• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Breaking- Church shooting in TX

Page 39 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Paladin3 said:
I don't know why I'm even going to try, but here goes...

Most guns, 99.9%+, are never used to hurt anyone so stop with this stupid characterization of gun owners as nutty, power hungry losers. Most of us just want to target shoot, hunt a bit and are very safe and responsible with our weapons. A very, very few have turned out to be nuts and used their guns to hurt others, but you can say that of any group. Should we judge Christians, Muslims, gays or any other group by the horrific actions of a tiny few?

Repealing the Second Amendment and banning private ownership of guns would in no way stop shootings like what happened to those poor folks in that Texas church because 1) law abiding citizens who would comply and turn in their guns are not the problem, 2) It would cause a civil war if you tried to forcibly disarm America, and 3) who would you get to try and take away all the guns to begin with?

It's emotionally soothing to call for gun bans and think that will make you safer, but it's just not realistic. America is too invested in the concept that this is the land of freedom and nobody can tell anyone else what to do. Culturally we have very little respect for our responsibilities to family, community and society. This is combined with our stupid war on drugs and the resulting violence associated with the illegal drug trade. Together it makes us some of the most dangerous folks in the developed world, but still, just a tiny fraction of us. Most Americans are damn fine folk who abhor violence.

If we every get our gun violence down in line with the rest of the developed world, it won't be because we sat around vainly trying to do the impossible and disarm everyone so they would play nice. Better health care, working harder to identify violent individuals so we can get them the help they need and remove their gun rights, along with teaching our children well would be a better use of our efforts.

Speaking specifically about the Texas Church Shooting, it would have been nice if the Air Force had reported the criminal conviction and bad conduct discharge of the shooter to the FBI database like they were legally required to do. Then this convicted wife and child beater wouldn't have passed the background check to buy is gun. It would also have been nice if the in-laws would have reported the threatening texts sent to them by the shooter. I'm not trying to make them out to be at fault in any way, but we do need to all be vigilant when it comes to spotting potentially violent individuals around us.
Click to expand...
No.

We stop this from happening by eliminating guns from the equation, not by Monday morning quarterbacking all the checks and laws and things that should have happened.

The United States is the only developed westernized nation with a mass shooting epidemic because there are quite simply too many guns.

You have an industry exploiting a misinterpretation of the 2nd amendment to essentially support a fetish.

I hope your fetish is worth the body count.
 
mikeymikec said:
It's pretty easy actually, I would go to the supermarket and buy some venison.
Click to expand...
Not trying to wade in too deeply here, but there's actually many places in the US where people rely on a) hunting and b) donations from hunters/deer processing facilities to feed them. Like no-shit, cannot afford stuff from the store, grow their tomatoes and hunt their protein kinds of people.
 
Svnla said:
Did the police say these statements too?



One more thing, the original meme you posted did NOT have anything about whether Schnatter was an asshole or not. That's not what I posted the correction about but keep digging deeper in a desperation effort to spin. 😀
Click to expand...

Why is your certainty of things you can't possibly know right now greater than his certainty of the same things?

why?
 
NAC4EV said:
Please explain that to all those who are dead and will die, because your right to a gun was more important then their right to live.

Guns don't kill people. Gun owners do.

Guns are the drug of choice for those who desire the thrill of power without earning it legitimately.

The founding fathers wrote the 2nd Amendment so that an armed militia could protect citizens. Today, the 2nd Amendment arms the criminals so they can kill the citizens
Click to expand...

and what about the victims of drunk driving? do we tell their families that our right to drink alcohol supersedes their right to life?

not sure if this falls under false equivalence, but this kind of emotional argument can be used to ban damn near anything.

just because you don't find something of value, doesn't mean other people feel the same.
 
Svnla said:
Did the police say these statements too?

One more thing, the original meme you posted did NOT have anything about whether Schnatter was an asshole or not. That's not what I posted the correction about but keep digging deeper in a desperation effort to spin. 😀
Click to expand...

Well you are correct it did not have the words Asshole on it but you have to admit the meme implied he was indeed an asshole, no? Also snopes called it a mixed bag. So it's not like you were correct either.
 
bradly1101 said:
But isn't there a law for licensed sellers? Isn't that the "loophole" everyone talks about? Doesn't the discrepancy activate the desire for fairness in all of us?
Click to expand...

WTF are you going on about?

If you hold an FFL and are selling a gun then you are required by law to make the person buying the gun fill out a form 4473 and use that form to verify through the NICS system. There is no loophole. Failure to do that as an FFL holder is BREAKING the law. It doesn't matter if that is at a gunshow, a shop, a parking garage, or a house.

If a person doesn't have an FFL they are not required by law to make a person buying one of their guns fill out a form 4473 and go through a NICS check regardless of where they are.

Despite how many clear and concise ways this has been explained to you, the fact you can't grasp this simple concept is mind boggling.
 
Thebobo said:
Well you are correct it did not have the words Asshole on it but you have to admit the meme implied he was indeed an asshole, no? Also snopes called it a mixed bag. So it's not like you were correct either.
Click to expand...

I never tried to correct whether he was an asshole or not, not even once but you were the one that kept bring that back over and over again several times. Why is that? Look at the meme again, especially about the allegation about stealing employees wages. Funny how Snope said it was FAULT but you "forgot" to mention that. But keep spinning and digging deeper. 😀

No comment about what you said (in your own words) previously about the guy that stopped the shooter? LOL. Classic.

Here they are again.

Lol former NRA, like that matters.

And to be honest he didn't stop any more shooting deaths,
Click to expand...
 
Svnla said:
I never tried to correct whether he was an asshole or not, not even once but you were the one that kept bring that back over and over again several times. Why is that? Look at the meme again, especially about the allegation about stealing employees wages. Funny how Snope said it was FAULT but you "forgot" to mention that. But keep spinning and digging deeper. 😀

No comment about what you said previously about the guy that stopped the shooter? LOL. Classic.
Click to expand...
I think the shooter stopped himself with a self inflicted wound. No good guy stopped him, a good guy tried to prevent further fatalities, but he stopped himself.
 
Sheik Yerbouti said:
I think the shooter stopped himself with a self inflicted wound. No good guy stopped him, a good guy tried to prevent further fatalities, but he stopped himself.
Click to expand...
Has there ever been an incident where a mass shooter moved to a new location? They are usually very location specific. Then they run.

Only examples I can think of are going house to house targeting family members.
 
Sheik Yerbouti said:
I think the shooter stopped himself with a self inflicted wound. No good guy stopped him, a good guy tried to prevent further fatalities, but he stopped himself.
Click to expand...

You "forgot" the facts BEFORE the shooter shot himself to death.

Who put his life on the life and engaged the shooter when he went out to get more weapons in his vehicle? The good guy.

Who shot the shooter and hit him at least twice? The good guy.

Who chased the shooter and cornered him in a ditch until the police arrived? The good guy.

Before we talk about Z, let talk about A, B, C, D and so on first. Just saying.
 
Last edited:
Svnla said:
You "forgot" the facts BEFORE the shooter shot himself to death.

Who engaged the shooter when he went out to get more weapons in his vehicle? The good guy.

Who shot the shooter and hit him at least twice? The good guy.

Who chased the shooter and cornered him in a ditch until the police arrived? The good guy.

Before we talk about Z, let talk about A, B, C, D and so on first. Just saying.
Click to expand...
But you're assuming his intent at that point. Historically speaking they don't go back. They don't go somewhere else. They do their initial attack then they either die or flee.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pmv
Svnla said:
You "forgot" the facts BEFORE the shooter shot himself to death.

Who engaged the shooter when he went out to get more weapons in his vehicle? The good guy.

Who shot the shooter and hit him at least twice? The good guy.

Who chased the shooter and cornered him in a ditch? The good guy.

Before we talk about Z, let talk about A, B, C, D and so on first. Just saying.
Click to expand...
No evidence he was going back to his car to get more weapons. Like Trump you are just making shit up.

Just like those "hundreds" of people saved when the congregation was only about 50.

Liars just lie.
 
Svnla said:
You "forgot" the facts BEFORE the shooter shot himself to death.

Who put his life on the life and engaged the shooter when he went out to get more weapons in his vehicle? The good guy.
Click to expand...

So it's proven that he 'went out to get more weapons'? I hadn't seen that. Can you give a link, please?

(What is it with gun fetishists and the desire to use every gun they have? One would have thought it would have made more sense to just carry more ammo for the first gun, rather than go to a vehicle and get a different one)
 
HomerJS said:
No evidence he was going back to his car to get more weapons. Like Trump you are just making shit up.

Just like those "hundreds" of people saved when the congregation was only about 50.

Liars just lie.
Click to expand...

Are you saying there was no other weapon than the one he used inside the church? Go ahead, let see who is making shit up.
 
Svnla said:
Are you saying there was no other weapon than the one he used inside the church? Go ahead, let see who is making shit up.
Click to expand...

Gee, I don't know...maybe he left them there as backup weapons in the event he was cornered by police as he was attempting to flee. Choose your own adventure stories are fun!
 
I think there is a language barrier here Svnla, and not to be mean just that Svnla your not comprehending some of what folks are saying. Is english your first language?
 
woolfe9998 said:
Why again won't it happen? The reason you give, that we aren't required to check for a DL when selling a car, isn't a very good one. Do you have another? The only one I can think of it that the entire GOP is adamantly against any sort of restrictions on firearm purchases, no matter what they are.
Click to expand...

No matter what they are? Really? You picked my one example Ill give you one back. The GOP *and* the NRA agree with current restrictions on automatic firearms. So your statement is moot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top