Nothing worse than the aftermath of a mass shoe beating. It's hard to imagine the horror of all the distended tongues, broken heels, soles completely torn away. The misery these loafers and sneakers leave imprinted on innocent lives really stinks.
Glock-style is prevalant. Nevertheless, ordinary law-abiding citizens do not need ARs either for target practice or for hunting. Entire countries get along without them.
According to the comments on right wing websites I perused today, gunman is absolutely a liberal because he drives a Subaru. (They also don’t seem to get that red flag laws only work in states that have them, unlike Maine).
The whole "cars kill more people" argument is a false equivalence anyway -- generally speaking, people *don't* get in their cars and think, "who can I kill today?" Traffic deaths are in a large majority caused by careless driving, weather conditions and mechanical failures. Plus, as we all love to point out, cars are registered, require a license that requires periodic requalification, and usually requires the owner/operator to have insurance, often both against damage to physical objects (like other cars) *and* harm to others. If you want to compare vehicle deaths to gun deaths, let's parse out *just* the deaths that were caused deliberately, as when assholes drove into crowds of protestors with the intent to cause harm.
Wouldn't it be nice to have the gun humpers be required to register each gun and have insurance coverage for each firearm. Let the insurance co's sort out who is high risk and study gun violence since congress can't seem to make it happen.
Also, cars are made to transport people and goods. That's their primary purpose. Deaths caused by cars are an unfortunate side effect. What's the primary purpose of firearms again?
2 or 3 SWAT vehicles just rolled up in Bowdoin ME where he used to live and they asked the news crew there to turn off their lights (it's very dark out there now). They exited the SWAT vehicles and are heading for a barn across the street. Drones are above. They might have located this horribly disturbed murderer.
People really don't open carry much here. I saw it way more in Arizona. Lots of guns here of course, in part because lots of people hunt. "Freedom" reasons, too, but seriously you don't see much open carry in Maine.
I get the "Freedom" reasons. But what exactly are you hunting with an AR-15 style weapon with an electronic infrared scope? Is that for deer? Because, imho, we both know there will be NOTHING left of that deer to eat. It's for mass-slaughtering humans only.
All good questions. I don't deer hunt, but I'm sorely tempted because they eat absolutely everything here. Crossbow is what I'd consider. No need for or interest in rifles.
Yep, because as soon as you mention anything about maybe not allowing EVERYONE access to killing machines - "The DemoRats are taking away my rights! They'll perform tyranny on me" 😒
Rather than "... the people who want guns to be free and easy — hell, mandatory — are usually the ones killing lots of people with guns" I think it would be more accurate/precise to say "... the ones killing lots of people with guns are usually the people who want guns to be free and easy."
Nor do we require people to take a written or practical test in order to be legally permitted to drive a car. We also don't mandate that people who drive cars carry liability insurance. And we certainly don't require every car driven on the road to meet specified mechanical standards, or to be registered with the government, or to bear a highly visible identifying placard which can be used by jackbooted government thugs to instantly identify the owner of the car. I mean, if we did any of those things, that would be TYRANNY YES IT WOULD!!!! So right, the car analogy is a really excellent one and demonstrates that the person who made it is a very logical and organized thinker.
And let's not forget that Maine has no "red flag law" that would have enabled a family member or law enforcement to appeal to a court to take the guns away from someone who is a threat to themselves and others.
No insurance company would ever expose themselves to that kind of liability. But a sizable license fee could possibly be donated to a victims' fund, or something along those lines.
point of order - you can no longer call it a debate or discussion of gun laws - its dribbling babbling madness all the way down and hysterical knee jerk reactionism 'but mah freedumb' as well
Nothing worse than the aftermath of a mass shoe beating. It's hard to imagine the horror of all the distended tongues, broken heels, soles completely torn away. The misery these loafers and sneakers leave imprinted on innocent lives really stinks.
Glock-style is prevalant. Nevertheless, ordinary law-abiding citizens do not need ARs either for target practice or for hunting. Entire countries get along without them.
Wow, not ANOTHER psycho white guy military type that everyone in town knew as bad news for years, who would have guessed
Ta, Dok. I'm disgusted.
According to the comments on right wing websites I perused today, gunman is absolutely a liberal because he drives a Subaru. (They also don’t seem to get that red flag laws only work in states that have them, unlike Maine).
Umm, Dinesh, you moron:
https://everytownresearch.org/graph/gun-death-vs-motor-vehicle-accident-deaths-since-1999/
The whole "cars kill more people" argument is a false equivalence anyway -- generally speaking, people *don't* get in their cars and think, "who can I kill today?" Traffic deaths are in a large majority caused by careless driving, weather conditions and mechanical failures. Plus, as we all love to point out, cars are registered, require a license that requires periodic requalification, and usually requires the owner/operator to have insurance, often both against damage to physical objects (like other cars) *and* harm to others. If you want to compare vehicle deaths to gun deaths, let's parse out *just* the deaths that were caused deliberately, as when assholes drove into crowds of protestors with the intent to cause harm.
Wouldn't it be nice to have the gun humpers be required to register each gun and have insurance coverage for each firearm. Let the insurance co's sort out who is high risk and study gun violence since congress can't seem to make it happen.
Also, cars are made to transport people and goods. That's their primary purpose. Deaths caused by cars are an unfortunate side effect. What's the primary purpose of firearms again?
If gun ownership had the same levels of regulation that car ownership did that would be a decent start.
This is the appropriate thread as anticipated.
So without any further ado:
BLOOD FOR THE GUN GODS!!! CASH FOR THE NRA THRONE!!!
2 or 3 SWAT vehicles just rolled up in Bowdoin ME where he used to live and they asked the news crew there to turn off their lights (it's very dark out there now). They exited the SWAT vehicles and are heading for a barn across the street. Drones are above. They might have located this horribly disturbed murderer.
And when they eventually get him our Country will have .0001% less murdering psychopaths in it.
Good think the guy didn’t have a hammer or a swimming pool. Could have really hurt people.
Or loose ciggies.
Why was this guy able to get a gun like this?
Why?
Extremely weak gun laws in ME. People open carry everywhere. Senator Susan Collins is very concerned.
People really don't open carry much here. I saw it way more in Arizona. Lots of guns here of course, in part because lots of people hunt. "Freedom" reasons, too, but seriously you don't see much open carry in Maine.
I get the "Freedom" reasons. But what exactly are you hunting with an AR-15 style weapon with an electronic infrared scope? Is that for deer? Because, imho, we both know there will be NOTHING left of that deer to eat. It's for mass-slaughtering humans only.
All good questions. I don't deer hunt, but I'm sorely tempted because they eat absolutely everything here. Crossbow is what I'd consider. No need for or interest in rifles.
And once again, nothing will be done about the guns.
Yep, because as soon as you mention anything about maybe not allowing EVERYONE access to killing machines - "The DemoRats are taking away my rights! They'll perform tyranny on me" 😒
Rather than "... the people who want guns to be free and easy — hell, mandatory — are usually the ones killing lots of people with guns" I think it would be more accurate/precise to say "... the ones killing lots of people with guns are usually the people who want guns to be free and easy."
Nor do we require people to take a written or practical test in order to be legally permitted to drive a car. We also don't mandate that people who drive cars carry liability insurance. And we certainly don't require every car driven on the road to meet specified mechanical standards, or to be registered with the government, or to bear a highly visible identifying placard which can be used by jackbooted government thugs to instantly identify the owner of the car. I mean, if we did any of those things, that would be TYRANNY YES IT WOULD!!!! So right, the car analogy is a really excellent one and demonstrates that the person who made it is a very logical and organized thinker.
And let's not forget that Maine has no "red flag law" that would have enabled a family member or law enforcement to appeal to a court to take the guns away from someone who is a threat to themselves and others.
if they can afford their firearm habit they shouldn’t object to carrying insurance for their ‘’accidents’’ … i do for my automobile …
No insurance company would ever expose themselves to that kind of liability. But a sizable license fee could possibly be donated to a victims' fund, or something along those lines.
point of order - you can no longer call it a debate or discussion of gun laws - its dribbling babbling madness all the way down and hysterical knee jerk reactionism 'but mah freedumb' as well