EPTIf you're seeing this topic then another mass shooting hap…
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. | ||
|
Ayaz2810
United States2763 Posts
| ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States44116 Posts
And rightly so. Republicans need to take responsibility for perpetuating the hatred of LGBT and other minorities, which in turn helps create an environment where they're targeted and killed. No new bills, no new proposals, no new reactions besides "thoughts and prayers lulz". The core principle of prejudice is found in both religious fundamentalism and the modern Republican Party. And the death toll increases every day because of it. Here are some of the pictures (large/ not resized): + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/KV9naC1.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/JErUgl0.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/oXiNRQX.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/oky8IU4.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/ju1l5m1.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/YrhfN9J.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/h1NmnEh.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/olmsFIO.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/qpZtpgs.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/3IM21jC.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/EGecHex.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/VkMzAye.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/gMDq6fJ.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/TxYwf01.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/QDoiKC3.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/7m5W2q9.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/cMuqFcb.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/RHechRM.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/bDez819.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/yf4V0Ab.jpg) | ||
|
LennX
4543 Posts
On June 14 2016 17:52 Wegandi wrote: [...] First, AR-15's are not military-grade weapons. They are a semi-automatic rifle based off 1960's era weaponry. No one in the military uses an AR-15 and would not be caught with one since the military uses SELECT FIRE rifles. (I should know I was in the service myself) [...] AR-15 is not based off a 1960s design but a 1950s AR-10 design. The military equivalent of AR-15 is the M-16 rifle which most armies in the world are still using and its variants. A stock AR-15 doesn't have selective fire of 3round burst or full auto but there are other legal and illegal internal modifications that may be done thus making it similar to a M16. While the US considers AR-15 to be not a military grade assault rifle in the eyes of the law due to its lack of full auto, they do however sell variants of it to certain overseas militaries. Other countries also manufacture their own variants of AR-15s, some of which are military grade. Any weapon that can kill deserves respect, military grade or not and should be handled properly. | ||
|
Ayaz2810
United States2763 Posts
| ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On June 14 2016 14:01 oBlade wrote: The FBI should be positioned to have insight into the effect of the FBI having more power to suspend people's right to buy guns. Are you saying they would obviously want it because it's easier than having to investigate people and do actual police work? That's weak, I want to know the right way to do it. In order for this to work, there would have to be a list of people that were considered too low a risk to continue investigating, but high enough a risk that if you denied legal guns to the entire group, you would stop a significant number of attacks (or else what's the point). But if the number of attacks you objectively could stop was high enough, why weren't these people risky enough to have open investigations? Some things do just come from nowhere. How big do you estimate this class of people is that would get put on a secret list by an intelligence agency, without their knowledge, and have to spend forever in court trying to find answers and then somehow exonerate themselves to restore a their rights? Around 13,000 people, like the no-fly list, or around 400,000 people, like all terror watchlists? As I tried to explain earlier, if you stop people from buying guns legally, they also then do it under the radar, which I assume the FBI doesn't want unless it means the people are buying from undercovers. What I want is law enforcement agencies to liaise with each other more about these types of cases, including more things being tracked automatically in other agencies' records. what part of it being a policy question don't you understand? the fbi is ALREADY tasked with preventing guns from getting into the hands of terrorist suspects. all it takes is a single disqualifying legal category in the already existing CT loop of the NICS procedure, so that more background checks involving terrorism suspects return a deny or delay. | ||
|
Incognoto
France10239 Posts
On June 15 2016 01:09 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: Throughout social media, there has been a sudden increase in the number of "shots fired" at Republicans because of the (tragic) shots fired inside the gay club. And rightly so. Republicans need to take responsibility for perpetuating the hatred of LGBT and other minorities, which in turn helps create an environment where they're targeted and killed. No new bills, no new proposals, no new reactions besides "thoughts and prayers lulz". The core principle of prejudice is found in both religious fundamentalism and the modern Republican Party. And the death toll increases every day because of it. Here are some of the pictures (large/ not resized): + Show Spoiler + not that i like any of those people, but to me it's a little cheap to blame republicans for the shooting? they're idiots in many ways but to say they set up the conditions for terrorism is a stretch, imo are you going to blame trump, cruz or palin for radicalization of the french terrorists? maybe omar was just a bad person and the government cant actually mind control people into hate crimes either way, not really a gun control issue either; you're discussing hate crime which is unrelated | ||
|
GoTuNk!
Chile4591 Posts
On June 15 2016 01:09 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: Throughout social media, there has been a sudden increase in the number of "shots fired" at Republicans because of the (tragic) shots fired inside the gay club. And rightly so. Republicans need to take responsibility for perpetuating the hatred of LGBT and other minorities, which in turn helps create an environment where they're targeted and killed. No new bills, no new proposals, no new reactions besides "thoughts and prayers lulz". The core principle of prejudice is found in both religious fundamentalism and the modern Republican Party. And the death toll increases every day because of it. Here are some of the pictures (large/ not resized): + Show Spoiler + Geez, blaming republicans for this is so far fetched that I can make the counter argument repeating your words. "And rightly so. Muslims need to take responsibility for perpetuating the hatred of LGBT and other minorities, which in turn helps create an environment where they're targeted and killed." But I guess we can blame republicans aswell... given the shooter was a white male republican, and not a Muslim Democrat. | ||
|
oBlade
United States5491 Posts
On June 15 2016 01:09 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: Throughout social media, there has been a sudden increase in the number of "shots fired" at Republicans because of the (tragic) shots fired inside the gay club. And rightly so. Republicans need to take responsibility for perpetuating the hatred of LGBT and other minorities, which in turn helps create an environment where they're targeted and killed. No new bills, no new proposals, no new reactions besides "thoughts and prayers lulz". The core principle of prejudice is found in both religious fundamentalism and the modern Republican Party. And the death toll increases every day because of it. The death toll increases because it's cumulative. Cumulative things can only get bigger. Murder rates in the USA have been decreasing (I'm guessing Republicans can't take any responsibility for that, though). Hate crime laws exist and are used, what bills are missing? ![[image loading]](http://thepublicintellectual.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Homicides-1900-2010-2.jpg) Not every evil in the world is rooted in the Republican Party. If a shooting happened in a gun free zone, and you saw shit like this going around social media, you'd rightly think it was as despicably childish as what you're actually relaying to us now. + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/whitehouse.gov/files/images/twitter_cards_potus.jpg) "I am Seung-hui Cho." ![[image loading]](http://a4.files.biography.com/image/upload/c_fill,cs_srgb,dpr_1.0,g_face,h_300,q_80,w_300/MTE4MDAzNDEwMDU4NTc3NDIy.jpg) "I am Mainak Sarkar." ![[image loading]](http://media4.s-nbcnews.com/j/newscms/2016_04/1396226/bernie-sanders-mug_5fea106e0eb494469a75e60d8f2b18ea.nbcnews-fp-320-320.jpeg) "I am Adam Lanza." | ||
|
biology]major
United States2253 Posts
On June 15 2016 01:09 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: Throughout social media, there has been a sudden increase in the number of "shots fired" at Republicans because of the (tragic) shots fired inside the gay club. And rightly so. Republicans need to take responsibility for perpetuating the hatred of LGBT and other minorities, which in turn helps create an environment where they're targeted and killed. No new bills, no new proposals, no new reactions besides "thoughts and prayers lulz". The core principle of prejudice is found in both religious fundamentalism and the modern Republican Party. And the death toll increases every day because of it. Here are some of the pictures (large/ not resized): + Show Spoiler + This is a pretty good way for people to never take you seriously | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On June 15 2016 03:06 biology]major wrote: This is a pretty good way for people to never take you seriously I take seriously and think he had made a good point about the constant demonization of gays by social conservatives. And the efforts by the GOP to court those social conservatives as voters has allowed that demonization to continue and sustain itself. | ||
|
Reaps
United Kingdom1280 Posts
On June 15 2016 01:09 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: Throughout social media, there has been a sudden increase in the number of "shots fired" at Republicans because of the (tragic) shots fired inside the gay club. And rightly so. Republicans need to take responsibility for perpetuating the hatred of LGBT and other minorities, which in turn helps create an environment where they're targeted and killed. No new bills, no new proposals, no new reactions besides "thoughts and prayers lulz". The core principle of prejudice is found in both religious fundamentalism and the modern Republican Party. And the death toll increases every day because of it. Here are some of the pictures (large/ not resized): + Show Spoiler + Disgusting post. | ||
|
Ayaz2810
United States2763 Posts
On June 15 2016 03:06 biology]major wrote: This is a pretty good way for people to never take you seriously How do you figure? The right and the religious have been demonizing LGBT people for a long ass time. Based on the fact that the shooter went to that club something like twice a month for 3 years tells me he was a closeted homosexual who was ashamed. Why was he ashamed? Thats right, people like those in the pictures, and in some cases, those exact people. Pair that with what islam is (lets not delude ourselves), and you have a recipe for what happened. Politicians on the right and the religious are to blame. That's not a far stretch for a lot of people.... | ||
|
Ayaz2810
United States2763 Posts
On June 15 2016 03:13 Plansix wrote: I take seriously and think he had made a good point about the constant demonization of gays by social conservatives. And the efforts by the GOP to court those social conservatives as voters has allowed that demonization to continue and sustain itself. Exactly what I was getting at in my post. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States44116 Posts
On June 15 2016 02:39 Incognoto wrote: not that i like any of those people, but to me it's a little cheap to blame republicans for the shooting? they're idiots in many ways but to say they set up the conditions for terrorism is a stretch, imo Republicans are blocking the ability to even do research on gun violence in America, let alone allow us to make any changes. Furthermore, they're continuously trying to label and treat minority groups (such as LGBT) as second-class citizens. When the status quo is a daily mass shooting and discrimination in this country, and one political party refuses to acknowledge it and do anything about it, they're part of the problem. Saying "thoughts and prayers" is the most hollow and offensive thing a politician could say, seeing as how he could actually be trying to do something meaningful in response to these tragedies. On June 15 2016 02:50 GoTuNk! wrote: Geez, blaming republicans for this is so far fetched that I can make the counter argument repeating your words. "And rightly so. Muslims need to take responsibility for perpetuating the hatred of LGBT and other minorities, which in turn helps create an environment where they're targeted and killed." Muslims aren't controlling Congress; there is not a majority of Muslims who are deciding whether or not to actually take steps towards properly assessing and dealing with these situations. It's Republicans. On June 15 2016 03:00 oBlade wrote: The death toll increases because it's cumulative. Cumulative things can only get bigger. lol yes I know that  The intended emphasis was on "every day"- the surprisingly common frequency in which gun-related deaths occur. And yet each day goes by and nothing changes. They shrug and say, "Ehhhhh whaddya gonna do. It happens." On June 15 2016 03:06 biology]major wrote: This is a pretty good way for people to never take you seriously Can you please elaborate why as opposed to just posting a one-liner comment like that? A real response would allow me to attempt to clarify my position and discuss points with you (as I've tried to do with the previous responders). Thanks. Thank you for your contribution. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States44116 Posts
 | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12095 Posts
On June 14 2016 18:02 Wegandi wrote: I only get annoyed at hoity-toity Europeans who are self-righteous. Does it ever strike you that this comes down to you thinking it's pretentious for people to have opinions? | ||
|
bluzi
4703 Posts
On June 14 2016 11:57 dontforgetosmile wrote: i don't think you understand that the purpose of a car, nor the fact that there are currently regulations applied to ownership of one, have any effect on the amount of people dead as a result. you're really grasping at straws here. i'm just trying to show you that you are completely fine with the amount of people dying from car use. you are fine with this in spite of the fact that this number is higher than the number of people killed involving gun violence. why is it ok for more people to die in one way and not ok for less people to die in another? Oh god.... its not real life anymore...., the quetion is the benfits you get for the risk you take , no one would care about the guns in america if there werent so many cases of shooting like the one we just saw , the benfit is whats in question if you can point us to the BENFITS it will be great !!! we see the risks all the time ......I can point out some small benfits modern transportation has provided to human kind. | ||
|
oBlade
United States5491 Posts
On June 15 2016 02:18 oneofthem wrote: what part of it being a policy question don't you understand? Never heard of "listen to the generals?" On June 15 2016 02:18 oneofthem wrote: the fbi is ALREADY tasked with preventing guns from getting into the hands of terrorist suspects. all it takes is a single disqualifying legal category in the already existing CT loop of the NICS procedure, so that more background checks involving terrorism suspects return a deny or delay. The FBI is not just a gun-blocking machine. That's only one means of trying to make the country safer. I've tried to get you to explain how many this people you think is supposed to affect and what attacks it's meant to stop that otherwise slip through the FBI's cracks - i.e., whether it can actually save any lives and whether it would be worth the tradeoff of constitutionally protected rights. For example, if the list denied guns to 100,000 people but only stopped 2 murders, it would be stopping fewer murders than you'd expect just from the base rate of the population. What makes more sense is what I said before, have more interagency tracking and records. Alert a department somewhere when someone who was in an investigation that's closed buys a gun so they can decide to take another look if it's warranted. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On June 15 2016 03:48 oBlade wrote: Never heard of "listen to the generals?" The FBI is not just a gun-blocking machine. That's only one means of trying to make the country safer. I've tried to get you to explain how many this people you think is supposed to affect and what attacks it's meant to stop that otherwise slip through the FBI's cracks - i.e., whether it can actually save any lives and whether it would be worth the tradeoff of constitutionally protected rights. For example, if the list denied guns to 100,000 people but only stopped 2 murders, it would be stopping fewer murders than you'd expect just from the base rate of the population. What makes more sense is what I said before, have more interagency tracking and records. Alert a department somewhere when someone who was in an investigation that's closed buys a gun so they can decide to take another look if it's warranted. You are dealing in hypotheticals with ginned up numbers to make your point. The argument is that there should be a system for the FBI to deny a gun sale if they feel the person is dangerous enough. Of course the system you created in your example would not be acceptable. But that does not mean the system shouldn’t exist. Are you advocating that there should be no way for the FBI or law enforcement to prevent gun sales to people that they suspect will be dangerous? Yes or no. Do not give me your counter question where you demand to know how it would work so you don’t have to answer. Do you believe that the FBI and law enforcement shouldn’t be able to stop gun sales no matter what? | ||
|
thePunGun
598 Posts
On June 15 2016 03:57 Plansix wrote: You are dealing in hypotheticals with ginned up numbers to make your point. The argument is that there should be a system for the FBI to deny a gun sale if they feel the person is dangerous enough. Of course the system you created in your example would not be acceptable. But that does not mean the system shouldn’t exist. Are you advocating that there should be no way for the FBI or law enforcement to prevent gun sales to people that they suspect will be dangerous? Yes or no. Do not give me your counter question where you demand to know how it would work so you don’t have to answer. Do you believe that the FBI and law enforcement shouldn’t be able to stop gun sales no matter what? This will never happen in the U.S., because the gun lobby/NRA have way too much power in this country! It's not about guns for them, it's about the profit! Do you really think the NRA gives a shit about gun owners/people? Nope, it's all about profit, nothing else! And yes, I own a gun, but I am not deluded enough to think, that owning a gun equals protection! When out of nowhere some maniac starts shooting, for whatever reason, I'll hit the ground faster than I can grab my gun! That's physics and yes the gun lobby will deny that, but guess what, reality is a bitch! And it won't matter, if the NRA disagrees with it! Reality quite frankly doesn't give 2 shits about opinions... | ||
| ||
