America - Gun Control

[Abraham]

Because we all know that main stream news services are the beacon of integrity.

Im more than familiar with Breitbart, although i stopped following them when Ben Shapiro resigned.

If you click on the link it is simply 20 examples of gun owners using their weapons against bad guys. I have checked some of the examples, they are real.

20 examples vs 461 mass shooting events over the same period of time….me thinks the bad guys are well on top.

https://www.massshootingtracker.org/data/2016

And here is a nice compilation of Breibarts greatest hits, or misses depending on your outlook

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/breitbart-headlines_us_5829ba13e4b060adb56f1bdb

Not sure what your point is?

A member asked for examples of good guys with guns taking out the bad guys, and so i provided some.

Case closed.

And its quite funny you miss the irony of using the Huffington Post to analyse Breitbart. The left pot calling the right kettle black.

 

[MG1962]

Because we all know that main stream news services are the beacon of integrity.

Im more than familiar with Breitbart, although i stopped following them when Ben Shapiro resigned.

If you click on the link it is simply 20 examples of gun owners using their weapons against bad guys. I have checked some of the examples, they are real.

20 examples vs 461 mass shooting events over the same period of time….me thinks the bad guys are well on top.

https://www.massshootingtracker.org/data/2016

And here is a nice compilation of Breibarts greatest hits, or misses depending on your outlook

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/breitbart-headlines_us_5829ba13e4b060adb56f1bdb

Not sure what your point is?

A member asked for examples of good guys with guns taking out the bad guys, and so i provided some.

Case closed.

And its quite funny you miss the irony of using the Huffington Post to analyse Breitbart. The left pot calling the right kettle black.

Is it your contention that the Huffington Post made those stories up?

 

[earl]

If it was all staged and some conspiracy why release photos that don't contain these supposedly glaring omissions? I mean if it was a setup you'd have all that covered right? All we've seen is a few photos without a full context. No doubt there will be a very thorough investigation and you can make a conclusion based on the full evidence.

Exactly. There will always be people with foil hats trying to contrive a conspiracy when it's unlikely one exists. I would think an investigation of this type would take weeks or months to complete and there's little chance the general public will ever be told the full process of the killings - nor is there any need to do so.
To be concluding there's some massive cover up based on the publicly available evidence would be naive, if not foolish.
Let's just see it for what it was - a tragic mass murder by a crazy person who had access to weapons which normal citizens should never have been allowed to buy.

Conspiracy theories are amazing. I think people do this because they can't face reality but it amazes me. Some guy goes crazy with guns. It happens a lot.

 

[Abraham]

Is it your contention that the Huffington Post made those stories up?

No, its my contention that Breitbart's reputation has nothing to do with anything we are talking about.

And its also my contention that the Huffington Post is to the left, what Breitbart is to the Alt-Right, simply a propaganda mouthpiece that genuine news seekers don't take seriously.

 

[Yossarian]

If it was all staged and some conspiracy why release photos that don't contain these supposedly glaring omissions? I mean if it was a setup you'd have all that covered right? All we've seen is a few photos without a full context. No doubt there will be a very thorough investigation and you can make a conclusion based on the full evidence.

Exactly. There will always be people with foil hats trying to contrive a conspiracy when it's unlikely one exists. I would think an investigation of this type would take weeks or months to complete and there's little chance the general public will ever be told the full process of the killings - nor is there any need to do so.
To be concluding there's some massive cover up based on the publicly available evidence would be naive, if not foolish.
**Let's just see it for what it was - a tragic mass murder by a crazy person who had access to weapons which normal citizens should never have been allowed to buy.**

Nothing wrong with asking questions. Especially when everyone has access to smart phones and a wealth of information at their disposal. In a time when mainstream media is dying and citizen journalism is on the rise it's a good thing people ask questions.

Asking questions is fine but after every major event some Johnny Sweatpants puts out a YouTube video supposedly pointing to clear evidence of a conspiracy. I'm pretty convinced that a middle aged man on the 32nd floor armed to the teeth went nuts and shot at a crowd with lethal intent. Obviously that still leaves a lot of questions and to my mind more useful questions. I suspect many conspiracy theorists have the objective to obfuscate these things to avoid those questions.

 

[earl]

If it was all staged and some conspiracy why release photos that don't contain these supposedly glaring omissions? I mean if it was a setup you'd have all that covered right? All we've seen is a few photos without a full context. No doubt there will be a very thorough investigation and you can make a conclusion based on the full evidence.

Exactly. There will always be people with foil hats trying to contrive a conspiracy when it's unlikely one exists. I would think an investigation of this type would take weeks or months to complete and there's little chance the general public will ever be told the full process of the killings - nor is there any need to do so.
To be concluding there's some massive cover up based on the publicly available evidence would be naive, if not foolish.
**Let's just see it for what it was - a tragic mass murder by a crazy person who had access to weapons which normal citizens should never have been allowed to buy.**

Nothing wrong with asking questions. Especially when everyone has access to smart phones and a wealth of information at their disposal. In a time when mainstream media is dying and citizen journalism is on the rise it's a good thing people ask questions.

Asking questions is fine but after every major event some Johnny Sweatpants puts out a YouTube video supposedly pointing to clear evidence of a conspiracy. I'm pretty convinced that a middle aged man on the 32nd floor armed to the teeth went nuts and shot at a crowd with lethal intent. Obviously that still leaves a lot of questions and to my mind more useful questions. I suspect many conspiracy theorists have the objective to obfuscate these things to avoid those questions.

Exactly. I think it's just to avoid looking at the issue.

 

[innsaneink]

If it was all staged and some conspiracy why release photos that don't contain these supposedly glaring omissions? I mean if it was a setup you'd have all that covered right? All we've seen is a few photos without a full context. No doubt there will be a very thorough investigation and you can make a conclusion based on the full evidence.

Exactly. There will always be people with foil hats trying to contrive a conspiracy when it's unlikely one exists. I would think an investigation of this type would take weeks or months to complete and there's little chance the general public will ever be told the full process of the killings - nor is there any need to do so.
To be concluding there's some massive cover up based on the publicly available evidence would be naive, if not foolish.
**Let's just see it for what it was - a tragic mass murder by a crazy person who had access to weapons which normal citizens should never have been allowed to buy.**

Nothing wrong with asking questions. Especially when **_everyone has access to smart phones and a wealth of information at their disposal._** In a time when mainstream media is dying and citizen journalism is on the rise it's a good thing people ask questions.

… and even more mis-information.

 

[tsjonathan]

If it was all staged and some conspiracy why release photos that don't contain these supposedly glaring omissions? I mean if it was a setup you'd have all that covered right? All we've seen is a few photos without a full context. No doubt there will be a very thorough investigation and you can make a conclusion based on the full evidence.

Exactly. There will always be people with foil hats trying to contrive a conspiracy when it's unlikely one exists. I would think an investigation of this type would take weeks or months to complete and there's little chance the general public will ever be told the full process of the killings - nor is there any need to do so.
To be concluding there's some massive cover up based on the publicly available evidence would be naive, if not foolish.
**Let's just see it for what it was - a tragic mass murder by a crazy person who had access to weapons which normal citizens should never have been allowed to buy.**

Nothing wrong with asking questions. Especially when **_everyone has access to smart phones and a wealth of information at their disposal._** In a time when mainstream media is dying and citizen journalism is on the rise it's a good thing people ask questions.

… and even more mis-information.

without digressing too much from the topic i would disagree. I think we live in an age where we are smarter and healthier than we have ever been in human history. Information which isn't accurate generally speaking is far less likely to be ranked by search engines such as Yahoo; Baidu; Google et al , which in turn limits traffic and increases bounce rate. Wikipedia as an example corrects any editing done on its websites within a few hours.

I can totally understand apprehension and caution with questioning media when in the 1950s you had operation mocking bird which still affects modern media.

 

[Abraham]

without digressing too much from the topic i would disagree. I think we live in an age where we are smarter and healthier than we have ever been in human history. Information which isn't accurate generally speaking is far less likely to be ranked by search engines such as Yahoo; Baidu; Google et al , which in turn limits traffic and increases bounce rate. Wikipedia as an example corrects any editing done on its websites within a few hours.

I can totally understand apprehension and caution with questioning media when in the 1950s you had operation mocking bird which still affects modern media.

Asking questions is ALWAYS the intelligent thing to do.

The official line so far is that he acted alone in the hotel room. But how does a 64 year old manage to shoot a modified automatic rifle for 10-15 minutes continuously? I'm much younger than him and physically fit, and i would say it would be nearly impossible for me to do that under normal circumstances. Its not like the movies, shooting any long arm more powerful than a .22 is not a walk in the park.

If he used a bump stock as reported, he would have had this rifle pummeling into his shoulder 400 times per 60 seconds. Unless he is superman, than it verges on the physically impossible.

Information may come out explaining how this was done, but it is a legitimate question to ask when no explanation currently exists.

 

[Geo]

I wont believe anything until It comes from the betoota advocate..

 

[earl]

without digressing too much from the topic i would disagree. I think we live in an age where we are smarter and healthier than we have ever been in human history. Information which isn't accurate generally speaking is far less likely to be ranked by search engines such as Yahoo; Baidu; Google et al , which in turn limits traffic and increases bounce rate. Wikipedia as an example corrects any editing done on its websites within a few hours.

I can totally understand apprehension and caution with questioning media when in the 1950s you had operation mocking bird which still affects modern media.

Asking questions is ALWAYS the intelligent thing to do.

The official line so far is that he acted alone in the hotel room. But how does a 64 year old manage to shoot a modified automatic rifle for 10-15 minutes continuously? I'm much younger than him and physically fit, and i would say it would be nearly impossible for me to do that under normal circumstances. Its not like the movies, shooting any long arm more powerful than a .22 is not a walk in the park.

If he used a bump stock as reported, he would have had this rifle pummeling into his shoulder 400 times per 60 seconds. Unless he is superman, than it verges on the physically impossible.

Information may come out explaining how this was done, but it is a legitimate question to ask when no explanation currently exists.

Your premise is wrong. I'll give an explanation to you to try and explain this. I went out with some fundamentalist muslims for dinner recently. They don't believe that muslims are creating these terrorist attacks including 9/11\. They believe it's a government conspiracy to curtail our freedoms.

If you simply replace fundamentalist muslims with right wing nutters the questions as you call them are exactly the same.

When you state it's always intelligent to ask questions what you really mean is it's best to have some dodgy conspiracy theory and search for irrelevant facts to try and justify that conspiracy theory. I'm a fair bit younger than 64 but I bet I could pull a trigger for a long time. He wasn't wrestling a bear in there.

It's not physically impossible to do what he did. What is wrong is that he was allowed to purchase those guns. That is the issue. Trying to obfuscate the issue to turn it into something else so that you don't have to face the gun control issue is irrational but it makes it easier to stick to extreme right wing crazy theories on gun control.

 

[tsjonathan]

without digressing too much from the topic i would disagree. I think we live in an age where we are smarter and healthier than we have ever been in human history. Information which isn't accurate generally speaking is far less likely to be ranked by search engines such as Yahoo; Baidu; Google et al , which in turn limits traffic and increases bounce rate. Wikipedia as an example corrects any editing done on its websites within a few hours.

I can totally understand apprehension and caution with questioning media when in the 1950s you had operation mocking bird which still affects modern media.

Asking questions is ALWAYS the intelligent thing to do.

The official line so far is that he acted alone in the hotel room. But how does a 64 year old manage to shoot a modified automatic rifle for 10-15 minutes continuously? I'm much younger than him and physically fit, and i would say it would be nearly impossible for me to do that under normal circumstances. Its not like the movies, shooting any long arm more powerful than a .22 is not a walk in the park.

If he used a bump stock as reported, he would have had this rifle pummeling into his shoulder 400 times per 60 seconds. Unless he is superman, than it verges on the physically impossible.

Information may come out explaining how this was done, but it is a legitimate question to ask when no explanation currently exists.

Your premise is wrong. I'll give an explanation to you to try and explain this. I went out with some fundamentalist muslims for dinner recently. They don't believe that muslims are creating these terrorist attacks including 9/11\. They believe it's a government conspiracy to curtail our freedoms.

If you simply replace fundamentalist muslims with right wing nutters the questions as you call them are exactly the same.

When you state it's always intelligent to ask questions what you really mean is it's best to have some dodgy conspiracy theory and search for irrelevant facts to try and justify that conspiracy theory.

I guess the difference is that your Muslim friend would have a bucket load of evidence and common sense and doesn't subscribe to the narrative fed to him. Which is fair enough.

 

[Munk]

I'm a fair bit younger than 64 but I bet I could pull a trigger for a long time. He wasn't wrestling a bear in there.

Earl have you ever used a rapid fire weapon?

 

[earl]

without digressing too much from the topic i would disagree. I think we live in an age where we are smarter and healthier than we have ever been in human history. Information which isn't accurate generally speaking is far less likely to be ranked by search engines such as Yahoo; Baidu; Google et al , which in turn limits traffic and increases bounce rate. Wikipedia as an example corrects any editing done on its websites within a few hours.

I can totally understand apprehension and caution with questioning media when in the 1950s you had operation mocking bird which still affects modern media.

Asking questions is ALWAYS the intelligent thing to do.

The official line so far is that he acted alone in the hotel room. But how does a 64 year old manage to shoot a modified automatic rifle for 10-15 minutes continuously? I'm much younger than him and physically fit, and i would say it would be nearly impossible for me to do that under normal circumstances. Its not like the movies, shooting any long arm more powerful than a .22 is not a walk in the park.

If he used a bump stock as reported, he would have had this rifle pummeling into his shoulder 400 times per 60 seconds. Unless he is superman, than it verges on the physically impossible.

Information may come out explaining how this was done, but it is a legitimate question to ask when no explanation currently exists.

Your premise is wrong. I'll give an explanation to you to try and explain this. I went out with some fundamentalist muslims for dinner recently. They don't believe that muslims are creating these terrorist attacks including 9/11\. They believe it's a government conspiracy to curtail our freedoms.

If you simply replace fundamentalist muslims with right wing nutters the questions as you call them are exactly the same.

When you state it's always intelligent to ask questions what you really mean is it's best to have some dodgy conspiracy theory and search for irrelevant facts to try and justify that conspiracy theory.

I guess the difference is that your Muslim friend would have a bucket load of evidence and common sense and doesn't subscribe to the narrative fed to him. Which is fair enough.

Is it really fair enough ? I don't think it is. I think it's a way to avoid the negative side of Islam. I think it's the exact same thing with the hocus pocus theories regarding mass killings by gun nuts.

 

[earl]

I'm a fair bit younger than 64 but I bet I could pull a trigger for a long time. He wasn't wrestling a bear in there.

Earl have you ever used a rapid fire weapon?

No but I bet I could kill a bunch of people in the same situation if I was a crazy dude with access too that many guns. Guns are pretty efficient at killing people especially if you had a rapid fire weapon and could shoot down at a bunch of people below you.

 

[Munk]

I'm a fair bit younger than 64 but I bet I could pull a trigger for a long time. He wasn't wrestling a bear in there.

Earl have you ever used a rapid fire weapon?

No but I bet I could kill a bunch of people in the same situation if I was a crazy dude with access too that many guns. Guns are pretty efficient at killing people especially if you had a rapid fire weapon and could shoot down at a bunch of people below you.

I bet you couldnt. Just having guns doesnt cause what happened.

 

[Guest]

without digressing too much from the topic i would disagree. I think we live in an age where we are smarter and healthier than we have ever been in human history. Information which isn't accurate generally speaking is far less likely to be ranked by search engines such as Yahoo; Baidu; Google et al , which in turn limits traffic and increases bounce rate. Wikipedia as an example corrects any editing done on its websites within a few hours.

I can totally understand apprehension and caution with questioning media when in the 1950s you had operation mocking bird which still affects modern media.

Asking questions is ALWAYS the intelligent thing to do.

The official line so far is that he acted alone in the hotel room. But how does a 64 year old manage to shoot a modified automatic rifle for 10-15 minutes continuously? I'm much younger than him and physically fit, and i would say it would be nearly impossible for me to do that under normal circumstances. Its not like the movies, shooting any long arm more powerful than a .22 is not a walk in the park.

If he used a bump stock as reported, he would have had this rifle pummeling into his shoulder 400 times per 60 seconds. Unless he is superman, than it verges on the physically impossible.

Information may come out explaining how this was done, but it is a legitimate question to ask when no explanation currently exists.

Regarding the bump stock and recoil, it's far from impossible, in fact it's quite easy. The .223 calibre assault rifles are pussy cats to shoot. I've fired a H&K G36 among other assault rifles and the recoil is minimal. Given he had 22,000 people to aim at all he needed to do was point in the direction of the crowd and the bullets will do the rest, 500 metres is no problem for a .223 when your target is the size of a football field.

 

[Harvey]

Maybe he was a reptilian. Jeez there are some nut jobs out there.

Smart phones and most media platforms simply provide information. If you follow one particular feed, you will doubt anything that does not agree with that.
The problem is that people will always have ideas planted (by right wing racist parents, left wing looney teachers etc) before they are old enough to make up their own mind. With the amount of misinformation and wackjob theories around, they will always be able to find something that supports their preconceived ideas

 

[earl]

I'm a fair bit younger than 64 but I bet I could pull a trigger for a long time. He wasn't wrestling a bear in there.

Earl have you ever used a rapid fire weapon?

No but I bet I could kill a bunch of people in the same situation if I was a crazy dude with access too that many guns. Guns are pretty efficient at killing people especially if you had a rapid fire weapon and could shoot down at a bunch of people below you.

I bet you couldnt. Just having guns doesnt cause what happened.

Of course. If he didn't have access to the guns he would have done the same damage with his bare hands. As a matter of fact if I had to face off against someone and it was the choice between the other guy having a machine gun or having no gun I'd choose the machine gun. It's a tactical disadvantage.

 

[Guest]

I'm a fair bit younger than 64 but I bet I could pull a trigger for a long time. He wasn't wrestling a bear in there.

Earl have you ever used a rapid fire weapon?

I have and what he did was quite easy to do with the setup he had. People also need to recognise that he was also setting up rifles on tripods, so the felt recoil on his shoulder would have been less than normal, provided he had the right technique and was leaning into the tripod it would have been quite easy. A .223 (5.56mm) is a pussy cat to shoot. Step it up to a .308 (7.62mm) and things change considerably.