Mass shooting Boulder Colorado

Page 13 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Jul 9, 2009
10,758
2,086
136
Big surprise Taj only frets about terrorism when the person isn't white. BTW - idiot, you do know his religion had NOTHING to do with the shooting. But why let a few facts get in the way of your stupidity.
Well Homer it seems to me that about a month ago the Biden administration bombed Syria.

About a month later a Syrian born Islamic terrorist kills about 10 Americans.

"But why let the facts get in the way of your stupidity" Lefties say "derp derp derp ban guns , they evil"
 

MrSquished

Lifer
Jan 14, 2013
26,060
24,363
136
Well Homer it seems to me that about a month ago the Biden administration bombed Syria.

About a month later a Syrian born Islamic terrorist kills about 10 Americans.

"But why let the facts get in the way of your stupidity" Lefties say "derp derp derp ban guns , they evil"
Imagine how many millions of Trumphumpers are this fucking dumb. Definitely makes you take a step back and wonder if evolution can ever take care of such drains on the human species.
 

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
37,082
32,425
136
Well Homer it seems to me that about a month ago the Biden administration bombed Syria.

About a month later a Syrian born Islamic terrorist kills about 10 Americans.

"But why let the facts get in the way of your stupidity" Lefties say "derp derp derp ban guns , they evil"
But he was not triggered when Trump bombed Syria, because reasons.
 
  • Like
Reactions: alexruiz
Jul 9, 2009
10,758
2,086
136
But he was not triggered when Trump bombed Syria, because reasons.
You mean the airstrikes that President Trump ordered after Syria used chemical weapons on civilians? The ones Obama said he'd do with his "line in the sand"




Maybe he was still too young?
 

pcgeek11

Lifer
Jun 12, 2005
22,228
4,932
136
You should stop lying. It was straight up racist dog whistling. But we already know that you hear it and respond to it so its totally cool.

I didn't say it wasn't racist or screwed up. It just wasn't what he claimed... Of course you guys hear what you want regardless of what was actually said.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: ch33zw1z
Jul 9, 2009
10,758
2,086
136


"PUBLISHED: September 4, 2019 at 3:01 p.m. | UPDATED: September 4, 2019 at 3:46 p.m.
Customers who shop at Colorado’s 148 King Soopers and City Market stores are being asked to “no longer openly carry firearms” into the stores, echoing a move made by retail rival Walmart a day earlier."
 

Zorba

Lifer
Oct 22, 1999
15,613
11,255
136
A family member with history of paranoia, anger issues, and suspected mental illness, was seen playing with an assault rifle... and no one though that perhaps they should do some kind of intervention?
What could they do? The cops come out for a wellness check and leave, if they didn't kill him in the process.
 

NWRMidnight

Diamond Member
Jun 18, 2001
3,490
3,038
136
Well Homer it seems to me that about a month ago the Biden administration bombed Syria.

About a month later a Syrian born Islamic terrorist kills about 10 Americans.

"But why let the facts get in the way of your stupidity" Lefties say "derp derp derp ban guns , they evil"

I see it's business as normal for you.. stupid being stupid, doing everything you can to connect the dots in a manner that takes the focus off the Elephant in the room so you can ignore the real problem. The man must have been seriously scared with all the memories and childhood connections he was forced to leave behind at the age of 3 when he came to the US, and spent the last 18 years training for this day to attack in the name of the county that he has no memory of all in the name of "heritage".
 
  • Like
Reactions: ivwshane

HomerJS

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
38,746
31,788
136
I didn't say it wasn't racist or screwed up. It just wasn't what he claimed... Of course you guys hear what you want regardless of what was actually said.
Ok, I'll bite. What did I claim he said that he didn't say???
 

pmv

Lifer
May 30, 2008
14,979
9,860
136
Well Homer it seems to me that about a month ago the Biden administration bombed Syria.

About a month later a Syrian born Islamic terrorist kills about 10 Americans.

"But why let the facts get in the way of your stupidity" Lefties say "derp derp derp ban guns , they evil"


Just...where does one even start with this crap?

Firstly - where's your evidence that this is an "Islamic terrorist"? As opposed to just a standard-issue American gun-spree nutter who happened to be from a Muslim backgournd? You haven't presented any. Do you believe the majority of gun-spree killers in the US who were raised in Christian families, were therefore 'Christian terrorists'?

Secondly why are you lumping together two unrelated events and claiming a causal relationship?

I refer you to


Thirdly there's your tiresome, time-wasting, straw man misrepresentation of the opposition argument. "Lefties" say ban guns because they increase the lethality of criminal violence, no religious reference to 'evil' required. (And not all lefties are anti-gun, there are some who are very keen on them, hard to violently overthrow capitalism and white-supremacism without guns)

I dunno, it's a total waste of time actually engaging with your multiple fallcies becuase you aren't here to argue rationally, as you aren't anywhere close to a rational person.

Is this rubbish you spout supposed to fool others or is it just some weird psychological self-defence mecahnisms at work?
 

pmv

Lifer
May 30, 2008
14,979
9,860
136
The other side of it is - if there _were_ a significant number of radical Islamic terrorists in the US Muslim population, they'd have a very easy time of creating chaos, precisely because of the easy availability of guns. Wouldn't take a large number to arm themselves and just march into the Capital building and massacre lawmakers, for example. The fact such things haven't happened suggest the US is quite fortunate with its Muslim population being decidedly non-radicalised and well-integrated (as far as I'm aware there's been one case of a mass shooting that _might_ be Islamist-related, but which seemed to be at least 50% a traditional 'disgruntled employee workplace shooting'). If that were a real problem I would expect conservative politicians to rethink their stance on 2A pretty quickly.
 

Bitek

Lifer
Aug 2, 2001
10,676
5,239
136


"PUBLISHED: September 4, 2019 at 3:01 p.m. | UPDATED: September 4, 2019 at 3:46 p.m.
Customers who shop at Colorado’s 148 King Soopers and City Market stores are being asked to “no longer openly carry firearms” into the stores, echoing a move made by retail rival Walmart a day earlier."

This is Boulder. You obviously have no idea.

The only open carry is for water pipes.
 
Jul 9, 2009
10,758
2,086
136
I used to live in Wheatridge, just down Wadsworth from Arvada. You are wrong yet again, at least you can be proud of how consistent you are.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pcgeek11

David Jenkins

Junior Member
Mar 13, 2021
6
10
36
Why wouldn't that translate into well armed?
The common people, every able bodied man, were the militia back in the day. They needed to know how to handle weapons. Thus they were to keep and bear arms. Not be deprived of, or ignorant of them throughout their lives. The militia (people) were to be proficient in the use of guns.

Everyone being armed is how it was intended. Does not make it good for our society today, but I do believe that is what it is.

But I say we honor it by allowing people to do so. With the modern firearm most similar to the musket. And least likely to be effective in a killing spree. Founders did not specify which kind of firearm. That part is squarely up to us.

Textualism: a method of statutory interpretation whereby the plain text of a statute is used to determine the meaning of the legislation. Instead of attempting to determine statutory purpose or legislative intent

Not translations/interpretations - it doesn't say the right of all people. It's in relation to state militias which have been replaced by national guards.
 

Fenixgoon

Lifer
Jun 30, 2003
33,106
12,519
136
Textualism: a method of statutory interpretation whereby the plain text of a statute is used to determine the meaning of the legislation. Instead of attempting to determine statutory purpose or legislative intent

Not translations/interpretations - it doesn't say the right of all people. It's in relation to state militias which have been replaced by national guards.
It most definitely days the right of all people.

The single complete thought of the sentence is "the right shall not be infringed". That's it. Subject. Verb. Predicate adjective. Take that away and you do not have a complete sentence in english grammar.

Everything else provides additional information.
What right? To keep and bear arms
Whose right? "Of the people"
Why? A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of the free state

Maybe the framers were trying to be eloquent, for all I know, but if they wanted arms restricted to a militia, there are a million ways to make that abundantly more clear than what we have.

You literally could say "the right of the militia to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed". Then it would unquestionably apply the 2A specifically to the militia.

I know the grammar of the 2A has been debated at length. You'll find parties arguing both interpretations (militia vs. people) and the infamous comma argument, which I find comma-cal (had to pun) because it's entirely irrelevant. Comma or no, the subject and verb are the same.
A proper diagramming of the sentence tells all. Thanks mom (grammar teacher of nearly 30 years).

All that to say, yes further regulation is necessary because "shall not be infringed" is not synonymous with "cannot be regulated".

Edit: normally I don't post this early/late but I woke up and my brain is firing on all cylinders :(
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
33,366
16,746
136
It most definitely days the right of all people.

The single complete thought of the sentence is "the right shall not be infringed". That's it. Subject. Verb. Predicate adjective. Take that away and you do not have a complete sentence in english grammar.

Everything else provides additional information.
What right? To keep and bear arms
Whose right? "Of the people"
Why? A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of the free state

Maybe the framers were trying to be eloquent, for all I know, but if they wanted arms restricted to a militia, there are a million ways to make that abundantly more clear than what we have.

You literally could say "the right of the militia to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed". Then it would unquestionably apply the 2A specifically to the militia.

I know the grammar of the 2A has been debated at length. You'll find parties arguing both interpretations (militia vs. people) and the infamous comma argument, which I find comma-cal (had to pun) because it's entirely irrelevant. Comma or no, the subject and verb are the same.
A proper diagramming of the sentence tells all. Thanks mom (grammar teacher of nearly 30 years).

All that to say, yes further regulation is necessary because "shall not be infringed" is not synonymous with "cannot be regulated".

Edit: normally I don't post this early/late but I woke up and my brain is firing on all cylinders :(

So the 150+ years of interpreting the 2nd as a states right was wrong and all of the sudden in 2007 the Supreme Court got it right? Lol give me a fucking break.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

The subject is a well regulated militia. A militia doesn’t mean random unaffiliated people, it doesn’t mean individuals. How would random unaffiliated individuals provide security for a state anyway? How could the federal government call on random individuals to protect the country as prescribed in the constitution in various sections?

Your interpretation ignores the basic definition of words and the overall context of the 2nd as it relates to the rest of the constitution.
 

VRAMdemon

Diamond Member
Aug 16, 2012
7,699
9,886
136
Tom Cotton says that mass shootings happen because of Black Lives Matter.


What an idiot ... Of course! Colorado shooter thinks, Cops are too distracted by those protests that happened almost a year ago in a completely different place. Now’s my chance!
 

VRAMdemon

Diamond Member
Aug 16, 2012
7,699
9,886
136
Congress was holding hearings on extremism in the military and a spokesperson for the Southern Poverty Law Center was testifying. A Republican Congressman tried accusing SPLC of calling the American Legion and the VFW racist organizations. When she denied that they had ever done any such thing, he pointed to a website that claimed it. He had to be informed that he was quoting a satire site.


Lol ... Republicans are idiots
 

HomerJS

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
38,746
31,788
136
Tom Cotton says that mass shootings happen because of Black Lives Matter.


What an idiot ... Of course! Colorado shooter thinks, Cops are too distracted by those protests that happened almost a year ago in a completely different place. Now’s my chance!
Just like people in this forum. Crime eventually is traced back to black people.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Leeea

allisolm

Elite Member
Administrator
Jan 2, 2001
25,243
4,840
136
And we already have what appears as a wannabe copycat supermarket shooter.

A man entered a restroom at an Atlanta Publix on Mar 24, saw an AR-15 type weapon against a wall and heard sounds he associated with a weapon being loaded. He exited quickly, told management/security who called the police and evacuated the store. Police entered and saw the guy come around a corner and arrested him. He was wearing body armor, was carrying 4 loaded handguns and had a rifle and a shotgun in a bag.


Incident report: https://www.atlantapd.org/home/showpublisheddocument?id=3819
 
  • Like
Reactions: Leeea