Gun violence (2 Viewers)

It's like the Russian pee tapes remember? That was supposed to be the end of Trump.

All fabricated nonsense to try and subvert an election the left didn't want. It's kinda like an insurrection.😆😆
 
If it wasn't for democrats we wouldn't need to be armed, the left is very good at committing violent crime.
 
So if you wanted a meal for example and you have a small gun, do you give it in on arrival and collect it on the way out? That seems the only way to me. A bit like checking in a raincoat. I can't see the honour system working.
Col
You can't check in a weapon. You're not allowed to leave your weapon with anyone. That person may not be legally allowed to have a weapon in his possession.
 
Are you saying that American parents tell their children not to sneak into the house late at night because daddy or mummy will shoot you?
Col
Imagine you're a police officer. In the US, they carry firearms. Criminals have threatened you. Some recently got out of jail. You probably sleep with your gun. Your children know this. They don't just sneak in the house. Not all parents stay up all night to wait for their adult children to come home. Teens still in school, yes.
 
Imagine you're a police officer. In the US, they carry firearms. Criminals have threatened you. Some recently got out of jail. You probably sleep with your gun. Your children know this. They don't just sneak in the house. Not all parents stay up all night to wait for their adult children to come home. Teens still in school, yes.
Agree. I mean is it really that incredibly difficult for people to understand reasonably careful handling of a gun? I own a car too and I'm not constantly running my children over or the neighbors
 
You can't check in a weapon. You're not allowed to leave your weapon with anyone. That person may not be legally allowed to have a weapon in his possession.
I do it all the time. There's a lockbox hanging on the wall. I walk in , they hand me a key, I put my gun in the lockbox, take the key and go on my merry way.
 
The video below is an isolated fact that proves nothing. Tucker Carslon reports that improving the ability of citizens in Brazil to obtain guns, has lowered the crime rate. The video simply points to the possibility that improved access to guns may actually reduce crime. Something worth investigating since it seems that ever greater gun control has not reduced crime.
 
I do it all the time. There's a lockbox hanging on the wall. I walk in , they hand me a key, I put my gun in the lockbox, take the key and go on my merry way.


I've never seen a lockbox.
 
Agree. I mean is it really that incredibly difficult for people to understand reasonably careful handling of a gun? I own a car too and I'm not constantly running my children over or the neighbors
Same thing with prescription meds. Your older children don't help themselves to yours unless they have serious drug issues.
 
I do it all the time. There's a lockbox hanging on the wall. I walk in , they hand me a key, I put my gun in the lockbox, take the key and go on my merry way.


I've never seen a lockbox.
Not in restaurants, etc. but they do have them in all the courts, jails, prisons, state and fed bldgs., etc. No reason other places couldn't do the same.
 
in restaurants, etc. but they do have them in all the courts, jails, prisons, state and fed bldgs., etc. No reason other places couldn't do the same.
Well Moke that explains that. I rarely go into those places.
 
Well here we go.

It appears they are only talking about murders. Add in ABDW's, accidents, and suicides and the numbers flip.
Your wife is technically more at risk with your gun ownership than any stranger danger.
 
It appears they are only talking about murders. Add in ABDW's, accidents, and suicides and the numbers flip
Murders would be the most relevant metric to me.

Your wife is technically more at risk with your gun ownership than any stranger danger
That's about as persuasive as telling me what my odds of a car accident are based solely on any one single variable, like just my gender, or just my age, or just my city, and not controlling for any other of numerous predictive factors.
On second thought it's even worse - it's like telling me what my odds of a car accident are SOLELY based on a single variable: That I own a car.
 
Last edited:
They dont dispute that trump was insistant in going to the capitol with full knowledge that his armed supporters were going there.
"armed" supporters????????? Get real. Numbers please. Did any of the people persecuted for their demonstration on 1/6 get charged with a crime for carrying a weapon? Near as I can tell, the only death as a result of the demonstration on 1/6 was the murder of an unarmed protester as she was trying to come into the building. No warning, the cop just popped out of a room/closet and shot an unarmed woman dead at point blank range. None of this "stop or I'll shoot" crap Why give her a warning? She might stop. Good thing he was black and she was white. Was he really in fear of his life? He just blithely killed a woman for trespassing and then bragged about it. If he hadn't opened his mouth, we still wouldn't know who the murderer was because the "system" closed up and protected him because the victim was supporting the evil orange man and so deserved to be killed.

And if someone did get charged? Why? The prosecutors seem to be unwilling to charge any gun crimes these days. Oh, but that only applies to black people. Sorry. My mistake. Does racism today make up for racism in the past? I don't think so.
 
Last edited:
Left wingers such as Black Lives Matter forcibly took physical control of entire swaths of, for example, Seattle and Portland for weeks/months at a time - while Democrat leadership looked the other way and donated to groups who were bailing them out of jail.

I'd say taking control of US cities for months at a time and being supported by a Democrat government is about a thousand times more serious than the few hundred people (a few dozen actually culpable, who knew they weren't supposed to be moving forward) trespassing on the capitol, with dubious "weapons", most of which liberals have had to write entire essays in order to make ludicrous exaggerations in order to get around the fact that there were virtually no actual firearms present, (tasers, mason jars, pepper spray, baseball bats - I'm not joking - are somberly mentioned in the NPR article, lest you think that we normally consider guns to be the qualifying item!).

Whereas BLM actually set fire to police stations after chaining the doors shut. If Proud Boys is a terrorist org according to New Zealand now, it's a shame we can't speak the uncomfortable truth that BLM is twice the terrorist organization they are - as their intimidation and violence has actually been brought to fruition on 100's of occasions, whereas Proud Boys seem to struggle to even effectively disrupt a perversion session in an elementary school.
 
"armed" supporters????????? Get real. Numbers please. Did any of the people persecuted for their demonstration on 1/6 get charged with a crime for carrying a weapon? Near as I can tell, the only death as a result of the demonstration on 1/6 was the murder of an unarmed protester as she was trying to come into the building. No warning, the cop just popped out of a room/closet and shot an unarmed woman dead at point blank range. None of this "stop or I'll shoot" crap Why give her a warning? She might stop. Good thing he was black and she was white. Was he really in fear of his life? He just blithely killed a woman for trespassing and then bragged about it. If he hadn't opened his mouth, we still wouldn't know who the murderer was because the "system" closed up and protected him because the victim was supporting the evil orange man and so deserved to be killed.

And if someone did get charged? Why? The prosecutors seem to be unwilling to charge any gun crimes these days. Oh, but that only applies to black people. Sorry. My mistake. Does racism today make up for racism in the past? I don't think so.
 
Exactly - the NPR article that both I and moke posted is hilarious.

Pretty lame when you have to write essays devoted to convincing people they really had weapons, since on any normal day in the world of reporting crime, going down a list of skateboards, bats, pepper spray, flagpoles (!) and mason jars is not what we usually mean when we say "armed".

In that sense most people are armed all the time.

Funny, in the Rittenhouse case, Democrats didn't seem to think much of skateboards as a weapon. On January 6th, they suddenly become a major player on NPR's list of dangerous weapons.
:LOL:
 
is not what we usually mean when we say "armed".
You need to spend some time in the gallery at a criminal court. See what people are charged with as armed with a weapon. Bet you wouldn't consider a pillow a deadly weapon until someones holding it over your face. I've seen people charged with Assault Dangerous Weapon To Wit: A Floor.
 
You need to spend some time in the gallery at a criminal court. See what people are charged with as armed with a weapon. Bet you wouldn't consider a pillow a deadly weapon until someones holding it over your face. I've seen people charged with Assault Dangerous Weapon To Wit: A Floor.
Except that's not what's relevant here. We're talking about the court of public opinion, which is the venue where it's questionable to claim that tons of people were armed when you're talking about things as silly as we are, since that's not what the normal lay person means when they refer to an armed person. It's irrelevant what courts charge people with in the context of this discussion about public perception of rioters being armed. It's all relative, and that's especially important in this discussion.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom