Are there really more "mass shootings" in the U.S.?

Post Reply New Topic

It is difficult to believe that claim when you have also said "My theory, they're over-compensating for something that looks like a gun."

So, are you serious about the matter now, or then? With such apparent animosity toward those Americans who enjoy the Second Amendment, and all other amendments as well, it strains credibility to claim that "...nobody is talking about taking the Second Amendment away."

1) To Magna: actually yes, I see you're more "the sky is falling - they're gonna take everything from us!!" kind of guy though.

2) To Aspie: oh, so this is about me ridiculing gun nuts. Yeah, no apologies here. I said and meant what I mean - I'm not politically correct nor aim to be. I personally find gun nuts to be frankly hilariously odd. There are NRA members, soldiers, and hunters who do as well. To clarify on hunters - there are hunters who only shoot and kill what they intend to eat and use, then there are hunters who just go out there to shoot animals with no intention of use - just shooting their gun; this distinction is even made among the serious hunting community.

I asked you two questions in my last post. What exactly are you saying "yes" to in response?

This.

I support gun ownership, but I don't think anybody should be allowed to have any gun they want, with as much ammo as they want, with the freedom to bring them everywhere.

Yes, there is a limit to how much can and will be restricted.

Will "sane gun laws" stop all gun violence? No, will it deter it - yes.

Life doesn't exist in absolutes and extremes.

Have I insulted you in this discussion? I don't believe I have, but I have received several insults aimed at me. I don't mind, after being a public figure for almost 40 years, I am familiar with it. But, I have to wonder why the animosity finds itself in so many of your posts. Unfortunately, that is a signal to most people that you aren't kind, and will listen to respond, not to learn. Too bad. I believe that your apparent intellect could be useful.

I couldn't care less who feels insulted and who doesn't by me making fun of gun nuts nor did I call you a gun nut, that's only up to you to decide. If you're that extreme, it fits you. If you're not, then it doesn't.

Right about after 2016 I stopped caring who I offend. You can thank the right and Trump for that. Now, I just "say it like it is."

Last edited by Spooky_Mulder on 26 Sep 2018, 4:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I don't agree with you that there's a limit to how much can and will be restricted. That's not true. It's possible for a new amendment to be created that could supersede the 2nd Amendment thereby nullifying it. So what is this "limit" that you speak of?

Technically there isn't a limit to anything, sociologically and democratically there typically is unless there's a dictator.

Limit: don't take everyone's guns away and allow people to have the possibility of gun ownership - which doesn't include specifically designed military hardware. There are some guns that are only designed for advanced combat scenarios, these should not be out on the streets and trained military soldiers have even said as much. As per what the specifications are on this weaponry, I don't know - but, I personally take the word of the military who have experienced combat in these regards.

Ok. "typically" isn't good enough for me when it comes to the Bill of Rights so we can agree to disagree.

As in 1 out of 1,000 if it isn't a dictator, King George and Hitler would fit this definition.

But, still, you care about rarities whereas I'm not concerned over rarities. So agree to disagree. Just wanted to specify what I meant by "typically."

Why would I thank the president for anything? I see little in him and his cohorts to thank.

You seem to believe that I am a Republican. I can assure you that I amn't. My 40 years in politics and public relations has allowed me to serve as an adviser on hate crimes to the U.S. Office of the Attorney for the District of Utah, being invited to visit the Clinton-Gore White House, serving as the federal Gramm-Leach-Bliley financial disclosure and privacy officer for a large financial institution in my state, I have helped writing viatical-settlements legislation in my state which benefits terminally ill individuals, I wrote the first LGB-friendly nondiscrimination law in my state.

And currently, I am working with the University of Utah Health Care Autism Spectrum Disorder Clinic and the Utah Pride Center in creating LGBTQ-autism accommodations and inclusion among many Utah agencies and foundations.

While I was a Democrat, I now consider myself a Jeffersonian constitutionalist (libertarian by most standards, but note the lowercase "L"). Fifteen years ago, I created the largest LGBTQ sport-shooting group in the United States.

So, while you pick the wheat from the chafe, you might want to consider being nicer to people who actually agree with you 80 percent of the time.

As stated, I never called you a gun nut; I only made fun of gun nuts in the most general of terms.

If the "glorify guns" comment was a response to you - unsure - yeah, my reply to that wasn't directed at you, just the notion of "glorifying guns." Gun nuts say things like they want to marry their guns, shoot animals for shooting rather than hunting sake, prepare for militias in the woods in case the government turns on them, and so on and so forth.

That is to say, not everybody who uses a gun is a gun nut.

ADDING: Checked, and nope - the glorified comment wasn't initially linked to you, so I didn't indirectly without knowing it call you a gun nut either. You somehow landed upon that conclusion yourself. As said not everybody who owns a gun is a gun nut.

Last edited by Spooky_Mulder on 26 Sep 2018, 4:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Yes. Yes, there are. Significantly more. Because of the "Wild West" cultural mentality and, of course, lots and lots of blood money courtesy of the НPA (That's NRA in Cyrillic, Tovarisch.)

Shooting animals for its own sake is illegal in my state and most others, I presume. In fact, scare or "warning" shots coming from rogue hunters or activists to scare away animals is also illegal.

Militias are now lawfully called "National Guards," but the result is the same. I don't think you meant to disparage guardsmen and guardswomen who are the last line of defense for your state and mine.

(1) Just because it’s illegal doesn’t mean people don’t do it.

(2) Nah militias as in “unregulated militias,” most (all?) of which are on the far right and it’s due to their belief that there will be a race “war.”