Spurs' Gregg Popovich responds to March For Our Lives, criticizes President Trump

[daslicer]

MILWAUKEE -- The San Antonio Spurs were in Milwaukee on Sunday for an afternoon matchup with the Milwaukee Bucks. Before the game, Spurs coach Gregg Popovich -- no stranger to voicing his opinions on the current political and social issues -- shared his thoughts on the student-led marches against gun violence that took place across the country on Saturday.

Popovich was asked specifically about what he thought the marches meant for the future of the country, but expounded further on the need for the country to reflect, and the lack of leadership from current politicians.

Popovich's full response:

Well, the future of the country is a pretty big thing. There's not one event that is going to signal what it's going to be like in the future. But I can tell you that I'm sure most everybody is going to be unbelievably proud and excited about those students and what they've done. Because our politicians have certainly sat on their thumbs and just hidden. To most, it's almost like a dereliction of duty to watch all these people get killed with guns -- in so many different ways, whether it's nightclubs, or schools, or cities. And it seems that the power and the money are more important than the lives. So to see these teenagers demand this, it takes you back.

You think about it, the civil rights movement didn't flip or change until people saw things on TV. They saw policemen with fire hoses and dogs biting old black men and women, people being beaten with sticks. Then you get to the Vietnam War, and we're in it forever, and then what happens? Film starts coming back with arms and legs blown off and coffins, and I can still remember the little girl who was napalmed running down the road. Things change when that happens. And in this one, in this situation, these students are the same way. Images are important. Obviously you can't put an image on TV of what happened in that classroom, that would be pretty horrifying.

But if you just sit for a moment and imagine those bullets going through those bodies, and what those bodies might have looked like afterwards, how can the president of the country talk about all the things he's going to do, and then go have lunch with the NRA and change it? It's just cowardice. A real leader would have been in Washington D.C. this weekend, not at his penthouse at Mar-a-Lago. He would have had the decency to meet with a group, to see what's going on, and how important it is, and how important our children should be to us. So for all those politicians involved, it's just a dereliction of duty.

They can talk about the age limit, and background checks and all that, but the real discussion is what kind of a country, what kind of a culture do we want? You go back and investigate the second amendment. What does it really mean today? What are we willing to give up for the safety of our children. The people in power don't want to talk about that. The fact that our president left town, is a real indication of how much he really cares about anything other than feeding his insatiable ego.

https://www.cbssports.com/nba/news/spurs-gregg-popovich-responds-to-march-for-our-lives-criticizes-president-trump/

[Spurtacular]

Pop still working on that inspirational extra curricular segment to cap off his 30 for 30 video.

[ElNono]

If peeps feel so strongly about this, they should boycott Pop and the Spurs, tbh... and their advertisers... stop eating Whataburger... for a week maybe... what? it's not happening? crofl...

[Spurtacular]

If peeps feel so strongly about this, they should boycott Pop and the Spurs, tbh... and their advertisers... stop eating Whataburger... for a week maybe... what? it's not happening? crofl...

People aren't going to walk away while legacies like Parker and Manu are still going hard. After that if Pop runs his mouth people are not gonna feel so emotionally invested and will consider their other options.

[Chris]

I wonder what Poop has to say about this?


978455000375468032

[Pavlov]

I wonder what Poop has to say about this?


978455000375468032That act didn't and wouldn't prevent the moar guns you want in schools tbh.

[cd98]

These rallies are far left stunts like the tea party rallies a few years ago during Obama’s years. Don’t be fooled. They are movements to get Democrats in control of Congress so they can ignore gun control just like they did under Obama with a super majority and the ability to pass whatever they wanted. They only care about this issue as a means of demonizing the other side. It’s like all those tea party candidates that ran on repealing Obamacare, but once given the presidency and both houses of Congress, they had no replacement plan and no repeal. These “movements” mean nothing.

[Russ]

I wonder what Poop has to say about this?


978455000375468032

Earth to OP -- The people who committed the mass shootings broke the law. The gun-free zone law didn't cause the shooting, it actually could have prevented it had the shooter been arrested for possessing weapons in a gun-free zone.

This is like passing a law requiring drivers to wear seatbelts and then complaining that 92% of fatal accidents occur on roads where drivers are required to wear seatbelts.

Or to appeal to a conservative (which you appear to be), it's like passing a law allowing the police to stop and frisk people in a bad high-crime part of town and then complaining that 92% of crime occurs in said bad part of town. No conservative would argue that the high crime rate is a result of stop and frisk, but rather stop and risk is a reaction to the high crime rate.

Similarly, gun-free zones are a reaction to mass shootings not a cause of them.

[MarCowMar]

As a player/employee, it's gotta be frustrating to have your coach/boss constantly running his mouth about politics on the company dime.

[Phenomanul]

The march itself wasn't targeting specific firearms. It was a blanket "get rid of all guns" protest. Which is just asinine. The students were spouting off against the "out-datedness of the U.S. Constitution" (quoted verbatim) - which is ironic, considering they were publically availing their own Constitutionally protected free-speech right, and their right to "peaceable assembly" - which not all nations grant.

The People have a right to defend themselves against any enemy, foreign or domestic. And the government cannot possibly provide that protection no matter how well equipped our local law enforcement departments may be across the country. We cannot simply depend on them. The best response times at 4-5 minutes place law enforcement a step behind those perpetrating crimes - which is why citizens need to be empowered to protect themselves.

We have laws against MURDER. But people think that more laws are magically going to change the hearts of those who've decided to take human lives? They are delusional. If the one law which in many states can carry the penalty of death is ignored by the perpetrators of "mass shooting events" what makes the protesters think that access to particular weapons will somehow be an effective deterrent? Again delusional. Didn't the Virginia Tech shooter kill over 30 students with hand guns alone (not "assault riffles")? Here recently a perp in China stabbed 29 people to death and left dozens more injured. Back in 2014 another stabbing spree in said country left 35 people dead and 143 injured. How many driving massacres have taken place across Europe over the past decade (and here in NYC recently)? The point is that someone hellbent on killing will do so NO MATTER WHAT THE LAW STATES. Gun control advocates are too full of their own baloney and knee-deep in socialist excrement to accept the truth. People are inherently "corrupt" and "government authorities" are not some benevolent force of good - nor can we depend on them for our own protection.

But somehow Popovich is supposed to be a "voice of reason" on the matter? The guy who excoriates other human beings on national TV, while his face turns blood red, as he yells obscenities at them? That Pop? Yeah. Sure.

[DontStopBelieving]

The march itself wasn't targeting specific firearms. It was a blanket "get rid of all guns" protest. Which is just asinine. The students were spouting off against the "out-datedness of the U.S. Constitution" (quoted verbatim) - which is ironic, considering they were publically availing their own Constitutionally protected free-speech right, and their right to "peaceable assembly" - which not all nations grant.

The People have a right to defend themselves against any enemy, foreign or domestic. And the government cannot possibly provide that protection no matter how well equipped our local law enforcement departments may be across the country. We cannot simply depend on them. The best response times at 4-5 minutes place law enforcement a step behind those perpetrating crimes - which is why citizens need to be empowered to protect themselves.

We have laws against MURDER. But people think that more laws are magically going to change the hearts of those who've decided to take human lives? They are delusional. If the one law which in many states can carry the penalty of death is ignored by the perpetrators of "mass shooting events" what makes the protesters think that access to particular weapons will somehow be an effective deterrent? Again delusional. Didn't the Virginia Tech shooter kill over 30 students with hand guns alone (not "assault riffles")? Here recently a perp in China stabbed 29 people to death and left dozens more injured. Back in 2014 another stabbing spree in said country left 35 people dead and 143 injured. How many driving massacres have taken place across Europe over the past decade (and here in NYC recently)? The point is that someone hellbent on killing will do so NO MATTER WHAT THE LAW STATES. Gun control advocates are too full of their own baloney and knee-deep in socialist excrement to accept the truth. People are inherently "corrupt" and "government authorities" are not some benevolent force of good.

Derp

[Galileo]

I hope President Trump kicks Pop off the US Olympic team. He is a disgrace to the nation.

[Russ]

We have laws against MURDER. But people think that more laws are magically going to change the hearts of those who've decided to take human lives? They are delusional. . . . The point is that someone hellbent on killing will do so NO MATTER WHAT THE LAW STATES.

You misunderstand the point of gun control laws -- they don't attempt to magically change potential murders into nice people. Gun laws seek to reduce the availability of guns to such people.

According to all statistical evidence, the less guns in circulation, the less mass shootings. After one such mass shooting, Australia passed laws to reduce the number of guns in Australia (including "buying back" guns and destroying them). Australia's murder rate went down dramatically.

The simple truth is that every other Western country has less guns in circulation than the US and every other Western country has a lower murder rate than the US.

[Phenomanul]

You misunderstand the point of gun control laws -- they don't attempt to magically change potential murders into nice people. Gun laws seek to reduce the availability of guns to such people.

According to all statistical evidence, the less guns in circulation, the less mass shootings. After one such mass shooting, Australia passed laws to reduce the number of guns in Australia (including "buying back" guns and destroying them). Australia's murder rate went down dramatically.

The simple truth is that every other Western country has less guns in circulation than the US and every other Western country has a lower murder rate than the US.

Tell that to the people in those same countries who were then subsequently murdered by use of other weapons. I will question any statistics that serve only to empower socialist agendas - the very same Marxist and totalitarian systems which killed over 100 million people over the past 120 years.

On the second point, BECAUSE of the proliferation of guns - the government can't simply say "ok everyone turn in your high capacity riffles, and other 'assault-style' weapons" because criminals don't heed the law anyways. All such laws would do is disarm law-abiding citizens and effectively give criminals an advantage on the streets.

If a criminal comes to my house, I have a right to protect my loved ones as best I see fit. And you nor anyone else (especially not the Tide-pod eating crowd) will change how I feel about that. It's not personal.

[Russ]

If a criminal comes to my house, I have a right to protect my loved ones as best I see fit.

I would suggest a lengthy filibuster about Marxism.

[moisaenz]

gun control has worked great across the border in Mexico...the government takes care of its people, and there is absolutely no gun violence in Mexico.

[K...]

gun control has worked great across the border in Mexico...the government takes care of its people, and there is absolutely no gun violence in Mexico.

Well they use American guns which ain't hard to get

[bigfan]

Pop is exactly right and has been for a long time.

[Killakobe81]

Earth to OP -- The people who committed the mass shootings broke the law. The gun-free zone law didn't cause the shooting, it actually could have prevented it had the shooter been arrested for possessing weapons in a gun-free zone.

This is like passing a law requiring drivers to wear seatbelts and then complaining that 92% of fatal accidents occur on roads where drivers are required to wear seatbelts.

Or to appeal to a conservative (which you appear to be), it's like passing a law allowing the police to stop and frisk people in a bad high-crime part of town and then complaining that 92% of crime occurs in said bad part of town. No conservative would argue that the high crime rate is a result of stop and frisk, but rather stop and risk is a reaction to the high crime rate.

Similarly, gun-free zones are a reaction to mass shootings not a cause of them.

There you go bringing logic to a debate about ideals and not practicality. NRA Acts like any gun reform is the beginning of the end ...i fully support a ban on AR's ...if you can't protect yourself or your family with a hunting rifle, shotgun and handgun ...you are a lousy shot and or a pussy ...:wakeup

[Nathan89]

They can talk about the age limit, and background checks and all that, but the real discussion is what kind of a country, what kind of a culture do we want? You go back and investigate the second amendment. What does it really mean today? What are we willing to give up for the safety of our children.

Them idiots wouldn't even give up their backpacks for safety and they want the nation to give up their 2nd Amendment rights?

Are we giving up alcohol to prevent the thousands of drunk driving accidents and 1/3 of all violent crime? No, because "I like wine", and "the team employs a drunk driver". This is real rich coming from a team that employs a drunk driver to all of a sudden be concerned about "safety". :lmao

Should we go through the list of all the dangerous things in our lives that we can get rid of for safety? Or should jump right to the crux and ask the nation to wear body cams for safety? Imagine all the lives you can save if everyone wore body cams and all you have to give up is your privacy. Safety is more important than your privacy, right?

[bic50]

Pop is exactly right and has been for a long time.
Not really

[superbigtime]

I applaud Pop for having the courage and morality to speak the obvious truth which too many Americans are dumb and deaf to.

[bic50]

There you go bringing logic to a debate about ideals and not practicality. NRA Acts like any gun reform is the beginning of the end ...i fully support a ban on AR's ...if you can't protect yourself or your family with a hunting rifle, shotgun and handgun ...you are a lousy shot and or a pussy ...:wakeup
Ar15 is just a semi auto rifle.

[bic50]

I applaud Pop for having the courage and morality to speak the obvious truth which too many Americans are dumb and deaf to.
Not really

[Nathan89]

There you go bringing logic to a debate about ideals and not practicality. NRA Acts like any gun reform is the beginning of the end ...i fully support a ban on AR's ...if you can't protect yourself or your family with a hunting rifle, shotgun and handgun ...you are a lousy shot and or a pussy ...:wakeup

The right to own guns is not entirely for regular occurrences like that.

Laws like that don't change shit but take rights away from people.

"I wished the National Rifle Association would stop blocking common-sense gun-control reforms such as banning assault weapons, restricting silencers, shrinking magazine sizes and all the other measures that could make guns less deadly."

"Then, my colleagues and I at FiveThirtyEight spent three months analyzing all 33,000 (https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/gun-deaths/) lives ended by guns each year in the United States, and I wound up frustrated in a whole new way. We looked at what interventions might have saved those people, and the case for the policies I’d lobbied for crumbled when I examined the evidence. "

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/i-used-to-think-gun-control-was-the-answer-my-research-told-me-otherwise/2017/10/03/d33edca6-a851-11e7-92d1-58c702d2d975_story.html?utm_term=.b64e5ead5c37

So yeah let's not give up our rights for ineffective policies. Fighting against that makes you a "pussy". Go fight for a ban on alcohol and you'll save many more lives than a ban on AR's.

Finally, since they are ineffective policies and the position that leads one to argue to take away guns is based on selfish reasons they will not stop there.

Get a glimpse of you next brainwashed generation.

https://www.gannett-cdn.com/-mm-/d4d253303a7d41dc8750b8eadd6e87d44a7f0965/c=5-0-4027-3024&r=x404&c=534x401/local/-/media/2018/03/24/USATODAY/USATODAY/636575100458504222-IMG-0362.jpg

This is the direction your gun reform is going. Don't expect people to bend over for ineffective policies.

[Nathan89]

On Nov. 11, 1938, the German minister of the interior issued "Regulations Against Jews Possession of Weapons." Not only were Jews forbidden to own guns and ammunition, they couldn’t own "truncheons or stabbing weapons."

Did the Nazis do this to strengthen the Jews or make them more vulnerable?

[Floyd Pacquiao]

Ban the ar15 or any other high capacity rifle and they'll just use 2 hand guns like that kid at VA Tech(killed 32 wounded 17). So then what your gonna ban hand guns too?

[Nathan89]

Body cams would make the country much safer than gun control. Is your privacy more important than safety?

[superbigtime]

Not really

I really applaud him.

[Nathan89]

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQazGLg2ay2swbpIjNt9_W48H3uXQddQ CFrGki4HxzP4kCSLMNg

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTPT3TzIasTNcbhkwdtt31Tmcz3xB_Nf n3vHUa6aNhEERVWA6n_

https://www.gannett-cdn.com/-mm-/d4d253303a7d41dc8750b8eadd6e87d44a7f0965/c=5-0-4027-3024&r=x404&c=534x401/local/-/media/2018/03/24/USATODAY/USATODAY/636575100458504222-IMG-0362.jpg

https://rhdefense.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/is-freedom-more-important-than-safety.jpg

Don't think for one second these idiots would stop if the ineffective policies were passed.

I'm not sure there could possibly be a more idiotic poster in that entire crowd than this last picture. I'd rather see a "kill all NRA" or "kill all gun owners" poster than this fucking under the radar idiocy tbh. This dumb fuck is completely ready to live life in a prison if there was guaranteed safety because "safety>freedom". Let me guess nobody called her out on her idiocy.:bang

[Nathan89]

I applaud Pop for having the courage and morality to speak the obvious truth which too many Americans are dumb and deaf to.

Gun control isn't based on morality it's based on being selfish.

Thousands of people die from drunk driving and 1/3 of all violent crime is influenced from alcohol. Not a word is said because "I like alcohol". 17 people get shot and people go apeshit because "I don't like guns".

Give off your moral high horse. You look like an idiot.

"Before I started researching gun deaths, gun-control policy used to frustrate me. I wished the National Rifle Association would stop blocking common-sense gun-control reforms such as banning assault weapons, restricting silencers, shrinking magazine sizes and all the other measures that could make guns less deadly.
Then, my colleagues and I at FiveThirtyEight spent three months analyzing all 33,000 (https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/gun-deaths/) lives ended by guns each year in the United States, and I wound up frustrated in a whole new way. We looked at what interventions might have saved those people, and the case for the policies I’d lobbied for crumbled when I examined the evidence."

Get off the your "intelligence" high horse as well. You look like an idiot.

[bic50]

I really applaud him.
seeing how these marches are typically just anti trump marches, pop knows trump wouldn't be welcomed there anyway. He's just using it to continue criticizing the president. I'd would have like to see how pop criticize the FBI and sheriffs department for their screw up aswell. But he just leaves that alone for some reason

[boutons_deux]

These rallies are far left stunts like the tea party rallies a few years ago during Obama’s years. Don’t be fooled. They are movements to get Democrats in control of Congress so they can ignore gun control just like they did under Obama with a super majority and the ability to pass whatever they wanted. They only care about this issue as a means of demonizing the other side. It’s like all those tea party candidates that ran on repealing Obamacare, but once given the presidency and both houses of Congress, they had no replacement plan and no repeal. These “movements” mean nothing.

Dems never had Senate control due to DINO Max Baucus and BigInsurance-protecting Lieberman (so no medicare for all).

kids demonstrating against school massacres by you gun fellators and NRA/BigGun shills isn't "far left", and it's not the kids role to propose specific regulations, only to protest with

"fucking do something to make it stop"

Of course, nothing will happen because kids don't have enough $Bs to outbid NRA/BigGun for the votes of corrupt legislative whores.

Kock Bros, etc hired tea baggers / patriots in their fucking britches and tri-cornered hats

Whose hiring the kids to protest?

yet again, fucking FALSE EQUIVALENCE. Goddamn, you people are fucking stupid

[spurraider21]

Tell that to the people in those same countries who were then subsequently murdered by use of other weapons. I will question any statistics that serve only to empower socialist agendas - the very same Marxist and totalitarian systems which killed over 100 million people over the past 120 years.

On the second point, BECAUSE of the proliferation of guns - the government can't simply say "ok everyone turn in your high capacity riffles, and other 'assault-style' weapons" because criminals don't heed the law anyways. All such laws would do is disarm law-abiding citizens and effectively give criminals an advantage on the streets.

If a criminal comes to my house, I have a right to protect my loved ones as best I see fit. And you nor anyone else (especially not the Tide-pod eating crowd) will change how I feel about that. It's not personal.
its awfully convenient to question statistics that challenge your world view

and the tide-pod stuff is a lazy attempt to write-off people who disagree, as if that somehow represents a substantial portion of the anti-gun advocates

[Nathan89]

No, if you are a teenager then you have enough intelligence to do more than scream like a toddler. First they should recognize they have no reason to fear for their lives at school(besides the people that lived through a shooting). School shootings are a statistical outlier. They are extraordinarily safe so cut the bullshit about "feeling safe". Next you have to realize that you can't make everything stop. People will break the law and put other lives at risk. Just look at drunk driving Buford who the Spurs employ. Just because thousands of people get killed because of idiots like Buford break the law doesn't mean we are going to punish the rest of the country. So yeah, teenagers need to come to the table with a little more that "make it stop". And if they don't then the adults that agree with them and using them to push an agenda should.

[bic50]

Dems never had Senate control due to DINO Max Baucus and BigInsurance-protecting Lieberman (so no medicare for all).

kids demonstrating against school massacres by you gun fellators and NRA/BigGun shills isn't "far left", and it's not the kids role to propose specific regulations, only to protest with

"fucking do something to make it stop"

Of course, nothing will happen because kids don't have enough $Bs to outbid NRA/BigGun for the votes of corrupt legislative whores.

Kock Bros, etc hired tea baggers / patriots in their fucking britches and tri-cornered hats

Whose hiring the kids to protest?

yet again, fucking FALSE EQUIVALENCE. Goddamn, you people are fucking stupid
So are you blaming gun owners for these mass shootings? If it isn't "far left" then why not the same criticism for the FBI and sheriffs department? Why reject the suggestion of having armed security or teachers?

[Nathan89]

its awfully convenient to question statistics that challenge your world view

and the tide-pod stuff is a lazy attempt to write-off people who disagree, as if that somehow represents a substantial portion of the anti-gun advocates

Yeah, because questioning statistics is a bad thing.

Even if he accepts all the statistics they all pale in comparison to the 100 million deaths he was talking about. In reality he really doesn't give a shit about your short-term statistics because he's thinking long-term which every reasonable person should.

[boutons_deux]

Body cams would make the country much safer than gun control. Is your privacy more important than safety?

vids from body cams are held in secret by the police

cops still bash people and phones for legally filming the police.

[Nathan89]

vids from body cams are held in secret by the police

cops still bash people and phones for legally filming the police.

That's irrelevant to my point. I'm not going back and forth with you in the Spurs forum.

[phxspurfan]

"How dare somebody criticize the president"...like that's ever happened before (lol @ the George W years when everyone was critical, and it was not only ok but funny as hell. Or even the Thanks Obama meme years where it was also funny). The fact that people are so outraged that some public figure has an opinion on the president or politicians in this regime makes it look much more like Hitler era fascism. Like "how dare you have an opinion other than what has been fed to you by the leading faction." If you're not with us you're not with America. We should stone you to death." Literally the opposite of democracy.

[Proxy]

Gun control isn't based on morality it's based on being selfish.

Thousands of people die from drunk driving and 1/3 of all violent crime is influenced from alcohol. Not a word is said because "I like alcohol". 17 people get shot and people go apeshit because "I don't like guns".

Give off your moral high horse. You look like an idiot.

"Before I started researching gun deaths, gun-control policy used to frustrate me. I wished the National Rifle Association would stop blocking common-sense gun-control reforms such as banning assault weapons, restricting silencers, shrinking magazine sizes and all the other measures that could make guns less deadly.
Then, my colleagues and I at FiveThirtyEight spent three months analyzing all 33,000 (https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/gun-deaths/) lives ended by guns each year in the United States, and I wound up frustrated in a whole new way. We looked at what interventions might have saved those people, and the case for the policies I’d lobbied for crumbled when I examined the evidence."

Get off the your "intelligence" high horse as well. You look like an idiot.

Watch out nathan, someone is drunk and may be coming for you. The problem isn't white men at all, don't look at them

[Killakobe81]

The right to own guns is not entirely for regular occurrences like that.

Laws like that don't change shit but take rights away from people.

"I wished the National Rifle Association would stop blocking common-sense gun-control reforms such as banning assault weapons, restricting silencers, shrinking magazine sizes and all the other measures that could make guns less deadly."

"Then, my colleagues and I at FiveThirtyEight spent three months analyzing all 33,000 (https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/gun-deaths/) lives ended by guns each year in the United States, and I wound up frustrated in a whole new way. We looked at what interventions might have saved those people, and the case for the policies I’d lobbied for crumbled when I examined the evidence. "

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/i-used-to-think-gun-control-was-the-answer-my-research-told-me-otherwise/2017/10/03/d33edca6-a851-11e7-92d1-58c702d2d975_story.html?utm_term=.b64e5ead5c37

So yeah let's not give up our rights for ineffective policies. Fighting against that makes you a "pussy". Go fight for a ban on alcohol and you'll save many more lives than a ban on AR's.

Finally, since they are ineffective policies and the position that leads one to argue to take away guns is based on selfish reasons they will not stop there.

Get a glimpse of you next brainwashed generation.

https://www.gannett-cdn.com/-mm-/d4d253303a7d41dc8750b8eadd6e87d44a7f0965/c=5-0-4027-3024&r=x404&c=534x401/local/-/media/2018/03/24/USATODAY/USATODAY/636575100458504222-IMG-0362.jpg

This is the direction your gun reform is going. Don't expect people to bend over for ineffective policies.

None of that changes my stance. I previously read the fivethirtyeight article you linked. Pointing at instances where gun control would not help doesnt mean there arent lives that could be saved with sone form of gun control. More aggresive types such as full auto assault weapons have been banned ...dont think legal owners of the guns i mentioned before are suffering cuz they cant purchase those or a bazooka.
I get gun laws wont stop some criminals but if it can save some lives even a small % Im all for it. I would never support a ban for all gun types however ...

[Nathan89]

Watch out nathan, someone is drunk and may be coming for you. The problem isn't white men at all, don't look at them

Probably Pop's drunk driving friend Buford.

[Proxy]

Probably Pop's drunk driving friend Buford.

:lol

[Nathan89]

None of that changes my stance. I previously read the fivethirtyeight article you linked. Pointing at instances where gun control would not help doesnt mean there arent lives that could be saved with sone form of gun control. More aggresive types such as full auto assault weapons have been banned ...dont think legal owners of the guns i mentioned before are suffering cuz they cant purchase those or a bazooka.
I get gun laws wont stop some criminals but if it can save some lives even a small % Im all for it. I would never support a ban for all gun types however ...

You can save life much more easily than putting all your effort into banning those guns. That article mentions some of the things we can do that doesn't involve any bans that would save many more lives. This march is a giant derail from those effective plans that could save many more lives without long-term repercussions.

[Killakobe81]

You can save life much more easily than putting all your effort into banning those guns. That article mentions some of the things we can do that doesn't involve any bans that would save many more lives. This march is a giant derail from those effective plans that could save many more lives without long-term repercussions.

Why can't we do both? if the plans you outline will save many and some gun control will ony save a few ...why not do both?!

[Dex]

Ban the ar15 or any other high capacity rifle and they'll just use 2 hand guns like that kid at VA Tech(killed 32 wounded 17). So then what your gonna ban hand guns too?

So you're saying since we can't stop everything, we shouldn't try to stop anything?

That sounds effective.

[Nathan89]

Why can't we do both? if the plans you outline will save many and some gun control will ony save a few ...why not do both?!

Because I'm not going to push every restrictive policy on the public in the name of a few lives. You can do that with anything. People are just fear mongering over guns now.

Meanwhile, perfectly reasonable plans like that article mentioned are not being push forward with vigor because people want topush restrictive policy that will only save a few lives. By focusing on the wrong objective they are actually preventing real measurable change.

[spurraider21]

Yeah, because questioning statistics is a bad thing.

Even if he accepts all the statistics they all pale in comparison to the 100 million deaths he was talking about. In reality he really doesn't give a shit about your short-term statistics because he's thinking long-term which every reasonable person should.
questioning statistics only because they go against your world view is just cognitive dissonance

and his "long term" statistics are completely unrelated... he says he's skeptical of gun control because marxist russian dictators killed a lot of people. there's no logical connect to those two

thats like saying social security is a dangerous policy because the soviet union murdered people

[monkeypunk]

The real problem with gun control is that the NRA is funded by the Russians who know that more machine guns on the streets creates an unstable country which benefits them. The NRA muddies the conversation from sensible gun control (proper background checks and licensing, not giving guns to people on no fly lists, etc) to be the same as "They want to take away all your guns" because they know it makes it harder to figure out the middle ground.

Combine that with the Russians radicalizing people on FB, 4Chan, 8Chan, Reddit, etc. so they get crazed and go shoot places up or bomb shit, like Vegas, Parkland, Austin and you've got a toxic mix.

Finally, the NRA and the Russians have blackmail on gov people on both sides of the aisle and uses it to keep them from speaking up against what their constituents actually want. This won't change until the underlying Russian and NRA threat mechanisms have been decimated AND the corrupted politicians are voted out of office.

The kids are doing good in exposing the corrupt US side that are now openly siding with the NRA and not what the masses actually want. Ideally, this will spur the lazy fuckers who didn't vote into getting out and making the change they want to see.

Until then, keep your head on a swivel cause shit is going to get crazy.

[paperboy77]

The march itself wasn't targeting specific firearms. It was a blanket "get rid of all guns" protest. Which is just asinine. The students were spouting off against the "out-datedness of the U.S. Constitution" (quoted verbatim) - which is ironic, considering they were publically availing their own Constitutionally protected free-speech right, and their right to "peaceable assembly" - which not all nations grant.

The People have a right to defend themselves against any enemy, foreign or domestic. And the government cannot possibly provide that protection no matter how well equipped our local law enforcement departments may be across the country. We cannot simply depend on them. The best response times at 4-5 minutes place law enforcement a step behind those perpetrating crimes - which is why citizens need to be empowered to protect themselves.

We have laws against MURDER. But people think that more laws are magically going to change the hearts of those who've decided to take human lives? They are delusional. If the one law which in many states can carry the penalty of death is ignored by the perpetrators of "mass shooting events" what makes the protesters think that access to particular weapons will somehow be an effective deterrent? Again delusional. Didn't the Virginia Tech shooter kill over 30 students with hand guns alone (not "assault riffles")? Here recently a perp in China stabbed 29 people to death and left dozens more injured. Back in 2014 another stabbing spree in said country left 35 people dead and 143 injured. How many driving massacres have taken place across Europe over the past decade (and here in NYC recently)? The point is that someone hellbent on killing will do so NO MATTER WHAT THE LAW STATES. Gun control advocates are too full of their own baloney and knee-deep in socialist excrement to accept the truth. People are inherently "corrupt" and "government authorities" are not some benevolent force of good - nor can we depend on them for our own protection.

But somehow Popovich is supposed to be a "voice of reason" on the matter? The guy who excoriates other human beings on national TV, while his face turns blood red, as he yells obscenities at them? That Pop? Yeah. Sure.

Great response!

[poop]

Pop is a complete idiot and has an ego bigger than Trump. Some posters here have already done a great job debunking the anti-gun crowd's feeble, staggeringly ignorant talking points.
This 'march' is just yet another anti-Trump hissy fit fully organized and massively funded by the usual leftist bankrollers and personalities, with people being provided transportation, time off school, etc and being bussed around from city to city. Its all a charade. These people have no clue whatsoever what the laws even are or anything whatsoever about firearms. They are all the 5th column as far as im concerned, anti-american to the core and should be dealt with like the enemy that they are

[Nathan89]

questioning statistics only because they go against your world view is just cognitive dissonance

and his "long term" statistics are completely unrelated... he says he's skeptical of gun control because marxist russian dictators killed a lot of people. there's no logical connect to those two

thats like saying social security is a dangerous policy because the soviet union murdered people

He said he would question the statistics and that's a good thing. It's people that don't question the statistics that come to misleading narratives like when they bring up Australia.

"Completely unrelated"

"Gun registration and targeted confiscations therefore played an essential role in Stalin’s genocidal activities."

"So, while the Nazis ultimately favored loosening gun restrictions on the German population as a whole, the disarmament of Jews and other targeted minority populations was an essential feature of Hitler’s genocidal program, which included the murder of six million Jews (and millions of others deemed unworthy to live under the Third Reich) between 1938 and the end of World War II. "

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/little-gun-history/

Seems to me it plays an essential role in genocidal activities. Let's disarm people over a few deaths. :lmao

[BSfromTX]

Kids and teenagers do not know jack about the world they live in.

In the last 30 years they have managed to get a large portion of the population to BEG to take away liberties and freedoms in the name of defending terrorism, mass shootings, and immigration. Mass shootings, terrorism, racism, transgender, abortion, liberal, conservative, welfare, taxes etc. is just a small sample of what the media thrives on to keep us separated and bickering at each other. Divide and conquer.

Never do they talk about currency, banking, corrrupt politics (on both sides) and the cabal that rules this planet.

RULE #1 kiddos: Do not look to the glowing tube in the living room for the truth, nor your government issued history books. You must search with diligence and discernment and then be careful about your conclusions.

[poop]

Good post.The 'long march thru the institutions' was actually achieved, and we are seeing the results of those efforts in full blossom in the last few years.

[Pavlov]

Kids and teenagers do not know jack about the world they live in.

In the last 30 years they have managed to get a large portion of the population to BEG to take away liberties and freedoms in the name of defending terrorism, mass shootings, and immigration. Mass shootings, terrorism, racism, transgender, abortion, liberal, conservative, welfare, taxes etc. is just a small sample of what the media thrives on to keep us separated and bickering at each other. Divide and conquer.

Never do they talk about currency, banking, corrrupt politics (on both sides) and the cabal that rules this planet.

RULE #1 kiddos: Do not look to the glowing tube in the living room for the truth, nor your government issued history books. You must search with diligence and discernment and then be careful about your conclusions.Yeah, teenagers and kids BEGGED for the Patriot Act.

[cd98]

The sad reality of this country is without guns, there is no way to protect yourself from certain crimes. I don’t own a gun and never have. That said, if someone decided to use deadly force against me, the law isn’t going to stop him and the police won’t get there until I’m dead. That’s the world we live in and gun control won’t change it. Murder is outlawed in every state, but it doesn’t stop murders from murdering.

And while I agree that AR15s seem excessive, if you were in Louisiana during Katrina at your home with only a gun to protect your family from the looters (knowing no cops are coming to help you), wouldn’t you want an AR15 or something similar?

[BSfromTX]

Yeah, teenagers and kids BEGGED for the Patriot Act.

No, I agree. Most adults are no different, and you are right, the Patriot Act is an excellent example of that.

[Phenomanul]

So you're saying since we can't stop everything, we shouldn't try to stop anything?

That sounds effective.

From a leftist piece:

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/03/there-is-no-epidemic-of-mass-school-shootings.html

"If mass school shootings were the only form of gun violence in the United States, the case for treating the regulation of firearms as a pressing policy issue would actually be fairly weak. For the past quarter-century, there has been an average of one mass murder (a killing of four or more people committed with any weapon, as opposed to just firearms) in an American school each year. Every one of those atrocities is a blight on humanity. But it is nearly impossible to design a policy that can bring the incidence of an already exceptionally rare crime down to zero — and given the inherently limited nature of legislative time and resources, it would make little sense to prioritize such a marginal and difficult issue over public health challenges that kill exponentially more people.


There is no “school safety” crisis in the U.S.; only a gun violence epidemic that consists primarily of suicides, accidents, and single-victim homicides committed with handguns. In the decades since Columbine, progressives have often led the public to believe otherwise. And for understandable reasons. Spectacular acts of mass murder committed gagainst children (especially upper-middle class children in “good” public schools) attract a degree of media attention and political concern that our nation’s (roughly) 20,000 annual firearm suicides — and daily acts of urban gang violence — simply do not. The most misleading piece of the Parkland survivors’ message — that their experience is representative of a widespread social problem that threatens the lives of all American children — may well be its most politically effective component."

[Killakobe81]

Some mad at Pop for his liberal leanings and critiques of #45 ...
but can't pull the anti-american charge ...cuz unlike most posters or the last few presidents he served his country ...so he should get more lattitude to speak his mind.

[Chris]

None of that changes my stance. I previously read the fivethirtyeight article you linked. Pointing at instances where gun control would not help doesnt mean there arent lives that could be saved with sone form of gun control. More aggresive types such as full auto assault weapons have been banned ...dont think legal owners of the guns i mentioned before are suffering cuz they cant purchase those or a bazooka.
I get gun laws wont stop some criminals but if it can save some lives even a small % Im all for it. I would never support a ban for all gun types however ...

Donny, you're out of your element here. :lol

[bic50]

The real problem with gun control is that the NRA is funded by the Russians who know that more machine guns on the streets creates an unstable country which benefits them. The NRA muddies the conversation from sensible gun control (proper background checks and licensing, not giving guns to people on no fly lists, etc) to be the same as "They want to take away all your guns" because they know it makes it harder to figure out the middle ground.

Combine that with the Russians radicalizing people on FB, 4Chan, 8Chan, Reddit, etc. so they get crazed and go shoot places up or bomb shit, like Vegas, Parkland, Austin and you've got a toxic mix.

Finally, the NRA and the Russians have blackmail on gov people on both sides of the aisle and uses it to keep them from speaking up against what their constituents actually want. This won't change until the underlying Russian and NRA threat mechanisms have been decimated AND the corrupted politicians are voted out of office.

The kids are doing good in exposing the corrupt US side that are now openly siding with the NRA and not what the masses actually want. Ideally, this will spur the lazy fuckers who didn't vote into getting out and making the change they want to see.

Until then, keep your head on a swivel cause shit is going to get crazy.
:lol

[spurraider21]

He said he would question the statistics and that's a good thing. It's people that don't question the statistics that come to misleading narratives like when they bring up Australia.

"Completely unrelated"

"Gun registration and targeted confiscations therefore played an essential role in Stalin’s genocidal activities."

"So, while the Nazis ultimately favored loosening gun restrictions on the German population as a whole, the disarmament of Jews and other targeted minority populations was an essential feature of Hitler’s genocidal program, which included the murder of six million Jews (and millions of others deemed unworthy to live under the Third Reich) between 1938 and the end of World War II. "

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/little-gun-history/

Seems to me it plays an essential role in genocidal activities. Let's disarm people over a few deaths. :lmao
saying i'm skeptical of any socialist policies because stalin murdered people is horribly misguided. might as well say i'm skeptical of capitalist policies because andrew jackson had native americans slaughtered

and both those specify targeted confiscations. kinda important

[MannyIsGod]

The march itself wasn't targeting specific firearms. It was a blanket "get rid of all guns" protest. Which is just asinine. The students were spouting off against the "out-datedness of the U.S. Constitution" (quoted verbatim) - which is ironic, considering they were publically availing their own Constitutionally protected free-speech right, and their right to "peaceable assembly" - which not all nations grant.

The People have a right to defend themselves against any enemy, foreign or domestic. And the government cannot possibly provide that protection no matter how well equipped our local law enforcement departments may be across the country. We cannot simply depend on them. The best response times at 4-5 minutes place law enforcement a step behind those perpetrating crimes - which is why citizens need to be empowered to protect themselves.

We have laws against MURDER. But people think that more laws are magically going to change the hearts of those who've decided to take human lives? They are delusional. If the one law which in many states can carry the penalty of death is ignored by the perpetrators of "mass shooting events" what makes the protesters think that access to particular weapons will somehow be an effective deterrent? Again delusional. Didn't the Virginia Tech shooter kill over 30 students with hand guns alone (not "assault riffles")? Here recently a perp in China stabbed 29 people to death and left dozens more injured. Back in 2014 another stabbing spree in said country left 35 people dead and 143 injured. How many driving massacres have taken place across Europe over the past decade (and here in NYC recently)? The point is that someone hellbent on killing will do so NO MATTER WHAT THE LAW STATES. Gun control advocates are too full of their own baloney and knee-deep in socialist excrement to accept the truth. People are inherently "corrupt" and "government authorities" are not some benevolent force of good - nor can we depend on them for our own protection.

But somehow Popovich is supposed to be a "voice of reason" on the matter? The guy who excoriates other human beings on national TV, while his face turns blood red, as he yells obscenities at them? That Pop? Yeah. Sure.

Somehow gun laws work in the rest of the world. You're one hell of an idiot, Hector.

[Nathan89]

saying i'm skeptical of any socialist policies because stalin murdered people is horribly misguided. might as well say i'm skeptical of capitalist policies because andrew jackson had native americans slaughtered

and both those specify targeted confiscations. kinda important

You said his long-term is "completely unrelated". I showed why it's related. Gun confiscation is written in the genocidal playbook for dummies. Why? Because it makes the population vulnerable. So long-term the population is more vulnerable to real mass murders in the millions. Not the bullshit "mass murder" that you see now. Which is a short-term sacrifice for not wanting to be completely fucked long-term.

[sammy]

I applaud Pop for having the courage and morality to speak the obvious truth which too many Americans are dumb and deaf to.

Agree!

Those students have every right to protest since they are the ones that are dying in school and being shot at! They saw their friends and teachers murdered!

To all of those overreacting gun owners, they are not taking your guns away! You can still have your handgun and rifle! Why do you need an AR 15? Those guns should be banned period! Those guns belong to the professionals! They are meant to kill vast amounts of people! Those students want the AR 15 banned, universal background checks on all sales of guns (online, gun shows etc), 3 day waiting period, mentally ill or criminals not allowed to have a gun, no guns for people on the no fly list, and people can't buy a gun until 21 years old! There is nothing wrong with these sensible requests!

So sick and tired of these gun owners infringing their rights on others! Pop has every right to speak out when the fake president runs away to Florida to avoid these kids! How about meeting with them and do something about their concerns! Too many people are dying and you can't even go to church, concert, movie theater or school, because some inhuman scumbag will get a AR15 and kill many innocent lives! This has got to stop! Enough is enough!

[bic50]

Agree!

Those students have every right to protest since they are the ones that are dying in school and being shot at! They saw their friends and teachers murdered!

To all of those overreacting gun owners, they are not taking your guns away! You can still have your handgun and rifle! Why do you need an AR 15? Those guns should be banned period! Those guns belong to the professionals! They are meant to kill vast amounts of people! Those students want the AR 15 banned, universal background checks on all sales of guns (online, gun shows etc), 3 day waiting period, mentally ill or criminals not allowed to have a gun, no guns for people on the no fly list, and people can't buy a gun until 21 years old! There is nothing wrong with these sensible requests!

So sick and tired of these gun owners infringing their rights on others! Pop has every right to speak out when the fake president runs away to Florida to avoid these kids! How about meeting with them and do something about their concerns! Too many people are dying and you can't even go to church, concert, movie theater or school, because some inhuman scumbag will get a AR15 and kill many innocent lives! This has got to stop! Enough is enough!
How can you say they are not trying to take your guns away then say a certain gun that many people already own needs to be banned?

[spurraider21]

You said his long-term is "completely unrelated". I showed why it's related. Gun confiscation is written in the genocidal playbook for dummies. Why? Because it makes the population vulnerable. So long-term the population is more vulnerable to real mass murders in the millions. Not the bullshit "mass murder" that you see now. Which is a short-term sacrifice for not wanting to be completely fucked long-term.
oh, so the stoneman douglas kids want to commit genocide, huh.

would you say there's a distinction between forced, targeted confiscation and one that is democratically imposed? was the australian government literally hitler?

[Nathan89]

oh, so the stoneman douglas kids want to commit genocide, huh.

would you say there's a distinction between forced, targeted confiscation and one that is democratically imposed? was the australian government literally hitler?

No, just short-term thinkers with a narrow view.

Both put you in a vulnerable position in the end. The difference is when it's forced you will be fucked very soon. When it's democratically imposed you are vulnerable to be fucked at some point in the future.

[Clipper Nation]

Porker calls out Kawhi and creates drama in the locker room, Pop costs the Spurs a game by not taking a timeout, and right on cue, another political rant.

[Killakobe81]

Donny, you're out of your element here. :lol

No I am not ...
Im not a bleedling liberal ...
nor a stay away from my guns conservative...
i enjoy shooting but dont need a AR15 to do so.
Just a dude with common sense and no loyalty to strict party ideals on either side ...

[ducks]

When are they going to ban planned parenting
They killed 6500 or more lives last year

The result bomb thing in Austin proves take guns away people still find ways to kill people


Mexico is so poor no one their can afford a gun

[sammy]

People shouldn't have AR15! There was a ban on this gun in 2004 but wasn't renewed by the NRA bought Republican party! This gun does not belong on the street and should be only with the military who fight our wars! This gun has done massive damage and carnage to innocent lives lost! You look at those families who've lost their loved ones and tell them that those guns should still be allowed! This has got to stop! You don't need a AR15 to hunt, geez!

[Killakobe81]

Porker calls out Kawhi and creates drama in the locker room, Poop costs the Spurs a game by not taking a timeout, and right on cue, another political rant.

:lol
Fair enough,
but if our former servicemen dont have the freedom to discuss their political views ...who does? He served Trump and Obama did not ... whether we agree with his leftist views he has earned that right.

[poop]

People shouldn't have AR15! There was a ban on this gun in 2004 but wasn't renewed by the NRA bought Republican party! This gun does not belong on the street and should be only with the military who fight our wars! This gun has done massive damage and carnage to innocent lives lost! You look at those families who've lost their loved ones and tell them that those guns should still be allowed! This has got to stop! You don't need a AR15 to hunt, geez!

You are too dumb to even debate. Did you even read any of the posts in this thread?

[Clipper Nation]

:lol
Fair enough,
but if our former servicemen dont have the freedom to discuss their political views ...who does? He served Trump and Obama did not ... whether we agree with his leftist views he has earned that right.
Never said he didn't have the right to discuss his political views. He's entitled to his opinion like anyone else. It's just weird how he'll never answer questions about basketball (his actual job), but he'll talk for hours and hours about politics whenever the Spurs are struggling.

[poop]

Some mad at Pop for his liberal leanings and critiques of #45 ...
but can't pull the anti-american charge ...cuz unlike most posters or the last few presidents he served his country ...so he should get more lattitude to speak his mind.

He literally said a few months ago that..quote..'our country is an embarassment to the world'
So yea, its legit to call him anti-american. The dude is saying this directly from his own wine stained pie hole. Another gem from this Patriot in the last few months:

'This is a racist country'

Sure he 'served' as a kid, but proceeded to use his podium to mercilessly bash his own country. Some patriot :rolleyes

[Killakobe81]

He literally said a few months ago that..quote..'our country is an embarassment to the world'
So yea, its legit to call him anti-american. The dude is saying this directly from his own wine stained pie hole. Another gem from this Patriot in the last few months:

'This is a racist country'

Sure he 'served' as a kid, but proceeded to use his podium to mercilessly bash his own country. Some patriot :rolleyes

So if he said this country is the greatest in the world and is partnering with Trump to achieve a MAGA state and ...
the Spurs were winning close games because of his brilliance ...could Pop speak then?

not directed at you poop, just asking ..

[superbigtime]

He literally said a few months ago that..quote..'our country is an embarassment to the world'
So yea, its legit to call him anti-american. The dude is saying this directly from his own wine stained pie hole. Another gem from this Patriot in the last few months:

'This is a racist country'

Sure he 'served' as a kid, but proceeded to use his podium to mercilessly bash his own country. Some patriot :rolleyes

Right. Nothing embarrassing about the current leadership to talk about. What racism? Another patriotic sheep.

[bic50]

People shouldn't have AR15! There was a ban on this gun in 2004 but wasn't renewed by the NRA bought Republican party! This gun does not belong on the street and should be only with the military who fight our wars! This gun has done massive damage and carnage to innocent lives lost! You look at those families who've lost their loved ones and tell them that those guns should still be allowed! This has got to stop! You don't need a AR15 to hunt, geez!
So what happens when mass shootings continue with other types of guns?

[SpursforSix]

:pop: at least y'all nigs have shut up about the Mills contract

[spurraider21]

He literally said a few months ago that..quote..'our country is an embarassment to the world'
So yea, its legit to call him anti-american. The dude is saying this directly from his own wine stained pie hole. Another gem from this Patriot in the last few months:

'This is a racist country'

Sure he 'served' as a kid, but proceeded to use his podium to mercilessly bash his own country. Some patriot :rolleyes
he loves his country and wants to see it strive to be better

if a parent thinks his kids need improvement that doesn't mean he doesn't love his kids

[Nathan89]

Right. Nothing embarrassing about the current leadership to talk about. What racism? Another patriotic sheep.

There is a difference between "This is a racist country" and "There are racists in this country". If you can't see it then you should be fine with me saying "Blacks are criminals".

[gambit1990]

fuck trump and fuck you for voting for him.

[Nathan89]

So what happens when mass shootings continue with other types of guns?

They continue to try to take away guns of course. Everything they are saying about the AR15 can easily be said about a handgun. That's why tons of posters at that march had handguns marked out and one said "you and keep your musket". Others said asked "Is Freedom more important than safety". The idiots will keep marching. They are pushing policy on a statistical outlier of deaths. Banning the AR15 isn't going to stop statistical outlier deaths. Therefore, they will keep begging for more policy.

[Nathan89]

fuck trump and fuck you for voting for him.

Are you drunk? That would explain randomly blurting out nonsense directed at nobody.

[cd98]

He literally said a few months ago that..quote..'our country is an embarassment to the world'
So yea, its legit to call him anti-american. The dude is saying this directly from his own wine stained pie hole. Another gem from this Patriot in the last few months:

'This is a racist country'

Sure he 'served' as a kid, but proceeded to use his podium to mercilessly bash his own country. Some patriot :rolleyes

I agree his rhetoric is unnecessarily incendiary. You don't have to insult a nation because you disagree with its gun laws. We are an embarrassment? What about China and their one child policy? What about the middle east and they way the kill each other and treat women? And Europe were the original colonial countries? Where is he demanding reparations? Russia is killing people on foreign soil. Where is the condemnation? This guy is asleep to everything that isn't a rant against Trump. And he is desperately trying to get Trump's attention with this over-the-top rants. And yet, he is ignored. So sad.

[tholdren]

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQazGLg2ay2swbpIjNt9_W48H3uXQddQ CFrGki4HxzP4kCSLMNg

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTPT3TzIasTNcbhkwdtt31Tmcz3xB_Nf n3vHUa6aNhEERVWA6n_

https://www.gannett-cdn.com/-mm-/d4d253303a7d41dc8750b8eadd6e87d44a7f0965/c=5-0-4027-3024&r=x404&c=534x401/local/-/media/2018/03/24/USATODAY/USATODAY/636575100458504222-IMG-0362.jpg

https://rhdefense.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/is-freedom-more-important-than-safety.jpg

Don't think for one second these idiots would stop if the ineffective policies were passed.

I'm not sure there could possibly be a more idiotic poster in that entire crowd than this last picture. I'd rather see a "kill all NRA" or "kill all gun owners" poster than this fucking under the radar idiocy tbh. This dumb fuck is completely ready to live life in a prison if there was guaranteed safety because "safety>freedom". Let me guess nobody called her out on her idiocy.:bang

The sign creator also thinks nba is where real talent plays and has no correlation to media hype

[tholdren]

So are you blaming gun owners for these mass shootings? If it isn't "far left" then why not the same criticism for the FBI and sheriffs department? Why reject the suggestion of having armed security or teachers?

Ive often wondered several things. What do gun owners need protection for or from? That seems to be the sentiment for not wanting gun control, whatever thay means.

And lol for the idiots who want to arm teachers. Jesus. How stupid can you be?

[Nathan89]

Ive often wondered several things. What do gun owners need protection for or from? That seems to be the sentiment for not wanting gun control, whatever thay means.

And lol for the idiots who want to arm teachers. Jesus. How stupid can you be?

If you read around in this thread you can answer your first question.

Arming teachers is a forced solution to a non problem. I don't agree that it is stupid though. Other than for the fact that it is not necessary.

[Nathan89]

If infringing on the second amendment is so fun then why aren't we trying to infringe on the first amendment and not allow the news to cover mass shootings? That could likely be even more effective than banning an AR15. Can't wait for the new stations to push this and encourage the nation to prevent them from covering the story. I mean "Is freedom more important than safety"?

[poop]

fuck trump and fuck you for voting for him.

You mad bro??

TRUMP > Pop

:bobo

[poop]

Nathan89 is owning this thread. Good man there.

[Chris]

Pop has every right to speak out when the fake president runs away to Florida to avoid these kids! How about meeting with them and do something about their concerns!

Hogg bragged about hanging up on POTUS. :lol

[tholdren]

If you read around in this thread you can answer your first question.

Arming teachers is a forced solution to a non problem. I don't agree that it is stupid though. Other than for the fact that it is not necessary.

Nope. Couldnt find it. Gun owners it seems think that gun control = take away their guns = they cant protect and wont be safe.... id question how many times their guns have kept them safe from birth...? Probably about zero

[tholdren]

Arming teachers is a forced solution to a non problem. I don't agree that it is stupid though. Other than for the fact that it is not necessary.
Lol

[poop]

So if he said this country is the greatest in the world and is partnering with Trump to achieve a MAGA state and ...
the Spurs were winning close games because of his brilliance ...could Pop speak then?

not directed at you poop, just asking ..

Hes allowed to speak for sure, everyone has that right. Just as we have the right to say he is an arrogant, egotistical moron spouting off incredibly ignorant things and is literally alienating half his fanbase for no reason whatsoever other than that he is such an arrogant prick that he threw 'the spurs way' right out the window just to temper-tantrum about politics to sports fans who use sports as an ESCAPE from politics/other real world problems

Also, if he gets paid tens of millions of dollars to play a little game with a rubber ball and be adored and praised by millions in a league filled with 90% black men paid tens of millions to play the same little game, and then has the nerve to say the only country in the world with opportities like that is 'an embarassment to the world' and 'inherently super racist', then he is showing himself to be an incredibly stupid, out of touch with reality person

[Nathan89]

Hogg bragged about hanging up on POTUS. :lol

Wow. That's makes Pop's comment even more idiotic. :lol

[Nathan89]

Nope. Couldnt find it. Gun owners it seems think that gun control = take away their guns = they cant protect and wont be safe.... id question how many times their guns have kept them safe from birth...? Probably about zero

Well it's in the thread. It's up to you to find it.

Gun control can equal taking away guns. I personally haven't seen anything about "not being able to protest".

No, not probably about zero. There are many cases where guns have kept people safe. You could probably do a little internet searching and find some statistics.

[Godbama]

ooga booga
:lmao

[tholdren]

Well it's in the thread. It's up to you to find it.

Gun control can equal taking away guns. I personally haven't seen anything about "not being able to protest".

No, not probably about zero. There are many cases where guns have kept people safe. You could probably do a little internet searching and find some statistics.

Just generalizations and incomplete answers. Typical. They took our guns = they took our jobs... hope you find some teeth

[Nathan89]

Lol

You think that's comical, huh? Just wait till you see the march against vending machines.

"According to the NEISS, between 2002 and 2015, vending machines killed roughly four Americans per year (and an average of 1,730 vending machine related injuries per year)".

[tholdren]

You think that's comical, huh? Just wait till you see the march against vending machines.

"According to the NEISS, between 2002 and 2015, vending machines killed roughly four Americans per year (and an average of 1,730 vending machine related injuries per year)".

Not as comical as the gun fanclub.

[Nathan89]

Just generalizations and incomplete answers. Typical. They took our guns = they took our jobs... hope you find some teeth

You aren't responding to anything. Just making weird connections "They took our guns = they took our jobs". That's not even close to the case. I suppose you infuse nonsense to derail the conversation though.

[poop]

He has nothing else to add. He cannot argue facts or data so hes just trying to mock and call names like a standard libtard.

[Nathan89]

Not as comical as the gun fanclub.

More nonsense. How dare someone be in the 2nd amendment "fanclub". I'm also in the 1st amendment "fanclub". It's called being for your rights not a "fanclub".

[tholdren]

He has nothing else to add. He cannot argue facts or data so hes just trying to mock and call names like a standard libtard.

Irony

[tholdren]

More nonsense. How dare someone be in the 2nd amendment "fanclub". I'm also in the 1st amendment "fanclub". It's called being for your rights not a "fanclub".

Lol hahahhahahahah. Not how dare they, totally their right. But really low on the iq radar tbh

[Nathan89]

Lol hahahhahahahah. Not how dare they, totally their right. But really low on the iq radar tbh

Making yourself vulnerable is a sign of high intelligence. :tu

[tholdren]

Making yourself vulnerable is a sign of high intelligence. :tu

Bwahahahahahahshahaahhah

[poop]

The funny thing is, is if this nerd every finds himself in a bad situation hes gonna be dialling 911 as fast as his soft little fingers can type and beg for a man with a gun to come save him

[tholdren]

The funny thing is, is if this nerd every finds himself in a bad situation hes gonna be dialling 911 as fast as his soft little fingers can type and beg for a man with a gun to come save him

Lolololo in a bad situation? Like if i leave the saloon one night with a couple of bags that have dollar signs on them and bad bart sees me? That kind of situation?

[Play Boban]

MILWAUKEE -- The San Antonio Spurs were in Milwaukee on Sunday for an afternoon matchup with the Milwaukee Bucks. Before the game, Spurs coach Gregg Popovich -- no stranger to voicing his opinions on the current political and social issues -- shared his thoughts on the student-led marches against gun violence that took place across the country on Saturday.

Popovich was asked specifically about what he thought the marches meant for the future of the country, but expounded further on the need for the country to reflect, and the lack of leadership from current politicians.

Popovich's full response:

Well, the future of the country is a pretty big thing. There's not one event that is going to signal what it's going to be like in the future. But I can tell you that I'm sure most everybody is going to be unbelievably proud and excited about those students and what they've done. Because our politicians have certainly sat on their thumbs and just hidden. To most, it's almost like a dereliction of duty to watch all these people get killed with guns -- in so many different ways, whether it's nightclubs, or schools, or cities. And it seems that the power and the money are more important than the lives. So to see these teenagers demand this, it takes you back.

You think about it, the civil rights movement didn't flip or change until people saw things on TV. They saw policemen with fire hoses and dogs biting old black men and women, people being beaten with sticks. Then you get to the Vietnam War, and we're in it forever, and then what happens? Film starts coming back with arms and legs blown off and coffins, and I can still remember the little girl who was napalmed running down the road. Things change when that happens. And in this one, in this situation, these students are the same way. Images are important. Obviously you can't put an image on TV of what happened in that classroom, that would be pretty horrifying.

But if you just sit for a moment and imagine those bullets going through those bodies, and what those bodies might have looked like afterwards, how can the president of the country talk about all the things he's going to do, and then go have lunch with the NRA and change it? It's just cowardice. A real leader would have been in Washington D.C. this weekend, not at his penthouse at Mar-a-Lago. He would have had the decency to meet with a group, to see what's going on, and how important it is, and how important our children should be to us. So for all those politicians involved, it's just a dereliction of duty.

They can talk about the age limit, and background checks and all that, but the real discussion is what kind of a country, what kind of a culture do we want? You go back and investigate the second amendment. What does it really mean today? What are we willing to give up for the safety of our children. The people in power don't want to talk about that. The fact that our president left town, is a real indication of how much he really cares about anything other than feeding his insatiable ego.

https://www.cbssports.com/nba/news/spurs-gregg-popovich-responds-to-march-for-our-lives-criticizes-president-trump/

Is it a coincidence that the game when Poop opens up his huge pie hole is the game we lose after being on a winning streak? NO!!! Fire this loser!!!

[tholdren]

The funny thing is, is if this nerd every finds himself in a bad situation hes gonna be dialling 911 as fast as his soft little fingers can type and beg for a man with a gun to come save him

Quick someone with an assault rifle help me!

[ducks]

Cell phone killed 9 teens today because of texting and driving
BAnn then now left be consistent

[ducks]

The funny thing is, is if this nerd every finds himself in a bad situation hes gonna be dialling 911 as fast as his soft little fingers can type and beg for a man with a gun to come save him

[tholdren]

Cell phone killed 9 teens today because of texting and driving
BAnn then now left be consistent
Texting and driving is illegal. Cell phones should have some type of parental lock or car ignition lock that prevents texting and driving.

[ducks]

Let’s take the cops guns and fbis guns to
Because a few of them are bad so let’s get rid of those people having guns
Be consistent left

[apalisoc_9]

Pop is gonna win coach of the year now

[tholdren]

Cell phone killed 9 teens today because of texting and driving
BAnn then now left be consistent

Pro gun would want the cell phone to have 6 more screens to text on simultaneously so they can feel safe.

[tholdren]

Let’s take the cops guns and fbis guns to
Because a few of them are bad so let’s get rid of those people having guns
Be consistent left

Great idea

[Nathan89]

Texting and driving is illegal. Cell phones should have some type of parental lock or car ignition lock that prevents texting and driving.

Shooting people is also illegal. I'm glad that's settled.

[Nathan89]

Cell phone killed 9 teens today because of texting and driving
BAnn then now left be consistent

"I like phones therefore they are fine. I dislike guns therefore they should be banned." Selfish people.

[ducks]

Texting and driving is illegal. Cell phones should have some type of parental lock or car ignition lock that prevents texting and driving.

BAnn then
Killing people with guns is illegal also unless self defense

[tholdren]

Shooting people is also illegal. I'm glad that's settled.

Whats settled? I just said simply being illegal doesnt make it stop therefore further restrictions should be had. So youve just switched sides it seems... lol you are bad at this

[Pavlov]

Everything they are saying about the AR15 can easily be said about a handgun.Stephen Paddock couldn't have killed all those people in Vegas from 400 yards away with a handgun.

[tholdren]

BAnn then
Killing people with guns is illegal also unless self defense

Nope just put more restrictions on. Just like post said. Sorry you had emotional meltdown and did not read. Typical ducks doing typical emotional outlash

[tholdren]

"I like phones therefore they are fine. I dislike guns therefore they should be banned." Selfish people.

You just got triggered.... meltdown city baby!!!!!

[Nathan89]

Whats settled? I just said simply being illegal doesnt make it stop therefore further restrictions should be had. So youve just switched sides it seems... lol you are bad at this

The idiots flooding the streets said "I can have my musket". So let's ban cell phones and you can have your rotary dial phone.

[Nathan89]

You just got triggered.... meltdown city baby!!!!!

Yeah, ducks comments that supports what I've been saying "triggered" me.

[Nathan89]

While were at ban cars and go back to horse and buggy. We are trying to save lives.

[Nathan89]

Stephen Paddock couldn't have killed all those people in Vegas from 400 yards away with a handgun.

They didn't march the streets over Paddock. They marched it over 17 children getting killed which could easily happen with handguns. The powers at be know how to use them as a weapon for their agenda.

http://www.blog44.ca/kirbyh/files/2017/01/dba8756351dec51b390fc8e6637a00fe-1p58418.jpg

[tholdren]

They didn't march the streets over Paddock. They marched it over 17 children getting killed which could easily happen with handguns. The powers at be know how to use them as a weapon for their agenda.

http://www.blog44.ca/kirbyh/files/2017/01/dba8756351dec51b390fc8e6637a00fe-1p58418.jpg

Really melting down and not having rational debate. Typical. Keep melting down your stuff is halrious to read... not even responding on topic. Lololol mmmmmeeeeellllttttttt doooooowwwwwwnnnnnnnn

Pwned

[Pavlov]

They didn't march the streets over Paddock. They marched it over 17 children getting killed which could easily happen with handguns. The powers at be know how to use them as a weapon for their agenda.

http://www.blog44.ca/kirbyh/files/2017/01/dba8756351dec51b390fc8e6637a00fe-1p58418.jpg:lol "the powers at be"

The NRA controls every branch of government at this point.

Tell me, do handguns make the same wounds as AR-15 type weapons?

[Nathan89]

Really melting down and not having rational debate. Typical. Keep melting down your stuff is halrious to read... not even responding on topic. Lololol mmmmmeeeeellllttttttt doooooowwwwwwnnnnnnnn

Pwned


Lol


Bwahahahahahahshahaahhah

:lol

[poop]

You clowns dont know the first thing about the NRA.

"OMG the NRA is liek, this all-powerful shadowy organization because the gun companies have more money than any other entity obviously and they liek literally buy all the politicians to make them do their bidding!! They literally want no gun restrictions at all! They want to arm babies with ar15's right out of the womb im serrrious!!

:lol laughable

[Nathan89]

:lol "the powers at be"

The NRA controls every branch of government at this point.

Tell me, do handguns make the same wounds as AR-15 type weapons?

It's irrelevant that there minor distinctions between handguns and AR-15s. Once they are removed from the playing field then they'll fear monger over another gun. This isn't a position based on logic it's based on a combination of fear mongering and a selfish perspective. Which will be just as easily applied to handguns.

[Pavlov]

You clowns dont know the first thing about the NRA.OK, tell us all about the NRA.

Which proposed gun regulation laws are they currently endorsing?

[Pavlov]

It's irrelevantIt's quite relevant. You can't just avoid talking about bullet wounds because you don't wanna.

Do handguns make the same wounds as AR-15 type weapons?

[Nathan89]

It's quite relevant. You can't just avoid talking about bullet wounds because you don't wanna.

Do handguns make the same wounds as AR-15 type weapons?

Yes, because this protest is happening because the size of the bullet wounds.

It's completely irrelevant.

[Pavlov]

Yes, because this protest is happening because the size of the bullet wounds.

It's completely irrelevant.Of course it's relevant. You're saying handguns are the same as AR15s for all practical purposes. That's your argument.

Do handguns make the same wounds as AR-15 type weapons?

Yes or no.

[Nathan89]

Of course it's relevant. You're saying handguns are the same as AR15s. That's your argument.

Do handguns make the same wounds as AR-15 type weapons?

Yes or no.

Nope, that's not my argument. My argument is the difference isn't significant enough for the idiots to stop marching for the disarming of Americans if the AR-15 was banned.

[tholdren]

It's irrelevant that there minor distinctions between handguns and AR-15s. Once they are removed from the playing field then they'll fear monger over another gun. This isn't a position based on logic it's based on a combination of fear mongering and a selfish perspective. Which will be just as easily applied to handguns.

Man youve lost it. Sad really

[poop]

OK, tell us all about the NRA.

Which proposed gun regulation laws are they currently endorsing?

Lots of them, there are already tons of them on the books. The best example is they constantly advocate for penalties for those who use guns while committing crimes, those who obtain them illegally, those who attemp to make straw purchses (buying a gun legally for someone who is prohibited from obtaining one legally) and those who lie on the backgrpund check forms/attempt to buy them when they are prohibited from doing so. These measures would prevent countless criminals from obtaining firearms or would at least put authorities on notice. The irony is that of the tens of thousands who were reported in recent years for these things, only something like 14 were actually prosecuted, reason beong the Holder dept of justice saw prosecuting those as 'racist' since they tended to be disproportionately from a certain race, and this went against the obama/holder policy of being soft on crime 'because racist'. Ironically such measures would have also likely prevented Cruz from obtaining any guns or at least would have had him prosecuted for prior offenses instead of being simply let go some 39 times ans this shit would have never even happened

[Pavlov]

Nope, that's not my argument. My argument is the difference isn't significant enough for the idiots to stop marching for the disarming of Americans if the AR-15 was banned.Oh, your argument is they are not significantly different.

:lol

OK, let's discuss how they are not significantly different.

Are wounds caused by AR15 type weapons significantly different from those caused by handguns?

Yes or no.

[Nathan89]

Significant enough

[Pavlov]

Lots of them, there are already tons of them on the books. The best example is they constantly advocate for penalties for those who use guns while committing crimes, those who obtain them illegally, those who attemp to make straw purchses (buying a gun legally for someone who is prohibited from obtaining one legally) and those who lie on the backgrpund check forms/attempt to buy them when they are prohibited from doing so. These measures would prevent countless criminals from obtaining firearms or would at least put authorities on notice. The irony is that of the tens of thousands who were reported in recent years for these things, only something like 14 were actually prosecuted, reason beong the Holder dept of justice saw prosecuting those as 'racist' since they tended to be disproportionately from a certain race, and this went against the obama/holder policy of being soft on crime 'because racist'. Ironically such measures would have also likely prevented Cruz from obtaining any guns or at least would have had him prosecuted for prior offenses instead of being simply let go some 39 times ans this shit would have never even happenedI didn't ask which existing regulations they were advocating.

Which proposed gun regulation laws are they currently endorsing?

[Pavlov]

Significant enoughAre wounds caused by AR15 type weapons significantly different from those caused by handguns?

Yes or no.

[Nathan89]

Can you easily kill a lot of people with handguns? yes.
Like 17 kids? Yes

Well then we can continue to use them as a weapon for our agenda.

Meanwhile the media refuses to stop covering mass murders because they want ratings. Ok.

[Pavlov]

Can you easily kill a lot of people with handguns? yes.
Like 17 kids? Yes

Well then we can continue to use them as a weapon for our agenda.

Meanwhile the media refuses to stop covering mass murders because they want ratings. Ok.Ah, now muh media is to blame.

Are wounds caused by AR15 type weapons significantly different from those caused by handguns?

Yes or no.

[poop]

All the ones being proposed right now are completely idiotic and would do NOTHING to prevent mass murders.

And you clearly know zero about ar15's, or any of their variants, much less ballistics, so stop trying to sound all smart :lol

There are MANY guns, rifles and even handguns that create wound channels much more devistating than the standard .223 round from an ar15. It is actually a small caliber gun, so much so that is virtually all places its not even approved as appropriate for deer hunting

[tholdren]

All the ones being proposed right now are completely idiotic and would do NOTHING to prevent mass murders.

And you clearly know zero about ar15's, or any of their variants, much less ballistics, so stop trying to sound all smart :lol

There are MANY guns, rifles and even handguns that create wound channels much more devistating than the standard .223 round from an ar15. It is actually a small caliber gun, so much so that is virtually all places its not even approved as appropriate for deer hunting

Lol you deer hunt

[poop]

Nope

Nice deflection tho

[Killakobe81]

Pro gun would want the cell phone to have 6 more screens to text on simultaneously so they can feel safe.

:lol:toast

luv it when in a debate someone flips a foolish example back on the originator, well done.

[Killakobe81]

Let’s take the cops guns and fbis guns to
Because a few of them are bad so let’s get rid of those people having guns
Be consistent left

They are trained to protect and serve why would anyone argue that?!

[Pavlov]

All the ones being proposed right now are completely idiotic and would do NOTHING to prevent mass murders. So they support no proposed gun regulations.


And you clearly know zero about ar15's, or any of their variants, much less ballistics, so stop trying to sound all smart :lol

There are MANY guns, rifles and even handguns that create wound channels much more devistating than the standard .223 round from an ar15. It is actually a small caliber gun, so much so that is virtually all places its not even approved as appropriate for deer huntingAre wounds caused by AR15 type weapons significantly different from those caused by handguns?

Yes or no.

Feel free to give the testimony of trauma surgeons who have treated both to support your "wound channel" argument.

Thanks in advance.

[BD24]

Pro gun dumb asses still love to pretend that Australia doesn't exist and that there isn't tons of studies showing that more guns in a country = more gun deaths.

Quite the opposite of their dumb ass more guns makes the country safer rhetoric.

[Phenomanul]

Somehow gun laws work in the rest of the world. You're one hell of an idiot, Hector.

Tell that to the people of:
Venezuela
Mexico
Brazil
Columbia
China
Ukraine
Honduras
Chile
South Africa
Turkey
etc...

Here on the home front stricter gun control laws have not produced lower homicide rates. See:
Washington D.C.
Chicago
Detroit

I'm not going to stoop to name-calling simply because your POV differs from my own. I simply don't agree with your position on the matter. Government authorities cannot be depended on to respond to all crimes. IF they could the crime rate would be zero. The very fact that crimes exist show that government response is deficient - it's a fact that is proven day-in, day-out.

Under that context, and because I am a law abiding citizen I will protect my family, my home, as best I see fit. You don't have to like it.



1. Washington, D.C.'s gun ban worsened the city's homicide rate:

In 1976, D.C. implemented a law that banned citizens from owning guns, as only police officers were allowed to carry firearms. Those who already owned guns were allowed to keep them only if they were disassembled or trigger-locked. Trigger locks could only be removed if the owner received permission from the D.C. police, which was rare.

According to prosecutor Jeffrey Shapiro, the results were not good. Annual homicides rose from 188 in 1976 to 364 in 1988, and then increased even further to 454 in 1993. The gun ban was struck down by the Supreme Court in District of Columbia v. Heller, and homicides have steadily declined since then to 88 yearly murders in 2012. While Shapiro admits that there were other factors involved with the decline in homicides, lifting the gun ban clearly did not result in a rise in murders.


D.C. still has some of the strictest gun laws in the country and consequently is one of the most dangerous places in the country to live, but the facts clearly show that homicides in D.C. rose after the ban was implemented and then subsequently declined after the Supreme Court ruled the law unconstitutional.

2. The gun bans in Australia and Britain also didn't work.
Australia and Britain are both hailed by the Left as evidence that gun control works. However, the facts tell a different story.

Two studies – a 2007 British Journal of Criminology study and a 2008 University of Melbourne study – concluded that Australia's temporary gun ban had no effect on the gun homicide rate. Crime Research Prevention Center president John Lott had similar findings.

"Prior to 1996, there was already a clear downward [trend] in firearm homicides, and this pattern continued after the buyback," wrote Lott. "It is hence difficult to link the decline to the buyback."

"Again, as with suicides, both non-firearm and firearm homicides fell by similar amounts," Lott continued. "In fact, the trend in non-firearms homicides shows a much larger decline between the pre- and post-buyback periods. This suggests that crime has been falling for other reasons. Note that the change in homicides doesn’t follow the change in gun ownership – there is no increase in homicides as gun ownership gradually increased."

In Britain's case, the Crime Research Prevention Center found that after the gun ban was implemented, there was initially a severe increase in the homicide rate, followed by a gradual decline once Britain beefed up their police force. However, there has only been one year where the homicide rate was lower than it was pre-ban:

Additionally, there was an 89 percent spike in gun crime from 1998/1999 to 2008/2009, all of which occurred after the gun ban.

A closer look at the actual facts show that the Left's favorite examples of Britain and Australia are actually examples of how gun control doesn't work.

3. The vast majority of mass shootings occur in gun-free zones.
The Crime Research Prevention Center determined that since 1950, nearly 99 percent of mass public shootings have occurred in gun-free zones. The terror attack in Orlando, FL and the shooting that murdered singer Christina Grimmie in June also took place in gun-free zones. The reason is obvious: deranged murderers want to be in a position to murder as many as possible, so they target areas where they're least likely to find armed resistance, which happen to be gun-free zones.

As Lott points out, there are 320 million people in America but only 628,000 police officers, so it's impossible for the police to protect everybody. That's why it's prudent for citizens to arm themselves.

4. According to Lott, there is a clear correlation between higher firearm ownership and reducing police killings.
The conclusion he came to was that there is a 3.6 percent decrease in police killings for every percentage point increase in those owning a firearm. Naturally, the inverse was also true: Lott found that "from 2013 to 2015, the six states (plus the District of Columbia) that banned open carry actually experienced higher rates of police death (20.2 versus 17.3 per 100,000 officers)."

No wonder a recent National Association of Chiefs of Police survey found that 86.4 percent of 20,000 police chiefs and sheriffs support concealed carry and are overwhelmingly against further gun control. In light of the recent murders of cops, it has become even more important to have an armed citizenry.

5. There is also a correlation between fewer mass public shootings and higher gun ownership.
According to Lott and the University of Chicago's Bill Landes, between 1977 and 1999 "right-to-carry laws reduced both the frequency and the severity of mass public shootings; and to the extent to which mass shootings still occurred, they took place in those tiny areas in the states where permitted concealed handguns were not allowed."

6. As the number of guns per person has increased, gun violence has declined.
This is according to the Centers for Disease Control, which found that gun ownership increased by 56 percent, and yet gun violence declined by almost 50 percent between 1993 and 2003. If the premise of gun control zealots were correct, then wouldn't gun violence have increased during that period of time?

7. The number of defensive gun uses are higher than the number of criminal firearm uses.
There was a range of 500,000 to over 3 million defensive gun uses in 2013, according to research from the Institute of Medicine and the National Research Council published by the CDC. That same year, there were 11,208 firearm homicides and 414,562 nonfatal illegal gun uses, according to the CDC and National Justice Institute, respectively. Even when taking the low end of the defensive gun uses, it's clear that there are more defensive gun uses than criminal gun uses by Americans.

Besides...


From a leftist piece:

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/03/there-is-no-epidemic-of-mass-school-shootings.html

"If mass school shootings were the only form of gun violence in the United States, the case for treating the regulation of firearms as a pressing policy issue would actually be fairly weak. For the past quarter-century, there has been an average of one mass murder (a killing of four or more people committed with any weapon, as opposed to just firearms) in an American school each year. Every one of those atrocities is a blight on humanity. But it is nearly impossible to design a policy that can bring the incidence of an already exceptionally rare crime down to zero — and given the inherently limited nature of legislative time and resources, it would make little sense to prioritize such a marginal and difficult issue over public health challenges that kill exponentially more people.


There is no “school safety” crisis in the U.S.; only a gun violence epidemic that consists primarily of suicides, accidents, and single-victim homicides committed with handguns. In the decades since Columbine, progressives have often led the public to believe otherwise. And for understandable reasons. Spectacular acts of mass murder committed against children (especially upper-middle class children in “good” public schools) attract a degree of media attention and political concern that our nation’s (roughly) 20,000 annual firearm suicides — and daily acts of urban gang violence — simply do not. The most misleading piece of the Parkland survivors’ message — that their experience is representative of a widespread social problem that threatens the lives of all American children — may well be its most politically effective component."

The only mockery here is how somehow we are supposed to focus all of our collective attention towards fixing a "problem" that statistically cannot be effectively resolved.

It's not about "the children" either... if it were, then you and other liberals would rally around to stop the murder of 900,000 babies per year in our nation. But consequence-free promiscuity is MORE important to you all. You all instead attempt to reclassify that problem, by trying to redefine what human life is and what it isn't.

[dbestpro]

Nice to see that Pop is finally focused on doing his job...................Not.

[Proxy]

Tell that to the people of:
=
Here on the home front stricter gun control laws have not produced lower homicide rates. See:
Washington D.C.
Chicago
Detroit



we're suddenly caring about minorities?

[Nathan89]

They are trained to protect and serve why would anyone argue that?!

Because they are idiots asking questions like "Is freedom more important than safety?".

[cd98]

The problem is we live in a world where if you are attacked by someone and you don’t have a gun, you are dead. Laws against murder don’t stop murders and cops get there after the murder.

And while AR-15s seem less necessary there are times during riots or natural disasters where there is no law enforcement to be on duty to protect and perpetrators know it and if your family or store is attacked by multiple perpetrators, my guess is that you would be happy to have an AR-15.

[spurraider21]

The problem is we live in a world where if you are attacked by someone and you don’t have a gun, you are dead. Laws against murder don’t stop murders
so give me a good reason for why we have any laws?

[Nathan89]

So they support no proposed gun regulations.



He said the policies proposed were ineffective. Why would respond as if it's absurd that they didn't support them?

[dbestpro]

Hate kills people. Guns, bombs, poison, knives, even a hard rock are just tools. You want to stop the killing stop supporting the hating.

[Proxy]

Hate kills people. Guns, bombs, poison, knives, even a hard rock are just tools. You want to stop the killing stop supporting the hating.

pretty sure it's the tools causing the killing.... maybe not. I'm channeling all my hate at you... are you dead? I hope not I'd feel kinda bad if you were right

[dbestpro]

pretty sure it's the tools causing the killing.... maybe not. I'm channeling all my hate at you... are you dead? I hope not I'd feel kinda bad if you were right

Point is left slams right, right slams left. Some are just trolling and joking. The problem is someone somewhere takes it serious and bad things happen to innocent people. My mind a lot of this started with the limitations put on speech. Ideas that are not allowed to be spoken fester and turn to hate when logical debate may have changed the person's mind in the beginning.

[tholdren]

Because they are idiots asking questions like "Is freedom more important than safety?".

You probbably should define the extent of the terms

[Proxy]

Point is left slams right, right slams left. Some are just trolling and joking. The problem is someone somewhere takes it serious and bad things happen to innocent people. My mind a lot of this started with the limitations put on speech. Ideas that are not allowed to be spoken fester and turn to hate when logical debate may have changed the person's mind in the beginning.

in all seriousness, you're falling for propaganda bullshit if you really think the violence isn't stemming more from the right. It's a joke when I hear one side crying about antifa, or suddenly caring about the blacks in CHI or MS13 in Cali for the sake of their gun argument. It was an entirely different atmosphere when the Black Panthers were pro gun. You have an entire region in the middle east that hates the west because of our imperial bullshit back in the day, like taking out Qasim. There aren't POCs or gays shooting up schools, it's fucking white men

[Nathan89]

in all seriousness, you're falling for propaganda bullshit if you really think the violence isn't stemming more from the right. It's a joke when I hear one side crying about antifa, or suddenly caring about the blacks in CHI or MS13 in Cali for the sake of their gun argument. It was an entirely different atmosphere when the Black Panthers were pro gun. You have an entire region in the middle east that hates the west because of our imperial bullshit back in the day, like taking out Qasim. There aren't POCs or gays shooting up schools, it's fucking white men

Shooting up schools is incredibly rare. White men doesn't equal the right. Your comment is idiotic.

[Proxy]

Shooting up schools is incredibly rare. White men doesn't equal the right. Your comment is idiotic.

https://media.giphy.com/media/O5NyCibf93upy/giphy.gif

[Nathan89]

Go ahead post the political leanings of the school shooter if you want. Saying they are "the right" because they are white men is beyond idiotic. The shootings account basically nothing as well. Everyone knows black people commit the most violent crime. This all irrelevant to the discussion though.

"It’s true that around 13 per cent of Americans are black, according to the latest estimates from the US Census Bureau (http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/00000.html).And yes, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics (http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/htus8008.pdf), black offenders committed 52 per cent of homicides recorded in the data between 1980 and 2008. Only 45 per cent of the offenders were white. Homicide is a broader category than “murder” but let’s not split hairs."

https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-black-americans-commit-crime

[Spurtacular]

On Nov. 11, 1938, the German minister of the interior issued "Regulations Against Jews Possession of Weapons." Not only were Jews forbidden to own guns and ammunition, they couldn’t own "truncheons or stabbing weapons."

Did the Nazis do this to strengthen the Jews or make them more vulnerable?

[Proxy]

must've missed the times POC shot up schools

[ElNono]

Japan looks really Nazi these days with their weapons regulations, tbh...

[cd98]

so give me a good reason for why we have any laws?

The majority adhere to the laws, hence we have laws. But there are a minority that don’t. So we pass laws for the majority and we punish the minority. A law didn’t stop and wouldn’t stop Parkland or Sandy Hook. For those situations, there isn’t much you can do but hope someone has a gun to ward off the shooter or that some act of God saves you. It’s a sad reality of life, but not a reason to have no laws.

[Nathan89]

Japan looks really Nazi these days with their weapons regulations, tbh...

Short-term thinker:bobo

[ElNono]

Short-term thinker:bobo

yep, regulation only been in the books for 60 years there

[Play Boban]

And now our moron coach is blowing his load tonight against Washington. What a loser!

[Nathan89]

yep, regulation only been in the books for 60 years there

Like I said, "short-term thinker".

They needlessly vulnerable. There are numerous ways to save lives without becoming vulnerable. For starters, they can work on their suicide rate.

https://www.japantimes.co.jp/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/n-suicide-g-20170531.jpg

[Bill_Brasky]

Good god, reading this thread reminds me of why I quit posting at this shithole.

Nathan89, you really are a fucktard. If you just admitted that you are selfish and wanna own a gun because it makes you feel good and you don't care how many kids have to be murdered in school for you to be able to do it, I could at least have a shred of respect for you. The bullshit arguments you make are what drives me crazy.

And the hilarious thing is, even with reasonable gun controls and regulations, your stupid ass could probably still own a gun as long as you aren't a felon or have a violent history. Sure, it may cost a bit more, and may be a little more of a hassle to keep everything legal, but if you really love owning a gun and shooting, that shouldn't matter.

People like you who want guns everywhere make people like me feel LESS SAFE. I will never understand why anyone would think they need to have a gun everywhere they go.

[bic50]

:lol "the powers at be"

The NRA controls every branch of government at this point.

Tell me, do handguns make the same wounds as AR-15 type weapons?
Depends

[ElNono]

Like I said, "short-term thinker".

They needlessly vulnerable. There are numerous ways to save lives without becoming vulnerable. For starters, they can work on their suicide rate.

https://www.japantimes.co.jp/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/n-suicide-g-20170531.jpg

So they have about the same suicide rate as the US, but incredibly lower murder rate than the US...

I think they like their 'vulnerability' exactly the way it is. BTW, it's not illegal to own guns in Japan.

[UZER]

Good god, reading this thread reminds me of why I quit posting at this shithole.

Nathan89, you really are a fucktard. If you just admitted that you are selfish and wanna own a gun because it makes you feel good and you don't care how many kids have to be murdered in school for you to be able to do it, I could at least have a shred of respect for you. The bullshit arguments you make are what drives me crazy.

And the hilarious thing is, even with reasonable gun controls and regulations, your stupid ass could probably still own a gun as long as you aren't a felon or have a violent history. Sure, it may cost a bit more, and may be a little more of a hassle to keep everything legal, but if you really love owning a gun and shooting, that shouldn't matter.

People like you who want guns everywhere make people like me feel LESS SAFE. I will never understand why anyone would think they need to have a gun everywhere they go.

Cops at banks have guns. Do you feel less safe?

[bic50]

Ive often wondered several things. What do gun owners need protection for or from? That seems to be the sentiment for not wanting gun control, whatever thay means.

And lol for the idiots who want to arm teachers. Jesus. How stupid can you be?
Bad people do exist. Arming teachers is just a suggestion.

[TimDunkem]

We can't even trust every teacher not to have sick relationships with kids nowadays, and yet people want to arm them. Yeah, that'll get us places.

[ducks]

Pop speaks spurs lose two In a row
Shut the pie hole pop

[spurraider21]

The majority adhere to the laws, hence we have laws. But there are a minority that don’t. So we pass laws for the majority and we punish the minority. A law didn’t stop and wouldn’t stop Parkland or Sandy Hook. For those situations, there isn’t much you can do but hope someone has a gun to ward off the shooter or that some act of God saves you. It’s a sad reality of life, but not a reason to have no laws.
so most people will follow the law.

if a law banning AR's can prevent some people from acquiring said weapon that could end up using it dangerously, isn't that good enough, even if it doesn't stop 100%?

[ElNono]

so most people will follow the law.

if a law banning AR's can prevent some people from acquiring said weapon that could end up using it dangerously, isn't that good enough, even if it doesn't stop 100%?

Of course not. America clearly knows better about gun regulation.

[Nathan89]

So they have about the same suicide rate as the US, but incredibly lower murder rate than the US...

I think they like their 'vulnerability' exactly the way it is. BTW, it's not illegal to own guns in Japan.

No, the difference between their suicide rate and ours is not "about the same" it's actually an astronomical difference. If you adjust our suicide rate to theirs we'd have 20,000 more suicides per year.

They also have a homogeneous country. If the country had the demographics of Vermont we'd probably fair much better. Over half the homicides come from black people which is only 13% of the country.

Yeah, everybody enjoys being vulnerable.:rolleyes In reality vulnerabilities are only a problem when they are exploited.

[Spurs 4 The Win]

so most people will follow the law.

if a law banning AR's can prevent some people from acquiring said weapon that could end up using it dangerously, isn't that good enough, even if it doesn't stop 100%?

"the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

[spurraider21]

No, the difference between their suicide rate and ours is not "about the same" it's actually an astronomical difference. If you adjust our suicide rate to theirs we'd have 20,000 more suicides per year.

They also have a homogeneous country. If the country had the demographics of Vermont we'd probably fair much better. Over half the homicides come from black people which is only 13% of the country.

Yeah, everybody enjoys being vulnerable.:rolleyes In reality vulnerabilities are only a problem when they are exploited.
this would be a viable argument if we had race wars over the street, with black people killing white people, and vice versa (excluding law enforcement, for obvious reasons). but that's not what we find. instead that just comes off as "black people are bad'

[spurraider21]

"the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
can you buy one of these?

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ea/PEO_M240B_Profile.jpg

http://imagesvc.timeincapp.com/v3/foundry/image/?q=70&w=1440&url=https%3A%2F%2Ftimedotcom.files.wordpress.com%2 F2017%2F11%2Fnnd525.jpg%3Fquality%3D85

[ElNono]

No, the difference between their suicide rate and ours is not "about the same" it's actually an astronomical difference. If you adjust our suicide rate to theirs we'd have 20,000 more suicides per year.

They also have a homogeneous country. If the country had the demographics of Vermont we'd probably fair much better. Over half the homicides come from black people which is only 13% of the country.

Yeah, everybody enjoys being vulnerable.:rolleyes In reality vulnerabilities are only a problem when they are exploited.

Americans telling other countries that successfully implemented gun control regulations, and can actually prove it, how it should be done... :lol

This is also part of the problem in the US, tbh, people don't want to listen at all, even if the facts hit them straight in the face.

You keep doing your "I know better" routine while people die, Japan will keep their low murder rate, thanks.

[dbestpro]

There are 650,000 abortions in the US every year. Maybe we should outlaw peckers.

[spurraider21]

Americans telling other countries that successfully implemented gun control regulations, and can actually prove it, how it should be done... :lol

This is also part of the problem in the US, tbh, people don't want to listen at all, even if the facts hit them straight in the face.

You keep doing your "I know better" routine while people die, Japan will keep their low murder rate, thanks.
:cry then go move to japan! :cry

[Spurs 4 The Win]

this would be a viable argument if we had race wars over the street, with black people killing white people, and vice versa (excluding law enforcement, for obvious reasons). but that's not what we find. instead that just comes off as "black people are bad'

Chicago and DC are riddled with gun violence and have the strictest gun laws. Most gun deaths (67%) are suicides. Most gun deaths are from handguns. 0% of mass shooting are committed by NRA members. 98% of shooting occur in gun free zones. Stay woke

[Nathan89]

Good god, reading this thread reminds me of why I quit posting at this shithole.

Nathan89, you really are a fucktard. If you just admitted that you are selfish and wanna own a gun because it makes you feel good and you don't care how many kids have to be murdered in school for you to be able to do it, I could at least have a shred of respect for you. The bullshit arguments you make are what drives me crazy.

And the hilarious thing is, even with reasonable gun controls and regulations, your stupid ass could probably still own a gun as long as you aren't a felon or have a violent history. Sure, it may cost a bit more, and may be a little more of a hassle to keep everything legal, but if you really love owning a gun and shooting, that shouldn't matter.

People like you who want guns everywhere make people like me feel LESS SAFE. I will never understand why anyone would think they need to have a gun everywhere they go.

You can blame Pop for making this relevant to the Spurs. Otherwise it wouldn't be discussed here.

You're correct. I don't care enough about an insignificant amount of murders to push policy on the rest of the country.

You can go to the UK if you want to feel extra "safe" they'll take away your guns and your free speech.

[ElNono]

this would be a viable argument if we had race wars over the street, with black people killing white people, and vice versa (excluding law enforcement, for obvious reasons). but that's not what we find. instead that just comes off as "black people are bad'

Of course it's a terrible argument. Heck, I didn't even touch the fact that such regulations make Japenese citizens much more trustworthy of the police too, etc.

[Spurs 4 The Win]

can you buy one of these?



Yeah, I actually can by fully automatic weapons and tanks. Read up son

[ElNono]

:cry then go move to japan! :cry

I lived in a lot of countries... none of them are perfect. Everybody has their own pro and cons, tbh... it actually makes for great contrast.

[Bill_Brasky]

Cops at banks have guns. Do you feel less safe?

There's one of those bullshit arguments I was talking about.

[ElNono]

It actually makes much more sense to simply say "I like my guns, I want to keep em, that's my point". Like smokers that just tell you they enjoy smoking cigarettes...

I'm not going to tell Nathan he's wrong, or that I hold an undeniable truth. They're opinions, all respectable.

I just think sometimes the excuses are pretty laughable. Just say what you mean, get over it.

I'm actually not in favor of an outright gun ban, as I said many times, but also not against certain regulations (as long as they don't impede using guns for personal defense).

[UZER]

There's one of those bullshit arguments I was talking about.

Why is it bullshit? Do you feel less safe at a bank with cops that have guns? It’s a simple question.

[spurraider21]

Chicago and DC are riddled with gun violence and have the strictest gun laws.
its almost like being a densely populated area stricken with poverty and failed public education could be a factor


Most gun deaths (67%) are suicides.
agreed. also irrelevant. guns are also the most common weapon used in murders. that's relevant


Most gun deaths are from handguns.
agreed. i'm not a big fan of them either. there are more accidental gun deaths per year than justified homicides. the cons outweigh the pros and it isn't particularly close. that said, the focus on semi auto rifles is with the specific intent of curbing mass shootings, which tend to be carried out with assault rifles. yes, virginia tech was with pistols. but focusing out outliers is never productive


0% of mass shooting are committed by NRA members.
incredible strawman/red herring


98% of shooting occur in gun free zones.
absolutely false.

story is different when talking about mass shootings vs shootings in general. your comment didn't specify mass shootings, and thus was incorrect

that being said, areas that are "gun free zones" tend to be densely populated areas. schools, airports, malls, clubs. those areas, gun free or not, are inherently attractive spots for mass shooters.

you are confusing cause and effect. a wide open field might not be a gun free zone, but thats not why a mass shooter isn't going to set up shop in a wide open field. it's because nobody is there for him to shoot.


Stay woke
always

[Bill_Brasky]

You can blame Pop for making this relevant to the Spurs. Otherwise it wouldn't be discussed here.

You're correct. I don't care enough about an insignificant amount of murders to push policy on the rest of the country.

You can go to the UK if you want to feel extra "safe" they'll take away your guns and your free speech.

Funny you mention "free speech", kind of like what the brave students who had to hear and watch their friends die are voicing that you so vehemently disapprove of and chastise.

At least you can admit that you don't care about them. Props for that I guess, though I'm pretty certain you would feel a lot different if it was your kid or relative who died in one of these now seemingly annual mass shooting events. If you have kids.

And fuck you, no, I pay taxes and enjoy living here.

[Nathan89]

It actually makes much more sense to simply say "I like my guns, I want to keep em, that's my point". Like smokers that just tell you they enjoy smoking cigarettes...

I'm not going to tell Nathan he's wrong, or that I hold an undeniable truth. They're opinions, all respectable.

I just think sometimes the excuses are pretty laughable. Just say what you mean, get over it.

I'm actually not in favor of an outright gun ban, as I said many times, but also not against certain regulations (as long as they don't impede using guns for personal defense).

That is true for most things but there are undeniable uses for guns beyond "I like them". That's all smokers can say(besides government being overly restrictive). The all drinkers of alcohol can say. But that's not all you can say about guns.

Likewise I think the excuses for banning guns are pretty laughable. Just say "I don't like guns". That's the reality. Just say what you mean and get over it.

[rastaspur]

In my opinion what pop said was spot on. But, my head isnt up my ass like most trump supporters.

Most people on this site hate his point of view. Thats cool. However, pop is informed and knows more about politics and current world affairs than any poster on this site.

He would absolutely destroy any of his haters in a debate / political conversation. If you think otherwise you have delusions of grandeur or are a fucking idiot just like trump.

[Bill_Brasky]

Why is it bullshit? Do you feel less safe at a bank with cops that have guns? It’s a simple question.

Those aren't the same. A cop is at least somewhat trained to carry a gun. It's not like Jimmy Lipper carrying his pistol on his hip in a crowded restaurant thinking he's some badass. And not all banks have armed cops. Most that i've been in don't actually.

I'm sure you also compare cars and guns.

[spurraider21]

Yeah, I actually can by fully automatic weapons and tanks. Read up son
how easily can you obtain an NFA weapon

[Spurs 4 The Win]

its almost like being a densely populated area stricken with poverty and failed public education could be a factor


agreed. also irrelevant. guns are also the most common weapon used in murders. that's relevant


agreed. i'm not a big fan of them either. there are more accidental gun deaths per year than justified homicides. the cons outweigh the pros and it isn't particularly close. that said, the focus on semi auto rifles is with the specific intent of curbing mass shootings, which tend to be carried out with assault rifles. yes, virginia tech was with pistols. but focusing out outliers is never productive


incredible strawman/red herring


absolutely false.

story is different when talking about mass shootings vs shootings in general. your comment didn't specify mass shootings, and thus was incorrect

that being said, areas that are "gun free zones" tend to be densely populated areas. schools, airports, malls, clubs. those areas, gun free or not, are inherently attractive spots for mass shooters.

you are confusing cause and effect. a wide open field might not be a gun free zone, but thats not why a mass shooter isn't going to set up shop in a wide open field. it's because nobody is there for him to shoot.


always

I could go back and forth with you all day on this, as I have with many other liberals. Ill save you and I the time.

The rights are self-evident, handed to us by our Creator. The government does not give us these rights, they are non-negotiable God given rights to us for simply existing as humans. The government is sworn to uphold those rights. Not to undermine them, not to cancel them the moment some butthurt high schoolers eat too many tide pods and think its time to change the law. The Constitution can only be changed with a 75% vote of the states to repeal an amendment. Good luck with that.

Please read...

"the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

[Nathan89]

Funny you mention "free speech", kind of like what the brave students who had to hear and watch their friends die are voicing that you so vehemently disapprove of and chastise.

At least you can admit that you don't care about them. Props for that I guess, though I'm pretty certain you would feel a lot different if it was your kid or relative who died in one of these now seemingly annual mass shooting events. If you have kids.

And fuck you, no, I pay taxes and enjoy living here.

I've never once said they shouldn't have the right to protest. I just disagree with them.

Of course I don't care enough about a few insignificant amount of murders to push policy on the rest of America. Like I'm not going to agree to wear body cam even though I know for a fact that would save 10's of thousands of lives every year easily.

Oh, I thought you didn't feel safe.

[spurraider21]

this always hits home

‘No Way To Prevent This,’ Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens (https://www.theonion.com/no-way-to-prevent-this-says-only-nation-where-this-r-1819576527)
https://www.theonion.com/no-way-to-prevent-this-says-only-nation-where-this-r-1819576527

[Nathan89]

In my opinion what pop said was spot on. But, my head isnt up my ass like most trump supporters.

Most people on this site hate his point of view. Thats cool. However, pop is informed and knows more about politics and current world affairs than any poster on this site.

He would absolutely destroy any of his haters in a debate / political conversation. If you think otherwise you have delusions of grandeur or are a fucking idiot just like trump.

Get off your knees.

[Bill_Brasky]

I've never once said they shouldn't have the right to protest. I just disagree with them.

Of course I don't care enough about a few insignificant amount of murders to push policy on the rest of America. Like I'm not going to agree to wear body cam even though I know for a fact that would save 10's of thousands of lives every year easily.

Oh, I thought you didn't feel safe.

So a pretty much yearly occurrence of a large amount of people, often times children, being shot to death in a public setting isn't enough for you to say "hmm, maybe something needs to change here"? That's "insignificant" to you?

That is the definition of having your head in the sand, blinders on.

[Play Boban]

Pop speaks spurs lose two In a row
Shut the pie hole pop

[Nathan89]

but focusing out outliers is never productive



Oh that's rich. :lmao

[spurraider21]

I could go back and forth with you all day on this, as I have with many other liberals. Ill save you and I the time.

The rights are self-evident, handed to us by our Creator. The government does not give us these rights, they are non-negotiable God given rights to us for simply existing as humans. The government is sworn to uphold those rights. Not to undermine them, not to cancel them the moment some butthurt high schoolers eat too many tide pods and think its time to change the law. The Constitution can only be changed with a 75% vote of the states to repeal an amendment. Good luck with that.

a) the constitution was written by men, not god
b) the whole "rights are self evident, handed to us by our creator" is from the declaration of independence, not the constitution, and is not legally binding
c) i must have missed the bible verse where god gave all man a right to have firearms
d) even if such verse existed, this country does not endorse religious law. leave that for the middle east
e) tide pod smack talk is just a lazy attempt to write off a position that has existed for decades


Please read...

"the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
i have read it, thanks. i dont think anybody here has proposed banning all guns. the supreme court has already held that the government CAN regulate guns, as long as the regulations are reasonable. none of the rights in the constitution are absolute. we have limits to free speech. by that same token, we have limits on guns. you cant just walk into a military base and buy a fully operational tank easy peasy. you cant walk into a gun store and walk out with anti-aircraft heavy machine guns.

and thats despite the "shall not be infringed" aspect.

[UZER]

Those aren't the same. A cop is at least somewhat trained to carry a gun. It's not like Jimmy Lipper carrying his pistol on his hip in a crowded restaurant thinking he's some badass. And not all banks have armed cops. Most that i've been in don't actually.

I'm sure you also compare cars and guns.

And these “somewhat trained” cops are the same ones shooting innocent black men. Why don’t we take all their guns away? I mean innocent black men are being gunned down. Don’t you care about them!?! Take the cops guns away so they can stop dying!

Could it be that a few bad cops with guns out there don’t represent the thousands and thousands of good cops that use those guns to protect the innocent?

[Nathan89]

So a pretty much yearly occurrence of a large amount of people, often times children, being shot to death in a public setting isn't enough for you to say "hmm, maybe something needs to change here"? That's "insignificant" to you?

That is the definition of having your head in the sand, blinders on.

Too insignificant with regards to pushing restrictive policies. However, there are more ways to attack a problem.

No, that's not "having your head in the sand". Are you willing to wear a body cam to save 10s of thousands of lives? Perhaps, but I'm not. Similarly I'm not pushing restrictive policy to save a few handfuls of people. I could easily save thousands of lives by banning alcohol. I also wouldn't do that but I would before banning guns.

[Spurs 4 The Win]

a) the constitution was written by men, not god
b) the whole "rights are self evident, handed to us by our creator" is from the declaration of independence, not the constitution, and is not legally binding
c) i must have missed the bible verse where god gave all man a right to have firearms
d) even if such verse existed, this country does not endorse religious law. leave that for the middle east
e) tide pod smack talk is just a lazy attempt to write off a position that has existed for decades


i have read it, thanks. i dont think anybody here has proposed banning all guns. the supreme court has already held that the government CAN regulate guns, as long as the regulations are reasonable. none of the rights in the constitution are absolute. we have limits to free speech. by that same token, we have limits on guns. you cant just walk into a military base and buy a fully operational tank easy peasy. you cant walk into a gun store and walk out with anti-aircraft heavy machine guns.

and thats despite the "shall not be infringed" aspect.

Your lack of understanding of our history and what the Constitution means to our representative republic is appalling. The Constitution is the highest and most powerful document in our country. You act like it is toilet paper written by fossils.

I will never understand the left's fetish with banning guns, I own several and am highly trained and skilled in using them and may save your ass one day. And how ironic that abortion kills many many multiples more of children every year but I dont see a March for Life to stop abortion. Leftist are hypocrites and the worst kind, the self righteous ones that will try and bully you with "think of the children" arguments and simultaneously ignore the fact that they support baby killing. But hey you dont see me belly aching about repealing your Constitutional rights to abortion (that doesnt exist). Imagine the outcry. Go read a history book please.

[cd98]

so most people will follow the law.

if a law banning AR's can prevent some people from acquiring said weapon that could end up using it dangerously, isn't that good enough, even if it doesn't stop 100%?

Again, I'll never own an AR-15, but you are in favor of banning all AR-15s in hopes that it might stop one incident and that is good enough to pass a law. First, if you ban AR-15s, that doesn't mean that the minority of people that would commit violent crimes with them can't get their hands on it and even if it is hypothetically more difficult, we don't know how difficult. Drugs are illegal and they aren't that hard to get. Also, when you start passing laws because it might save one life, then you go down a slippery slope. There are lots of things that could be banned if it could just save one life. Yet you wouldn't ban swimming pools or certain types of cars or any number of things that take more lives (intentionally and accidentally) than guns.

I'm not a gun advocate and I'll never own a gun, but I just think its bad public policy to ban something that has little to no impact just for the sake of saying you are "doing something." I favor any reasonable gun control that will be effective for stopping gun violence. If banning AR-15s meant no more mass murders, then I'd be all for it. But the problem is that banning AR-15s won't stop them from being accessible on the black market and there will always be other weapons that take the place of the AR-15s.

And even if AR-15s stopped the mass gun violence, you would move the markers. Let's say there is gun violence where someone shoots 3 people on campus instead of 15. Aren't those three lives just as important as the 15. So how do we stop those three people from being shot? What guns can we ban to stop that?

[Nathan89]

Who here is for banning the media from covering mass murders?

[Killakobe81]

I could go back and forth with you all day on this, as I have with many other liberals. Ill save you and I the time.

The rights are self-evident, handed to us by our Creator. The government does not give us these rights, they are non-negotiable God given rights to us for simply existing as humans. The government is sworn to uphold those rights. Not to undermine them, not to cancel them the moment some butthurt high schoolers eat too many tide pods and think its time to change the law. The Constitution can only be changed with a 75% vote of the states to repeal an amendment. Good luck with that.

Please read...

"the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

The Constitution has been amended plenty ...can and will be again. Women were given the right to vote and blacks the same plus civil rights. Quoting it doesnt prove anything, except what the current state of governance is. It is a living breathing document, meant ti be changed or they would not put a process in place to amend it. Its not the Bible.

[bic50]

In my opinion what pop said was spot on. But, my head isnt up my ass like most trump supporters.

Most people on this site hate his point of view. Thats cool. However, pop is informed and knows more about politics and current world affairs than any poster on this site.

He would absolutely destroy any of his haters in a debate / political conversation. If you think otherwise you have delusions of grandeur or are a fucking idiot just like trump.
I don't know about all that

[cd98]

Funny you mention "free speech", kind of like what the brave students who had to hear and watch their friends die are voicing that you so vehemently disapprove of and chastise.

At least you can admit that you don't care about them. Props for that I guess, though I'm pretty certain you would feel a lot different if it was your kid or relative who died in one of these now seemingly annual mass shooting events. If you have kids.


And fuck you, no, I pay taxes and enjoy living here.

In fairness, mass shootings are actually on the decline. It's just when one happens it gets massive coverage. But it's true that none of us want us or our kids or anyone to go through what happened at Parkland or Sandy Hook. The problem with the rhetoric from the students isn't that they want to speak out with guns, it's that they are saying things like if you own a gun or want to own a gun, you favor kid killing and mass shootings. One they go that far, they are ripe to be criticized. It's one thing to advocate your position. It's another thing to smear someone.

[Killakobe81]

Again, I'll never own an AR-15, but you are in favor of banning all AR-15s in hopes that it might stop one incident and that is good enough to pass a law. First, if you ban AR-15s, that doesn't mean that the minority of people that would commit violent crimes with them can't get their hands on it and even if it is hypothetically more difficult, we don't know how difficult. Drugs are illegal and they aren't that hard to get. Also, when you start passing laws because it might save one life, then you go down a slippery slope. There are lots of things that could be banned if it could just save one life. Yet you wouldn't ban swimming pools or certain types of cars or any number of things that take more lives (intentionally and accidentally) than guns.

I'm not a gun advocate and I'll never own a gun, but I just think its bad public policy to ban something that has little to no impact just for the sake of saying you are "doing something." I favor any reasonable gun control that will be effective for stopping gun violence. If banning AR-15s meant no more mass murders, then I'd be all for it. But the problem is that banning AR-15s won't stop them from being accessible on the black market and there will always be other weapons that take the place of the AR-15s.

And even if AR-15s stopped the mass gun violence, you would move the markers. Let's say there is gun violence where someone shoots 3 people on campus instead of 15. Aren't those three lives just as important as the 15. So how do we stop those three people from being shot? What guns can we ban to stop that?

None. But 12 lives saved and 12 familes spared the grief of that sort of loss.

[Spurs 4 The Win]

The Constitution has been amended plenty ...can and will be again. Women were given the right to vote and blacks the same plus civil rights. Quoting it doesnt prove anything, except what the current state of governance is. It is a living breathing document, meant ti be changed or they would not put a process in place to amend it. Its not the Bible.

Again, it is the second amendment and if you knew history, the 2nd amendment was regarded as one of the most vital to viability of our country by the Founders. Additionally, you are correct, amendments have been made, but again it would take a 75% vote by the states to repeal it. I wish you luck on that journey should you decide to take it because it will be the death of the liberal party. There will not be 75% agreement on that issue in my lifetime.

What did that stupid outdated fossil George Washington say "“A free people ought not only be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them. Which would include their own government.”

[cd98]

None. But 12 lives saved and 12 familes spared the grief of that sort of loss.

Yes, but you could say that about banning just about anything that has caused a human to die. Your argument boils down to demonizing those that disagree. See you care about lives and someone that wants to own a gun doesn't.

[Killakobe81]

Your lack of understanding of our history and what the Constitution means to our representative republic is appalling. The Constitution is the highest and most powerful document in our country. You act like it is toilet paper written by fossils.

I will never understand the left's fetish with banning guns, I own several and am highly trained and skilled in using them and may save your ass one day. And how ironic that abortion kills many many multiples more of children every year but I dont see a March for Life to stop abortion. Leftist are hypocrites and the worst kind, the self righteous ones that will try and bully you with "think of the children" arguments and simultaneously ignore the fact that they support baby killing. But hey you dont see me belly aching about repealing your Constitutional rights to abortion (that doesnt exist). Imagine the outcry. Go read a history book please.

Banning one type of gun means all guns need to be banned?
What guns do you own? I have a couple guns, no AR15s .
if they ban those I can still defend my family if needed, and improve my accuracy with my pistols or go get a hunting rifle if i want a ranged weapon.

[Killakobe81]

Yes, but you could say that about banning just about anything that has caused a human to die. Your argument boils down to demonizing those that disagree. See you care about lives and someone that wants to own a gun doesn't.

nope never said that or support that. Just saying there is middle ground to be found if people are willing to compromise. I would never support a bill, president senator etc that would take away my handguns.

[Spurs 4 The Win]

Banning one type of gun means all guns need to be banned?
What guns do you own? I have a couple guns, no AR15s .
if they ban those I can still defend my family if needed, and improve my accuracy with my pistols or go get a hunting rifle if i want a ranged weapon.

Lol, why would you ban an AR-15 (a hunting rifle, semi-automatic) when handguns are responsible for a very large majority of gun deaths. Doesnt make any sense. Shooters can do just as much damage with multiple handguns in a mass shooting scenario as a semi auto rifle. Maybe we should just outlaw murder?

As an aside, if you have ever been hunting and had to deal with a feral boar you would understand why semi automatic rifles are necessary. Those fuckers are mean and dont go down easily, takes several shots with high powered rifles to stop em.

[Spurs 4 The Win]

nope never said that or support that. Just saying there is middle ground to be found if people are willing to compromise. I would never support a bill, president senator etc that would take away my handguns.

Look, I know a lot about guns and banning a semi auto rifle would do nothing to stop these "mass shootings." It is simply for show, it is so people can feel like they are doing something, but in reality, it is worthless and only limits the freedoms given to us by our Constitution and takes us one step closer to full on repeal of the 2nd amendment. No thanks.

[cd98]

nope never said that or support that. Just saying there is middle ground to be found if people are willing to compromise. I would never support a bill, president senator etc that would take away my handguns.

The vast majority of this country favors any laws that would limit gun violence. The problem is that what people propose won't impact gun violence. It's more about "doing something" or, for politicians, it's about demonizing the other side.

[Killakobe81]

Lol, why would you ban an AR-15 (a hunting rifle, semi-automatic) when handguns are responsible for a very large majority of gun deaths. Doesnt make any sense. Shooters can do just as much damage with multiple handguns in a mass shooting scenario as a semi auto rifle. Maybe we should just outlaw murder?

As an aside, if you have ever been hunting and had to deal with a feral boar you would understand why semi automatic rifles are necessary. Those fuckers are mean and dont go down easily, takes several shots with high powered rifles to stop em.

nah i dont hunt boars but my uncle does ...
and they are nasty no doubt.
The semi aitomatic component makes it easier to kill feral boars and innocent people too
Tbh i havent seen any comprehensive gun controls im 100% ok with ...im just open to finding some compromise.

[Nathan89]

What did that stupid outdated fossil George Washington say "“A free people ought not only be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them. Which would include their own government.”

Long-term thinker that George Washington. Glad he set the precedent for two terms as well tbh.

On the other hand did he factor in the death of 17 kids? Surely that would change the equation drastically.

[Killakobe81]

Im sure Old George, Thomas and Ben were thinking of AR15s, UZIS, AKs when crafting the 2nd amendment...

[Spurs 4 The Win]

nah i dont hunt boars but my uncle does ...
and they are nasty no doubt.
The semi aitomatic component makes it easier to kill feral boars and innocent people too
Tbh i havent seen any comprehensive gun controls im 100% ok with ...im just open to finding some compromise.

The semi automatic component? Not sure what you mean there. All guns are semi automatic for the most part

[cd98]

The reality is gun control for the left is like Obamacare repeal for the right. Whenever there is a mass shooting, Dems jump all over the guns and demonizing Republicans (but not Dems in red states) and claiming they are complicit in the murders. Yet, when they have super majority and the presidency, what do these same warriors do...they don't pass one single gun reform. The same can be said about Tea Party people you jump up and down about how Obamacare is going to bankrupt the country and must be repealed, and once they get elected and have the presidency and congress, they have no replacement for Obamacare and they don't repeal it. Instead, these people that care so much about the debt pass a spending bill that even Democrats would be embarrassed to pass. The money funding these political parties push these positions to get people elected, but they are highly unlikely to ever follow through.

[Nathan89]

The vast majority of this country favors any laws that would limit gun violence. The problem is that what people propose won't impact gun violence. It's more about "doing something" or, for politicians, it's about demonizing the other side.

It's the "touch on crime" of this generation tbh.

[cd98]

Im sure Old George, Thomas and Ben were thinking of AR15s, UZIS, AKs when crafting the 2nd amendment...

I'm sure Old George would've liked those for the Revolutionary War.

[rastaspur]

Get off your knees.

Get your assault rifle and try to make me

[rastaspur]

I don't know about all that

Pop is articulate and smart. He is quick witted.

He also knows history very well. And can be a bully.

Tough to win an argument against pop imo. Its also tough to win an argument against trump. Totally different reasons and totally different styles.

But they are similar as well. Both are stubborn.

[Spurs 4 The Win]

Pop is articulate and smart. He is quick witted.

He also knows history very well. And can be a bully.

Tough to win an argument against pop imo. Its also tough to win an argument against trump. Totally different reasons and totally different styles.

But they are similar as well. Both are stubborn.

Pop is quick witted certainly, he is definitely a bully, and I dont disagree with your comparison to Trump. But I dont really find him to be very enlightening. His shtick relies on his aura of invincibility from being an elite NBA coach, nobody really challenges him on the issues or anything he says. They play into his persona he created and he eats it up. He is quite arrogant and rude, and talks down to those who disagree with him instead of trying to use logical or fact based arguments.

[rastaspur]

Pop is quick witted certainly, he is definitely a bully, and I dont disagree with your comparison to Trump. But I dont really find him to be very enlightening. His shtick relies on his aura of invincibility from being an elite NBA coach, nobody really challenges him on the issues or anything he says. They play into his persona he created and he eats it up. He is quite arrogant and rude, and talks down to those who disagree with him instead of trying to use logical or fact based arguments.

Fair points.

If he doesnt consider someone to be his intellectuall equal he can dismiss folks and be a straight dick.

So patience and superiority complexes are problably similar traits as well.

[SouthTexasRancher]

Hey Pop, just how many damn miles did your stinking old ass march on Saturday? You are nothing more than an idiotic, imbecilic, moronic ignoramus who is out of touch with today's NBA. Why is it that none of the big name free agents ever want to play for you? Why, because you are an asshole with the personality of a pet rock. Or maybe that should be a pet boulder. It is past time for your sorry ol' senile, dementia and Alzheimer's laden empty noggin' to retire to the old folks home where your liberal ass friends can come visit and you can suck their little weenie. You've been out coached this season by about 20 coaches who've made you look like a silly fool. You are nothing without Timmy, David and Kawhi. This team you and the drunk, have put together couldn't beat a 7th grade church league girls team. So the next time there is some gay liberal march I want to see your pock marked face marching with the LaLa Land crowd. In the meantime you can go to hell as far as I'm concerned. :whine

[ElNono]

That is true for most things but there are undeniable uses for guns beyond "I like them". That's all smokers can say(besides government being overly restrictive). The all drinkers of alcohol can say. But that's not all you can say about guns.

Likewise I think the excuses for banning guns are pretty laughable. Just say "I don't like guns". That's the reality. Just say what you mean and get over it.

Actually, a daily glass of red wine is good for your heart... :bobo

[ElNono]

At least with alcohol we can say we tried and it didn't work out, tbh...

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Your lack of understanding of our history and what the Constitution means to our representative republic is appalling. The Constitution is the highest and most powerful document in our country. You act like it is toilet paper written by fossils.

I will never understand the left's fetish with banning guns, I own several and am highly trained and skilled in using them and may save your ass one day. And how ironic that abortion kills many many multiples more of children every year but I dont see a March for Life to stop abortion. Leftist are hypocrites and the worst kind, the self righteous ones that will try and bully you with "think of the children" arguments and simultaneously ignore the fact that they support baby killing. But hey you dont see me belly aching about repealing your Constitutional rights to abortion (that doesnt exist). Imagine the outcry. Go read a history book please.

There was much debate about the meaning of militia in the part you conveniently don't quote in the Federalist and such ie where Madison etc would argue and explain the constitution and bill of rights.

I know you think it is cut and dry because you are parroting NRA propaganda but it isn't. The whole check on tyranny that you buffoons like to wave your hands at was discussed in the ability of static armed militias to counter tyrants. It wasn't Red Dawn they were thinking. Nevermind they loathed the idea of a standing national army and how modern day conservatives are clueless towards intent.

That is why they included the well regulated language because the intent was not a free for all.

Then of course there is the idea of competing rights. The right to bear arms is enumerated but so is the right to life and the obligation of the state to maintain security. It's all in the constitution. Personally I think they need to close the corporate loophole and put semiautos with the tanks, autos, grenades and rocket launchers.

If you cannot protect your family with a pump action shotgun or a revolver then you have no business with any weapon at all and should jsut call po-po.

[Killakobe81]

There was much debate about the meaning of militia in the part you conveniently don't quote in the Federalist and such ie where Madison etc would argue and explain the constitution and bill of rights.

I know you think it is cut and dry because you are parroting NRA propaganda but it isn't. The whole check on tyranny that you buffoons like to wave your hands at was discussed in the ability of static armed militias to counter tyrants. It wasn't Red Dawn they were thinking. Nevermind they loathed the idea of a standing national army and how modern day conservatives are clueless towards intent.

That is why they included the well regulated language because the intent was not a free for all.

Then of course there is the idea of competing rights. The right to bear arms is enumerated but so is the right to life and the obligation of the state to maintain security. It's all in the constitution. Personally I think they need to close the corporate loophole and put semiautos with the tanks, autos, grenades and rocket launchers.

If you cannot protect your family with a pump action shotgun or a revolver then you have no business with any weapon at all and should jsut call po-po.

:toast exactly ...