You're right. They should've left their guns at home and not been brave and allowed dozens to be killed.
Lite
No it isn't. It's akin to ing the football over putting out a fire someone else started. I didn't invent guns or populate the country with them. No one here can prevent people from owning a gun. I've said since day one that all you can do is mitigate the damage. Damage was mitigated. Short sighted comment by you.
You're right. They should've left their guns at home and not been brave and allowed dozens to be killed.
Lite
I thought DMX took the cookie for dumbest take in the thread but wow![]()
no. i would agree that armed folks would provide better security than unarmed folks in the event that a shooting was underway. the absurdity is being complacent with laws and the environment which make it too easy for these shootings to happen in the first place.
as elnono said, its absurd that we've reached a point where even churches need armed security
The left is reeling over these people who are still living. They would love to have been talking about 45 or more deaths. Now they pretend nothing is different, that this is just as horrible as it would have been if 45 people died. These are the same people who never commented on the 13 people shot at a house party a few days ago.
Excited somebody is challenging your status as the dumbest poster on the forum?![]()
That pesky second amendment.
OK so cry about it while others are actually preparing for the fact it exists. Your tears don't do to help.
How would current gun control ideas have thwarted this? Guy had a shotgun, was neutralized by guys with handguns. Where's the assault weapons?
The second amendment doesn’t preclude gun regulation...
It does say that the right to bare arms shall not be infringed. There's already a lot of this in the law though.
bad people don't care about gun regulation
they will steal the gun or get it by any means necessary
if they can't get a gun they will use something else
dumb
The SCOTUS was clear in er that while the State can’t preclude you from owning a gun for personal defense, it can certainly regulate guns. That’s why gun free zones, bans of heavy weapons, etc are all legal. The 2nd amendment is far from an all or nothing proposition.
Derp feeling his oats after a weekend training with his well regulated militia.
stick to George Carlin copypasta![]()
That’s why we call bad people bad. Or why we have cops and call them the good guys (most of the time anyways).
ie: because you’re a simpleton dumb doesn’t mean everyone needs to be a simpleton dumb .
Twitter bot talking about copypasta![]()
And FWIW, I’m actually pro 2nd amendment (something I apparently need to clarify every time people come up with threads like these). However, having a discussion about the 2nd amendment when you don’t know what it means is complicated...
"ideas" wouldn't thwart it. action having already been taken pursuant to those ideas... radical concept tho
that’s telling me. Folded per par
You're being evasive. What action?
Everyone here is well aware of your 3rd person shtick. You're not even slightly interesting.
it would be very difficult to asses on a case by case basis if particular laws would or would not have prevented it. its quite likely that they wouldn't actually have an impact in this particular scenario.
its like looking at increased hurricane tendencies due to climate change. its pretty difficult to point to a specific hurricane and say "a ha. this one is because of global warming." but you can look at trends and see who the overarching culprit is
Which is why you've ramped up your posting about me today, right?
You can't even pick a lane when it comes to me.![]()
lol non answer
lol lawyer can't spell assess
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)