80% of the general public is supportive of stricter gun control laws. The people don't directly vote for gun legislation; they vote for the people who draft and vote on gun legislations, and is isn't done regardless of public support. That's how democracy works.

I'd vote for those politicians that will actually act on stricter gun control. That is how democracy should work.

[odeon]

I've picked examples showing the magnitude of the problem. The plain fact is that unless something is done, people will continue to die. Why is that so hard to understand? Why is it that so many people will deflect and compare guns to vehicles or refer to dated legislation when they should be outraged?

Some of it's that it's been culturally packaged into the same clusterfuck of ideals as white american evangelical christianity and masculinity- the idea that real men love god, their country, and their guns.  (Also, they kind of hate women, kind of love fetuses, healthcare is something only dirty commies want to have be affordable, and foreigners and non-foreign brown and black people are ruining everything, as is every poor person they don't personally know.)

Don't know why the fuck sir les is infected with that that, he's halfway across the fucking planet.

"Clusterfuck" describes the situation well.

[odeon]

Typical leftist regressive race-baiting tripe.      

This is the type of straw-man argument parroted by non-thinking pod people.

As opposed to yours? You're not worth my time.

[Yuri Bezmenov]

I've picked examples showing the magnitude of the problem. The plain fact is that unless something is done, people will continue to die. Why is that so hard to understand? Why is it that so many people will deflect and compare guns to vehicles or refer to dated legislation when they should be outraged?

Some of it's that it's been culturally packaged into the same clusterfuck of ideals as white american evangelical christianity and masculinity- the idea that real men love god, their country, and their guns.  (Also, they kind of hate women, kind of love fetuses, healthcare is something only dirty commies want to have be affordable, and foreigners and non-foreign brown and black people are ruining everything, as is every poor person they don't personally know.)

Don't know why the fuck sir les is infected with that that, he's halfway across the fucking planet.

Respectfully, Elle, you are a moron and ideologically off your rocker...

...Oh and Elle, you will have to make a case for me having the sexist, religious, racist ideal you presume people of this presumed clusterfuck of ideals have

Al, 1) I doubt she is going to read and respond to something this long. 2) Elle seems to be projecting in regards to being ideologically possessed. As we know, SJW's are pod people who parrot the party line.

[odeon]

[Jack]

Anything but changing a dated piece of 18th century stupidity.

Federal gun laws are in fact different now than they were back then, and those differences serve as a prime example to show the constitution doesn't have to be rewritten or even infringed upon in order to enact and enforce new regulations. Though the government isn't exactly doing a decent job of enforcing state participation in the most recent federal gun regulations. 80% of the general public is supportive of stricter gun control laws. The people don't directly vote for gun legislation; they vote for the people who draft and vote on gun legislations, and is isn't done regardless of public support. That's how democracy works.

I'd vote for those politicians that will actually act on stricter gun control. That is how democracy should work.

But they don't. There were eight years of the Obama administration and they only bothered to target disabled people with an executive order at the last minute while walking out the door.

[Yuri Bezmenov]

But they don't. There were eight years of the Obama administration and they only bothered to target disabled people with an executive order at the last minute while walking out the door.

Sad part is, that's the only "gun control" that makes sense, keeping guns out of the hands of people with mental illnesses that would likely use them(schizophrenics and the like).

[Jack]

But they don't. There were eight years of the Obama administration and they only bothered to target disabled people with an executive order at the last minute while walking out the door.

Sad part is, that's the only "gun control" that makes sense, keeping guns out of the hands of people with mental illnesses that would likely use them(schizophrenics and the like).

There are already poorly enforced laws against mentally ill people. What Obama did was try to specifically target people who don't personally manage their own disability income.

[Yuri Bezmenov]

But they don't. There were eight years of the Obama administration and they only bothered to target disabled people with an executive order at the last minute while walking out the door.

Sad part is, that's the only "gun control" that makes sense, keeping guns out of the hands of people with mental illnesses that would likely use them(schizophrenics and the like).

There are already poorly enforced laws against mentally ill people. What Obama did was try to specifically target people who don't personally manage their own disability income.

That's fucked up. They have a right to self defense too.

[Jack]

But they don't. There were eight years of the Obama administration and they only bothered to target disabled people with an executive order at the last minute while walking out the door.

Sad part is, that's the only "gun control" that makes sense, keeping guns out of the hands of people with mental illnesses that would likely use them(schizophrenics and the like).

There are already poorly enforced laws against mentally ill people. What Obama did was try to specifically target people who don't personally manage their own disability income.

That's fucked up. They have a right to self defense too.

It's one of the fist things the new congress voted to squash. This is what I had to say about it at the time.

It's not really a stupid question, but more of a matter of stupid unnecessary rules. Let's stop disabled people who don't manage their own benefit income from buying guns because that's a real problem, right? There are ways the federal government could strengthen gun control without imposing on the constitution or needlessly targeting individual groups. For example, license/permits and safety training courses, which are already required for concealed arms; similar to driver's licenses that process excludes people without making specific laws against them. There's also no need for federal laws against blind people driving cars.

[El]