MONKMAN Posted November 7, 2017 Share Posted November 7, 2017 There was no other shoot out and they were communicating with the police throughout the pursuit. I stand corrected, initial reports I seen stated there had been a second shootout after the chase. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted November 7, 2017 Share Posted November 7, 2017 16 minutes ago, Bairnardo said: They likely would have to answer some questions about the gun they used. Aye, but if they nicked it out of a police car or broke into a gun shop, while it was going on, no charges. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheProgressiveLiberal Posted November 8, 2017 Share Posted November 8, 2017 13 hours ago, chomp my root said: It might have been more effective if they'd removed the assault rifles still in circulation, all you had was a culture of those with them and those without, some of who did want them. That's why whenever there's even a whiff of another ban being put in place more go out and buy them to beat the anticipated 'dead'line. Things change anyway, there seems to have been an increase in the 'newsworthy' mass slayings, certainly more than there was leading up to the last ban. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban I'm assuming this is what you're referring to. Ok. If you have an idea of how to remove assault weapons from circulation without sparking a civil war I'm all ears. There's a reason Clinton didn't bother to try in the ban he passed. 13 hours ago, NotThePars said: Wasn't there a federal tax collector killed a few years back in the deep south? I think you would need near unanimous political will and public support to effectively disarm the entire population and it looks you'll never get that especially in such a polarised state the US is in now. There was a census work who killed himself and staged it to look like a right wing murder in Kentucky. Of course the fake media tried to pin it to the tea party before the truth came out. 12 hours ago, Zen Archer said: The boy can afford a gun but not a fucking dentist. He had the truck, not the gun. Probably spent his straight teeth money on that fresh neck tattoo. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chomp my root Posted November 8, 2017 Share Posted November 8, 2017 7 minutes ago, TheProgressiveLiberal said: Ok. If you have an idea of how to remove assault weapons from circulation without sparking a civil war I'm all ears. There's a reason Clinton didn't bother to try in the ban he passed. There was a census work who killed himself and staged it to look like a right wing murder in Kentucky. Of course the fake media tried to pin it to the tea party before the truth came out. He had the truck, not the gun. Probably spent his straight teeth money on that fresh neck tattoo. While I accept that its the 64 thousand dollar question, have you got any idea how ridiculous the notion is. Without doing any research, the countries that tolerate the laissez faire approach you're talking about are America and sections of the third world. I don't know if it was on Clinton's or Bush's watch that the 10 year moratorium ceased but apart from it being an election year, it was an unpopular 'law', especially with those that didn't have assault rifles. I'm not sure why they felt the need for them, other than the boy next door had one but hey ho. I'm not unsympathetic to firearms, I've used them most my life, only ever used automatic weapons in the Military, never wanted one in my private life, there are much better alternatives for hunting and sports shooting. Handguns, I get too, maybe not the need to carry them day to day but I accept the cultural differences as well as the differences in crime (partially because every fecker has a gun so sort of self perpetuating). Serious question, do you as an individual think America is a better place because individuals can own (and hoard) automatic weapons and unlimited amounts of ammunition ? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
expatowner Posted November 8, 2017 Share Posted November 8, 2017 4 hours ago, TheProgressiveLiberal said: Ok. If you have an idea of how to remove assault weapons from circulation without sparking a civil war I'm all ears. There's a reason Clinton didn't bother to try in the ban he passed. How about hiking the tax on bullets by say 1000%? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blootoon87 Posted November 8, 2017 Share Posted November 8, 2017 If they perfect penis extension surgery and price it as cheaply as a rifle then I'd wager guns would be all but wiped out in America. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheProgressiveLiberal Posted November 8, 2017 Share Posted November 8, 2017 7 hours ago, chomp my root said: While I accept that its the 64 thousand dollar question, have you got any idea how ridiculous the notion is. Without doing any research, the countries that tolerate the laissez faire approach you're talking about are America and sections of the third world. I don't know if it was on Clinton's or Bush's watch that the 10 year moratorium ceased but apart from it being an election year, it was an unpopular 'law', especially with those that didn't have assault rifles. I'm not sure why they felt the need for them, other than the boy next door had one but hey ho. I'm not unsympathetic to firearms, I've used them most my life, only ever used automatic weapons in the Military, never wanted one in my private life, there are much better alternatives for hunting and sports shooting. Handguns, I get too, maybe not the need to carry them day to day but I accept the cultural differences as well as the differences in crime (partially because every fecker has a gun so sort of self perpetuating). Serious question, do you as an individual think America is a better place because individuals can own (and hoard) automatic weapons and unlimited amounts of ammunition ? I don't think semi-automatic "assault rifles" make much difference one way or the other. Since you're experienced with firearms let me ask you a question. Imagine you're someone with limited or median firearms experience. You are going to carry out a mass shooting in a confined, enclosed, and crowded space like a church or dance club. Your only goal is a high body count. Wouldn't a few handguns with extended clips be more effective than an AK-47? That's always been my perception as a person with median firearms experience. As for my opinion on the effects of stricter gun control laws in general: I don't think it's possible to stop mass killings. People who want to do that will find a way. I suspect they would decrease domestic type incidents but increase organized criminal attacks on normal law abiding people. I think gun ownership is very low in 3rd world countries. Much higher in large parts of Europe. For reference, Wikipedia says that Mexico is behind the following European countries in gun ownership rates: Luxembourg, Czech, Belgium, Bosnia, Sweden, Croatia, Greece, Montenegro, Macedonia, Switzerland, Germany, Iceland, Austria, France, Norway, Finland, Cyprus, and Serbia. I'd imagine you'd be much more scared to randomly travel through Mexico than any of those other countries. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chomp my root Posted November 8, 2017 Share Posted November 8, 2017 55 minutes ago, TheProgressiveLiberal said: I don't think semi-automatic "assault rifles" make much difference one way or the other. Since you're experienced with firearms let me ask you a question. Imagine you're someone with limited or median firearms experience. You are going to carry out a mass shooting in a confined, enclosed, and crowded space like a church or dance club. Your only goal is a high body count. Wouldn't a few handguns with extended clips be more effective than an AK-47? That's always been my perception as a person with median firearms experience. As for my opinion on the effects of stricter gun control laws in general: I don't think it's possible to stop mass killings. People who want to do that will find a way. I suspect they would decrease domestic type incidents but increase organized criminal attacks on normal law abiding people. I think gun ownership is very low in 3rd world countries. Much higher in large parts of Europe. For reference, Wikipedia says that Mexico is behind the following European countries in gun ownership rates: Luxembourg, Czech, Belgium, Bosnia, Sweden, Croatia, Greece, Montenegro, Macedonia, Switzerland, Germany, Iceland, Austria, France, Norway, Finland, Cyprus, and Serbia. I'd imagine you'd be much more scared to randomly travel through Mexico than any of those other countries. The sad thing is you're not even trolling. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shandon Par Posted November 8, 2017 Share Posted November 8, 2017 At the current rate of killings, TheProgressiveLiberal will likely be machine gunned to oblivion by a God-fearing white American any day now. Praise the Lord! 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted November 8, 2017 Share Posted November 8, 2017 I wish I knew how to do polls on here: Q. Do you think the amount of people shot dead in the U.S. this year has been: a) too many b) just the right amount c) not enough 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted November 8, 2017 Share Posted November 8, 2017 Just now, Melanius Mullarkey said: FTFY If you had to live in Greenock death would be a sweet release. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shandon Par Posted November 8, 2017 Share Posted November 8, 2017 (edited) 5 minutes ago, Granny Danger said: If you had to live in Greenock ... I'd like to think he and VikingT would become close friends. MM would introduce VT to mushroom suppers and they'd sit down together with a beer as VT reads extracts to MM from the Morton FC Almanac, 1970-2005, Vol, I-XV, The Glory Years. Edited November 8, 2017 by Shandon Par 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Venti Posted November 8, 2017 Share Posted November 8, 2017 7 minutes ago, Melanius Mullarkey said: FTFY Mostly self-inflicted gunshots at Cappielow. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted November 8, 2017 Share Posted November 8, 2017 3 minutes ago, Slenderman said: Mostly self-inflicted gunshots at Cappielow. Certainly wouldn't ask your strikers to do it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raidernation Posted November 8, 2017 Share Posted November 8, 2017 9 hours ago, TheProgressiveLiberal said: I'd imagine you'd be much more scared to randomly travel through Mexico than any of those other countries. I may not have previously mentioned I taught in some of Chicago's worst areas but I'd be less scared randomly travelling through, say, Austin or Englewood, than goin anywhere in the US with you! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheProgressiveLiberal Posted November 9, 2017 Share Posted November 9, 2017 14 hours ago, chomp my root said: The sad thing is you're not even trolling. All the points I made were thought out and logical. Handguns are just as dangerous as assault rifles in crowded and confined spaces. I suspect the murder rate has more to do with the amount of violent criminals in a society and the ability of a government justice system to function properly than the amount of guns. In fact, increasing guns in law abiding hands could potentially lower certain classes of murders. In general loads of the most violent countries have very low gun ownership rates and loads of the most peaceful countries have very high rates when you compare across the world. Don't think there's much of a correlation. 14 hours ago, Shandon Par said: At the current rate of killings, TheProgressiveLiberal will likely be machine gunned to oblivion by a God-fearing white American any day now. Praise the Lord! If you look at the real statistics, as a white American who's not a violent criminal I'm not more likely to be murdered in the USA than in the UK. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheProgressiveLiberal Posted November 9, 2017 Share Posted November 9, 2017 6 hours ago, Raidernation said: I may not have previously mentioned I taught in some of Chicago's worst areas but I'd be less scared randomly travelling through, say, Austin or Englewood, than goin anywhere in the US with you! What grade do you teach? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raidernation Posted November 9, 2017 Share Posted November 9, 2017 14 hours ago, TheProgressiveLiberal said: What grade do you teach? High School, why? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The OP Posted November 9, 2017 Share Posted November 9, 2017 14 hours ago, TheProgressiveLiberal said: If you look at the real statistics, as a white American who's not a violent criminal I'm not more likely to be murdered in the USA than in the UK. Have you similarly doctored the UK statistics so that it excludes all 'violent criminals'? I'd surmise that a majority of murder victims in Glasgow have convictions for assault, etc. Doesn't mean knife crime isn't a problem when they're stabbed to death. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergeant Wilson Posted November 9, 2017 Share Posted November 9, 2017 (edited) 16 hours ago, TheProgressiveLiberal said: What grade do you teach? 1 hour ago, Raidernation said: High School, why? ...and that's how I met him... Edited November 9, 2017 by Sergeant Wilson 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.