Mass shooting Sutherland Springs church

[Blake]

He doesn't think that either.

That he's the only one?

[Spurminator]

That he's the only one?

He doesn't think that a total ban is the only other solution.

[Blake]

Either ban guns or don't.

I didn't sense any sarcasm

[Spurminator]

I didn't sense any sarcasm

It's not sarcasm, it's diversion.

[Blake]

I think he believes it.

[DMC]

:lol rent free

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Dont forget lever action. I can crank out 10 .357 rounds out of my Marlin saddle rifle as fast as an AR-15.

I don't believe you. Trials show semiautos to be twice as fast as a lever action and that is for people that are trained to maintain their sight while levering. Then there is the whole accuracy thing.

[Blake]

:lol rent free

:lol :lol you have by far the most posts in this multi 10+ page thread

[DMC]

:lol :lol you have by far the most posts in this multi 10+ page thread

But not about you.

[Th'Pusher]

If the libs don't go for a total ban on firearms with confiscation attached, they don't have a hair on their balls (except Nancy).

CONFISCATION IS THE ONLY SOLUTION!!!

Stop op being a drama queen you pussy.

[DMC]

CONFISCATION IS THE ONLY SOLUTION!!!

Stop op being a drama queen you pussy.

JP trying too hard to appear edgy.

[Th'Pusher]

JP trying too hard to appear edgy.

I can tell your out of fuel whenever you resort to using the initials that you discovered by looking up the email address I used to register my ST account with...

Your ban all guns and confiscate them argument is bullshit. The are other measures that can be taken to reduce gun violence and mass shootings that would be effective and constitutional regardless of whether or not they’re currently politically feasible.

[Blake]

But not about you.


This is Blake's typical downward spiral that results from his initial premise being flawed because he's ignorant and lazy and doesn't understand the topic. He's a poor man's version of Chumpdumper.

[DMC]

^That was our discussion. It wasn't a gossip session between me and someone else.

Big difference.

Rent free

[DMC]

I can tell your out of fuel whenever you resort to using the initials that you discovered by looking up the email address I used to register my ST account with...

Your ban all guns and confiscate them argument is bullshit. The are other measures that can be taken to reduce gun violence and mass shootings that would be effective and constitutional regardless of whether or not they’re currently politically feasible.

Why is it bullshit to ban all guns and confiscate them? You haven't said.

[Blake]

^That was our discussion. It wasn't a gossip session between me and someone else.

Big difference.

Rent free

So you were talking to me directly but in 3rd person.

Yeah, no.

[Th'Pusher]

Why is it bullshit to ban all guns and confiscate them? You haven't said.

Because it’s both unnecessary and unconstitutional.

[boutons_deux]

Because it’s both unnecessary and unconstitutional.

There is no Constitutional right to own guns.

[Yonivore]

1) There is no law that can be passed that wouldn't disarm the good guy with a gun long before it disarmed the bad guy with a gun.

2) There is no law that can be passed that will repeal the laws of physics; and, believe it or not, there are many capable and skilled people in the world (good and bad) that can apply those physical laws to readily available raw materials, using readily available tools, to make any type of gun you want to outlaw.

3) There is no law that can be passed that will make the almost 1/2 billion existing weapons disappear.

My suggestion is we quit pussy-footing around mental health issues and illegal immigration by dangerous criminals.

[Th'Pusher]

There is no Constitutional right to own guns.

Unfortunately, Justice Scalia, writing the majority opinion, disagreed.

[Spurminator]

I'm fine with addressing mental health issues. I would like to see us fund annual mental health check-ins for all active Military and veterans, since a disproportionate amount of these crimes is committed by people with military background. We could fund it somewhere in our $2T military budget. Probably enough to also include anyone who is charged with domestic violence.

As far as illegal immigration, that's a predictably irrelevant red herring into this topic. Immigrants have a lower propensity for violent crime than US citizens, so not sure how that solves anything except for the violent immigrant boogeyman you've been trained to fear like a good nationalist.

[Blake]

My suggestion is we quit pussy-footing around mental health issues and illegal immigration by dangerous criminals.

You have any specific plans?

[Blake]

I'm fine with addressing mental health issues. I would like to see us fund annual mental health check-ins for all active Military and veterans, since a disproportionate amount of these crimes is committed by people with military background. We could fund it somewhere in our $2T military budget. Probably enough to also include anyone who is charged with domestic violence.

As far as illegal immigration, that's a predictably irrelevant red herring into this topic. Immigrants have a lower propensity for violent crime than US citizens, so not sure how that solves anything except for the violent immigrant boogeyman you've been trained to fear like a good nationalist.

Yeah the immigrant thing made me chuckle

[TSA]

I'm fine with addressing mental health issues. I would like to see us fund annual mental health check-ins for all active Military and veterans, since a disproportionate amount of these crimes is committed by people with military background. We could fund it somewhere in our $2T military budget. Probably enough to also include anyone who is charged with domestic violence.
Focusing solely on stopping mass shooting doesn't put a dent in overall gun violence though.

[Pavlov]

Focusing solely on stopping mass shooting doesn't put a dent in overall gun violence though.So better to do nothing.

[Spurminator]

Focusing solely on stopping mass shooting doesn't put a dent in overall gun violence though.

That's not the focus. The focus is mental health. One hopes that it would curb a decent amount of all shootings. But if it only reduces mass shootings, that's still a good start.

Or we could keep funding fighter jets we don't use.

[TSA]

That's not the focus. The focus is mental health. One hopes that it would curb a decent amount of all shootings. But if it only reduces mass shootings, that's still a good start.

Or we could keep funding fighter jets we don't use.

I assumed you were talking about mass shootings since you added this "since a disproportionate amount of these crimes is committed by people with military background"

Outside of mass shooting mental health isn't what causes our high firearm murder rate IMO, it's poverty and a lack of opportunity.

[boutons_deux]

ANOTHER CHURCH SHOOTING

Man and wife accidentally shot during church gun safety talk :lol

The 81-year-old took out his pistol to show another parishioner amid a talk about recent shootings at places of worship. :lol
Forgetting the weapon was loaded, he fired a single round,

striking himself in the hand :lol and

his 80-year-old wife, who was sitting in her wheelchair. :lol he got her in the abdomen! :lol

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-42032637

[Pavlov]

ANOTHER CHURCH SHOOTING

Man and wife accidentally shot during church gun safety talk :lol

The 81-year-old took out his pistol to show another parishioner amid a talk about recent shootings at places of worship. :lol
Forgetting the weapon was loaded, he fired a single round,

striking himself in the hand :lol and

his 80-year-old wife, who was sitting in her wheelchair. :lol he got her in the abdomen! :lol

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-42032637Obviously Antifa.

[spurraider21]

What about Chicago?

[Yonivore]

What about Chicago?

Mental Health, illegal immigration of violent criminals, narco-terrorism, and gangs.

[DMC]

So you were talking to me directly but in 3rd person.

Yeah, no.

Yes

[DMC]

So better to do nothing.

You're certainly on the right path then.

[DMC]

Because it’s both unnecessary and unconstitutional.

Are you suggesting Americans have a constitutional right to keep and bear arms? Even if they aren't in a militia?

[boutons_deux]

Mental Health, illegal immigration of violent criminals, narco-terrorism, and gangs.

What About the knitters, are they included in your rightwingnutjob/NRA talking points?

what about the War on Drugs business? gotta keep that War going, a huge job and profits creator

what about red states/red necks shippping guns into IL?

[Blake]

Yes

Rofl. You email and text people talking to them in the 3rd person too?

That L isn't coming down off the scoreboard no matter how you try to spin it

[Blake]

You're certainly on the right path then.

Do you think it will get worse if something gets passed?

[Th'Pusher]

Are you suggesting Americans have a constitutional right to keep and bear arms? Even if they aren't in a militia?
Yes. That's what DC v Heller established. I don't necessarily agree with the opinion, but it was the majority opinion.

[DMC]

Yes. That's what DC v Heller established. I don't necessarily agree with the opinion, but it was the majority opinion.

I'm not suggesting that it's not unconstitutional, but that the typical left position is that the 2nd Amendment doesn't grant citizens the right to keep and bear arms. So if the only roadblock to the total ban and confiscation is legalities, that's what the legislative branch is for, and the judicial branch can do whatever they have to do put their stamp on the 2nd Amendment or not.

Are you suggesting that congress shouldn't even try to pass such a bill?

[DMC]

Rofl. You email and text people talking to them in the 3rd person too?

No.


That L isn't coming down off the scoreboard no matter how you try to spin it
I'm not keeping score. If I was it would be:

DMC 1

Cuck 0

[DMC]

Do you think it will get worse if something gets passed?

It?

Something?

Use your words, Blake.

[Spurminator]

I'm not suggesting that it's not unconstitutional, but that the typical left position is that the 2nd Amendment doesn't grant citizens the right to keep and bear arms.

False.

[Blake]

It?

Something?

Use your words, Blake.

Anything

[Blake]

No.

I'm not keeping score. If I was it would be:

DMC 1

Cuck 0

Yes. You lose.

[Th'Pusher]

I'm not suggesting that it's not unconstitutional, but that the typical left position is that the 2nd Amendment doesn't grant citizens the right to keep and bear arms. So if the only roadblock to the total ban and confiscation is legalities, that's what the legislative branch is for, and the judicial branch can do whatever they have to do put their stamp on the 2nd Amendment or not.

Are you suggesting that congress shouldn't even try to pass such a bill?

Yes. I am suggesting that a total ban and confiscation is unnecessary. A federal ban on semiautomatic weapons coupled with a buyback program would curb violence and reduce mass shootings. That said, it’s not feasible under our current Congress.

[Th'Pusher]

Mental Health, illegal immigration of violent criminals, narco-terrorism, and gangs.

Remember when you made a New Years resolution to stop posting on SpursTalk? :lol

[DMC]

Yes. I am suggesting that a total ban and confiscation is unnecessary. A federal ban on semiautomatic weapons coupled with a buyback program would curb violence and reduce mass shootings. That said, it’s not feasible under our current Congress.

Are you only considering mass shootings?

[Xevious]

So better to do nothing.
That seems to be the running argument after every shooting. Nothing will help (in the short term anyway) so why bother?

[DMC]

False.


What military engagement have they won? While the Taliban can wait out in their homes for the army to leave, the national guard and local police forces reside is the hills too.

The right to bear arms NRA interpretation was over when they invented tanks, artillery and war planes. No you cannot have a grenade much less the ordinance to violently overthrow the US government. It certainly plays to the action hero complex of juvenile men though. Rambo did it!


Perhaps the only policy I can get behind with Shill is her admiration of the Austrailian gun outlaw/buyback program. She should push that shit harder. Knowing she wants Heller overturned gives me a slight modicum of optimism for an otherwise doomed presidency. Obama was a huge pussy on the issue.

Hopefully a Clinton presidency will take seriously the problem of an armed populace and attempt to disarm all civilians not associated with a "militia" (a.k.a. national guard or USAF)


Going after the 2nd one is perfectly fine, but don't worry, the gun fellators have prevented Obama taking the gun control measures that he initially had schemed.

Due to the ambiguity of the 2nd Amendment, however, a total ban on weapons for non-militia citizenry is most certainly possible. Fwiw.
:lol

[Th'Pusher]

Are you only considering mass shootings?

No, as was clearly established in my previous post when I explicitly separated gun violence with mass shootings.

[DMC]

No, as was clearly established in my previous post when I explicitly separated gun violence with mass shootings.

If that's the case, most shootings are just one person being shot. How does the semi-auto figure into that?

[Th'Pusher]

If that's the case, most shootings are just one person being shot. How does the semi-auto figure into that?

How many single person shootings are executed with a semiautomatic? Would the shootings be as deadly without a semi-auto weapons? Don’t bother answering as the data doesn’t exist. The NRA won’t allow the data to be collected.

[Blake]

:lol

Out of context cut from full post from 4 years ago.

Nice work, detective.

[DMC]

How many single person shootings are executed with a semiautomatic? Would the shootings be as deadly without a semi-auto weapons? Don’t bother answering as the data doesn’t exist. The NRA won’t allow the data to be collected.

Not true. The FBI and DOJ have that information. Rather recently the .38 Smith and Wesson (revolver) was the gun used most in homicides.

So pick a target:

Homicides
Gun related homicides
Semiauto gun related homicides
Mass shootings

[DMC]

Out of context cut from full post from 4 years ago.

Nice work, detective.

:lol "out of context" my ass

It's right there. Anyone who wants can click on the link.

[Th'Pusher]

Not true. The FBI and DOJ have that information. Rather recently the .38 Smith and Wesson (revolver) was the gun used most in homicides.

So pick a target:

Homicides
Gun related homicides
Semiauto gun related homicides
Mass shootings

Ok. Let’s attack mass shootings first. As you agree these are the jokers celebrated by the media resulting in copycats.

[DMC]

Ok. Let’s attack mass shootings first. As you agree these are the jokers celebrated by the media resulting in copycats.

Ok, and 1% of the gun related homicides in the US.

[Blake]

:lol "out of context" my ass

It's right there. Anyone who wants can click on the link.

Lol imploring "anyone" to help judge.

It's out of context. You're retarded.

[Blake]

Of course, even out of context, that statement still stands.

[Th'Pusher]

Ok, and 1% of the gun related homicides in the US.

Sounds good to me. Where do you want to start?

[Spurminator]

:lol

So what you meant was "the position of several people on this board." There is no recent poll that has suggested a majority of liberals want to ban all guns.

[Spurminator]

How many single person shootings are executed with a semiautomatic? Would the shootings be as deadly without a semi-auto weapons? Don’t bother answering as the data doesn’t exist. The NRA won’t allow the data to be collected.

It is always a good idea to bring up the Dickey Amendment in these discussions, they don't ever like to touch that one.

[DMC]

It is always a good idea to bring up the Dickey Amendment in these discussions, they don't ever like to touch that one.

Are you serious?

Someone shot and killed with a gun is just as dead whether it was a semi-auto or revolver. Single person shooting is a single person. Would it be as deadly without a semi-auto? Of course. Dead is dead.

And the Dickey amendment has been thoroughly dissected here, by me. It exists because the CDC was paying for a study to prove a biased opinion on the 2nd Amendment. It did not stop the CDC from promoting gun safety, just from pursuing and promoting gun control. It's not the CDC's business to promote a political agenda.

So tell us your opinion on it.

[Spurminator]

Are you serious?

Someone shot and killed with a gun is just as dead whether it was a semi-auto or revolver. Single person shooting is a single person. Would it be as deadly without a semi-auto? Of course. Dead is dead.

Huh? Do you know what the Dickey Amendment is?

[DMC]

Huh? Do you know what the Dickey Amendment is?


The Center for Disease Control should study gun related fatalities?

You mean this discussion we had months ago?

[Spurminator]

Are you serious?

Someone shot and killed with a gun is just as dead whether it was a semi-auto or revolver. Single person shooting is a single person. Would it be as deadly without a semi-auto? Of course. Dead is dead.

And the Dickey amendment has been thoroughly dissected here, by me. It exists because the CDC was paying for a study to prove a biased opinion on the 2nd Amendment. It did not stop the CDC from promoting gun safety, just from pursuing and promoting gun control. It's not the CDC's business to promote a political agenda.

So tell us your opinion on it.

It exists to keep the population debating hypotheticals and semantics instead of data when it comes to gun control. You and the NRA didn't like the CDC study because you don't like the facts they illuminated. Next you'll want to tell the CBO it can't analyze health reform.

[boutons_deux]

https://images.dailykos.com/images/469995/story_image/1308.png?1510095414

[DMC]

Sounds good to me. Where do you want to start?

Ban 1% of the semiautos.

[DMC]

It exists to keep the population debating hypotheticals and semantics instead of data when it comes to gun control. You and the NRA didn't like the CDC study because you don't like the facts they illuminated. Next you'll want to tell the CBO it can't analyze health reform.

You're pretending the CDC is an unbiased research organization just looking to discover the facts before forming an opinion. That doesn't jive with what the leaders of the CDC said before any of this took place:

“We need to revolutionize the way we look at guns, like we did with cigarettes. Now it [sic] is dirty, deadly and banned.” -Mark Rosenberg...

The same year Dr. Katherine Christoffel, head of the CDC funded Handgun Epidemic Lowering Plan, said in an interview with American Medical News "guns are a virus that must be eradicated...." In the same interview Rosenberg concurred with Christoffel, saying "...she’s not willing to be silent anymore. She’s asking for help.”

So you think taxpayers should fund these two people who have an obvious agenda, to find the "truth" they seem to already know. In reality (and as was demonstrated then) they were looking to build their case using taxpayer money, and to use that information to enact legislation.

It was passed during Clinton's term, and survived through 12 years of Obama.

Again, yap yap.. and do nothing about it.

The CDC has full right to research all they want. They just have to fund it themselves.

Like you did before, you'll ignore these points and reiterate your misguided ideal as if it's based in anything other than blind partisanship. Then you'll forget we discussed it and in a few months you'll throw that amendment out again as if you just shocked the forum with your knowledge on gun control history.

[pgardn]

You're pretending the CDC is an unbiased research organization just looking to discover the facts before forming an opinion. That doesn't jive with what the leaders of the CDC said before any of this took place:

“We need to revolutionize the way we look at guns, like we did with cigarettes. Now it [sic] is dirty, deadly and banned.” -Mark Rosenberg...

The same year Dr. Katherine Christoffel, head of the CDC funded Handgun Epidemic Lowering Plan, said in an interview with American Medical News "guns are a virus that must be eradicated...." In the same interview Rosenberg concurred with Christoffel, saying "...she’s not willing to be silent anymore. She’s asking for help.”

So you think taxpayers should fund these two people who have an obvious agenda, to find the "truth" they seem to already know. In reality (and as was demonstrated then) they were looking to build their case using taxpayer money, and to use that information to enact legislation.

It was passed during Clinton's term, and survived through 12 years of Obama.

Again, yap yap.. and do nothing about it.

The CDC has full right to research all they want. They just have to fund it themselves.

Like you did before, you'll ignore these points and reiterate your misguided ideal as if it's based in anything other than blind partisanship. Then you'll forget we discussed it and in a few months you'll throw that amendment out again as if you just shocked the forum with your knowledge on gun control history.

Lets shut the CDC down because they are a bunch of liberal scientists.
Fckn vaccinators...

What a crock of shit.

[DMC]

Lets shut the CDC down because they are a bunch of liberal scientists.
Fckn vaccinators...

What a crock of shit.

There's nothing wrong with the CDC. They just didn't have a blank slate to start with. Like many organizations, their leaders have political agendas and sought to use taxpayer money to further those agendas. Let's not deify them.

[pgardn]

There's nothing wrong with the CDC. They just didn't have a blank slate to start with. Like many organizations, their leaders have political agendas and sought to use taxpayer money to further those agendas. Let's not deify them.

Lets let them gather data like they do with other public health problems maybe.

In fact, lets aide them and require reports like with other public health problems how about.

[DMC]

Lets let them gather data like they do with other public health problems maybe.

In fact, lets aide them and require reports like with other public health problems how about.

Priorities for Research to Reduce the Threat of Firearm-Related Violence

Read that report

You might want to get up to date on your information.

[boutons_deux]

‘We are not a soft target’: Florida church sign is letting everyone know it’s not a ‘gun-free zone’

https://www.rawstory.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/shutterstock_570747931-800x430.jpg

https://www.rawstory.com/2017/11/we-are-not-a-soft-target-florida-church-sign-is-letting-everyone-know-its-not-a-gun-free-zone/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheRawStory+%28The+Raw+Story% 29

[DMC]

Boots posting a pic of a plastic gun. Fitting

:lol

[pgardn]

Priorities for Research to Reduce the Threat of Firearm-Related Violence

Read that report

You might want to get up to date on your information.

Not even close what it needs to be.

[DMC]

Not even close what it needs to be.

It's the CDC research you asked for.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

So a single CDC quote lacking any context invalidates all further study.

Of course no actual bad science is represented and of course the extremely well funded gun lobby would be in a position to peer review their work. They have plenty of think tanks already in place after all.

That and a desperate attempt to reframe the discussion into confiscation when every person making policy proposals in this thread has specifically stated that is not the case. If you want something to bitch about then cry about not being able to xfer(re: sell) your semiautos under what is being proposed here except of course to the government. That is actually on the table.

The only thing to read from this argument is that DMC is a disingenuous douche but that is news to no one. The writing is on the wall.

My proposal is to ban semiautos, institute a buyback program for all banned weapons, have law enforcement do all background checks for all firearms purchases --the system is already in place with the law enforcement waiver from the 1970s law-- and of course close the LLC loophole.

[boutons_deux]

Sutherland Springs family sues outdoors store where church shooter purchased gun

A family that lost three members in the Sutherland Springs massacre has filed a lawsuit against the store where the shooter purchased weapons, according to documents obtained by mySA.com (https://www.mysanantonio.com/).

The Ward and Lookingbill family is seeking $25 million in damages after they say Academy Sports & Outdoors failed to follow the law when selling an assault rifle to Devin Patrick Kelley, who killed 26 people on Nov. 5 in the First Baptist Church of Sutherland Springs.

In 2016, Kelley purchased a Ruger AR-566 rifle at an Academy store in San Antonio, and later used it to gun down half a church congregation.

The Lookingbills, Joann's parents, and her husband, Chris, claim Academy should not have sold the rifle to Kelley because the shooter listed his Colorado Springs address on a firearm record form.

The suit claims Kelley's firearm purchase should have been transferred to his Colorado residence. Instead, the suit says, Kelley picked the weapon up in Texas.

"The Ruger should have never been placed in Kelley's hands in Texas,"

Though Kelley's 2012 conviction for spousal and child abuse should have prevented Kelley from purchasing a gun, the U.S. Air Force said it failed to report the conviction to the FBI database.

http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local/article/Sutherland-Springs-family-sues-outdoors-store-12431682.php?utm_campaign=mysa_breakingnews&utm_source=email&utm_medium=newsletter


Of course, the USAF is untouchable, and uncaring.

[Blake]

Of course, the USAF is untouchable, and uncaring.



No, they can and should sue the USAF.

[DMC]

No, they can and should sue the USAF.

You going to pay for the attorneys?

[Blake]

You going to pay for the attorneys?

No

[DMC]

No

Yeah I didn't think so. Suing someone isn't free, just FYI.

[Blake]

Yeah I didn't think so. Suing someone isn't free, just FYI.

Gosh professor, I figured a contingency fee would be granted by the attorney in this case.

I wish I would have thought to ask you first before I posted

[Blake]

Lol dmc

Will he own it or spin it

[DMC]

Gosh professor, I figured a contingency fee would be granted by the attorney in this case.

I wish I would have thought to ask you first before I posted

So an attorney is going to go on a contingency fee to sue the department of defense.

It's one thing to sue a company, quite another to sue the federal government.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

So an attorney is going to go on a contingency fee to sue the department of defense.

It's one thing to sue a company, quite another to sue the federal government.

It depends on the strength of the case. The negligence is pretty obvious.

Big timing for the feds is amusing though.

[Blake]

So an attorney is going to go on a contingency fee to sue the department of defense.

It's one thing to sue a company, quite another to sue the federal government.

It's in the works, detective

[DMC]

It's in the works, detective

Class action?

[DMC]

It depends on the strength of the case. The negligence is pretty obvious.

Big timing for the feds is amusing though.

Not nearly as amusing as your posturing like you're someone in your mediocre life.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Not nearly as amusing as your posturing like you're someone in your mediocre life.

It's a clear tell that you know you have lost the argument when you resort to story time. In the meantime the case is both obvious and strong given the USAF admitted they failed to report him and they had a requirement to do so.

Have fun fantasizing about me.

[DMC]

It's a clear tell that you know you have lost the argument when you resort to story time. In the meantime the case is both obvious and strong given the USAF admitted they failed to report him and they had a requirement to do so.

Have fun fantasizing about me.

So class action lawsuit against the air force?

[Blake]

Class action?

No

[DMC]

No

Of course, because it cannot be done.

But you're not going to pay.

Maybe some law firms want to tie up their resources suing the federal government one claim at a time. Maybe not. It's questionable that they could win anything. It would be nice if they did.

[Blake]

Of course, because it cannot be done.

But you're not going to pay.

Maybe some law firms want to tie up their resources suing the federal government one claim at a time. Maybe not. It's questionable that they could win anything. It would be nice if they did.

Spin it is!

[pgardn]

Good lord.

Is there a major in micromanagement cause we got a guy...
DMC there was a scholarship waiting.

[DMC]

Spin it is!

When it peters out you and your ilk will ignore it like it never happened and be on to the next thing, you lapdogging of course, being the beta you are.

[Blake]

When it peters out you and your ilk will ignore it like it never happened and be on to the next thing, you lapdogging of course, being the beta you are.

Move the goalposts!

Ad the hominem!

[DMC]

Move the goalposts!

Ad the hominem!

Goddamn you're stupid.

[Blake]

Goddamn you're stupid.

Says dude that didn't know about contingency fees.

[DMC]

Says dude that didn't know about contingency fees.

To guy who didn't know about man in his home fucking his wife.

[Blake]

To guy who didn't know about man in his home fucking his wife.

False equivalence!

[DMC]

Anyone seen that Seinfeld episode where George flies to Ohio to deliver that cut down to the guy that called him a shrimp

Anyone seen your wife lately?

[Blake]

Anyone seen your wife lately?

Lol u mad

[DMC]

Lol u mad

:lol sure
:lol says the cuck who edited his stupid Seinfeld post

[pgardn]

When it peters out you and your ilk will ignore it like it never happened and be on to the next thing, you lapdogging of course, being the beta you are.

Oh shit!

The beta labeling.
Chris style.
Now call him a pillow fluffer.
Do it!

[Blake]

:lol sure
:lol says the cuck who edited his stupid Seinfeld post

You switched from the subject to going personal.

U mad.

[DMC]

Oh shit!

The beta labeling.
Chris style.
Now call him a pillow fluffer.
Do it!

Why do
you write
normal responses
in this
Style?

Are you
mentally retarded
or is your
text size
set to
100?

[boutons_deux]

Families of Sutherland Springs Shooting Victims Win the Right to Sue Gun Store That Sold Weapons (https://splinternews.com/families-of-sutherland-springs-shooting-victims-win-the-1832332660)

Academy is arguing that it’s protected by the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, which stops victims from suing gun manufacturers and dealers unless they were negligent or broke federal or state laws;

Ward and his lawyers argue that Academy shouldn’t have sold Ward the gun and high-cap mag when he bought it with a Colorado ID.

Roseanne Solis and Joaquin Ramirez, a husband and wife who were both wounded in the attack but survived, filed a separate lawsuit on similar grounds (https://www.dallasnews.com/news/courts/2018/08/06/sutherland-springs-couple-heard-shooter-yell-everybody-going-expletive-die-sue-academy-sports).

“Academy is the gatekeeper to protect people from buying guns who shouldn’t have them,” attorney Jason Webster said.

“When you have a guy who’s 850 miles from his home and paying cash ... that kind of raises some flags.”

In one hand, Webster clutched an AR-556. In the other, a magazine. One doesn’t work without the other, he said, so

arguing that “magazine” and “gun” are two different things is like arguing a car isn’t a car without its wheels.

“If Academy were to have followed the law, that gun would not have been in his hands,” Webster said.

“If anybody deserves their day in court, it’s these families here.”

The case hinges on whether or not a magazine is considered part of a gun :lol

The technical nature of the case is undoubtedly going to make gun rights activists furious—

there’s an easy argument to make in Academy’s favor because it sold a magazine that was legal in Texas.

the precedent it would set for weapons dealers.

They have to be flawless about this stuff: If someone tries to buy a gun with a Colorado ID, look up the Colorado gun laws.

the series of events that armed Kelley with a killing machine show an institutional failure at nearly every level.

Kelley was convicted of domestic abuse while in the United States Air Force, and

should not have been allowed to purchase a firearm (https://www.sacurrent.com/the-daily/archives/2017/11/06/an-air-force-error-allowed-devin-kelley-to-purchase-guns).

But the Air Force admitted it had failed to enter Kelley’s criminal charge into a federal criminal database for background checks on gun purchases.

https://splinternews.com/families-of-sutherland-springs-shooting-victims-win-the-1832332660?utm_source=splinter_newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=2019-02-04

Air Force admitted fucking up bad, but is beyond punishment.

If Academy loses, then probably nothing but a knuckle rap.

[boutons_deux]

Judge Rules US Air Force Largely Responsible For Sutherland Springs Shooting

A federal judge has ruled the U.S. Air Force is largely culpable for the Sutherland Springs shooting in 2017.

The Air Force did not submit the shooter's criminal history into an FBI database, which would have prevented him from purchasing the weapon he used in the attack.

Judge Xavier Rodriguez in San Antonio said the Air Force was 60% responsible for the attack.

They’re also liable for damages.

https://www.tpr.org/military-veterans-issues/2021-07-07/judge-rules-air-force-largely-at-fault-for-sutherland-springs-shooting

[boutons_deux]

Five years on, shooting victims fight for government to admit liability

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0?ui=2&ik=c5ffe9fe07&attid=0.1&permmsgid=msg-a:r884599354515042066&th=18298b7056432287&view=fimg&fur=ip&sz=s0-l75-ft&attbid=ANGjdJ-u38cTKCGxYCSmv7PJLrjHMbz76JePGWpo1qnsTAllSPVUWsqla 0my1fLVF9BmZbWEjQsVcwJI56pR_WjqhFnaVTQuxoptSfCWFLz yYCRwq8K_52qqFdRy1Ao&disp=emb&realattid=ii_l6sawd270

Ryland, who was shot at least four times at close range.

The bullets exploded through

his left arm,

stomach,

pelvis and

left leg,

causing such destruction to his 5-year-old body that doctors still can’t say for certain how many bullets hit him.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2022/08/13/sutherland-springs-victims-lawsuit

Bill O'Reilly says gun slaughter of Americans is the price of freedom