Printable View
Be that as it may, there just doesn't seem to be anything that can be done about this problem. Sure is a shame.Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodsy
I'm sure though, that with enough thoughts and prayers, all the victims of gun violence will find peace and move on to a trouble free existence.
The press sure did drop the Super Bowl shooter story fast.
No one cares about inner city violence. And there is no argument people are shooting each other downtown almost every day. The guns are sold in back alleys, no law will ever stop it, no gun turn in would work without a lot more enforcement. Cops are not even going into these parts of anymore.
Nothing short of a massive gun turn in, confiscation, with serious enforcement and penalties will slow it down.
I saw a stat that Kansas City has half the murders of New York City with less than 10% of the population. But hey at least they have the national champions of US football.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cono Este
https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/...arade-shooting
Chiefs parade update.
When people have lost the ability to react to someone fucking POSSIBLY LOOKING at them with anything less than gunfire, then we as a nation have proven beyond all doubt that we are not mature enough to carry guns (as if that wasn't already evident). Done. Sorry folks, the mouth breathers have ruined it for you, take it up with them.Quote:
The argument began when two groups of people grew agitated over the belief that people in the other group were staring at them, according to affidavits from police.
Certainly people should have the god given right to defend themselves against the penetrating stares of others?
Can't we, at a *minimum*, prevent stupid people from having access to firearms? :mad:
We can't stop the crazies ones from getting them.Quote:
Originally Posted by skaredshtles
We can't stop the criminals from getting them.
we can't stop the kids from getting them.
We are on page 277, we haven't solved shit.
You can't even define what constitutes the minimum level of stupid for ownership.
Attachment 487700
were the guns used legally obtained/owned?Quote:
Originally Posted by skaredshtles
I think the answer to Illegal guns is to institute a nationwide, no-questions buyback program at exorbitant prices. Make it a horrible financial decision to not sell your illegal gun at 1000% profit.
Legal firearm reform is needed, alongside an answer to the illegal firearm problem.
Gun control really works. This guy can't own guns and look how many he had.
https://www.ktvu.com/news/illegal-fi...-richmond-home
A suspect has been arrested in Richmond with illegal firearms and around one million rounds of ammunition, according to a press release from California Attorney General Rob Bonta.
The suspect in this case is legally barred from owning weapons, Bonta's release said. The seizure took place on Jan. 31, when authorities served a search warrant at the suspect's home in Richmond.
The search yielded grenades, 11 military-style machine guns, 133 handguns, 37 rifles, 60 assault rifles, 7 shotguns, 20 silencers, 4 flare guns, 3,000 large capacity magazines, approximately one million rounds of miscellaneous caliber ammunition, as well as dozens of rifle receivers and pistol frames.
So you are going to make the criminal is Richmond California a Millionaire?Quote:
Originally Posted by californiagrown
Must be a slow day in the gun cucks thread.
So, you love hyperinflation? And a solution that will NOT remove anywhere close to all guns?Quote:
Originally Posted by californiagrown
I'm ALL for this if you raise the funds privately. No poblem with soros et al funding this.
Give us your gun or go to jail when we find it. So keep it home. That would work.
Smoke this Leroy. The solution to big problems is best handled by using the same technique as sanding a wood panel. "Start by sanding the edges and the middle will take care of itself."
Yeh, probably a little too deep for ya.
At least one of the other articles I saw implied that the law cited specifically deals with removing firearms from someone who *was* legally allowed to possess them but who no longer is. I'm not familiar enough with California law to say for sure, but I'm guessing that at least some of the weapons were legally obtained and the purchaser subsequently became ineligible to own them, triggering the search and seizure.Quote:
Originally Posted by exsparky
There are laws against speeding, but people still speed.
There are laws against stealing and possessing stolen goods, but people still steal.
There need to be laws for that sort of thing so that people can be prosecuted, and maybe/possibly discouraged from that kind of thing.
Just because all illegal guns won’t be eliminated right away doesn’t mean there shouldn’t be laws passed to outlaw semi-automatic and automatic weapons. We have to start somewhere. It will take time.
People that argue that restrictive gun laws won’t eliminate all the problem weapons are dissembling and blowing smoke up our asses. They’re absolutely and completely full of shit.
Hmm. ya know actually, i think hamfisted metaphors about woodworking really aren't relevant for complex sociopolitical problems with countless variables. but thanks.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cisco Kid
but thanks for saying the quiet part out loud and admitting its a slippery slope. just keep sanding, just a little more, always a little more.
So when you say give 'us' your gun? Do you mean you? Are you signing up to go door to door to get these guns? cus the cops will not do it. Are you advocating for martial law and the suspension of habeus corpus nationwide? Do you really see that being a net positive?
Could you extrapolate your ideas like a real adult, rather than just say emotionally gratifying things you clearly haven't thought out? I thought this was supposed to be a thread in search of solutions right? Or is it a support group for those who struggle with cognitive dissonance i can't tell? Can you tell me how your little plan would play out? Are you just an accelerationist and want societal collapse?
If too many people are speeding will it work to lower the speed limit? Or perhaps step up enforcement of existing limits? if you can't enforce existing limits, what good is lowering the posted limit?Quote:
Originally Posted by Meadow Skipper
^ Absolutely and completely full of shit.
How so? I'm sure its fun to say, but try using your words like a big boy! Unless you get too triggered and have to throw a tantrum again.Quote:
Originally Posted by Meadow Skipper
I'm sure you do beleive that if you can't get enough cops to enforce the limits, simply lowering the limits and putting up more signs will do the trick.
Without quoting.
I knew that your brain on/off switch of a brain would not be capable of handling a nuanced metaphor.
They could start with my gun. Check and mate.
Hahhahha. Its not a nuanced metaphor. There is no nuance there. And my brain has no off switch. Thats my problem.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cisco Kid
Can you extrapolate your plan like an adult? Or are you just not a serious person? How would it work? i would honestly really like to know just exactly what you're suggesting. Have you ever thought out the consequences and challenges of such a policy?
I'm too old and wise. You're too young and dumb. Take what I give you. Or not.
Yea I figured you never actually gave this any serious thought, aren't willing to put your neck on the line to make it happen, and just like saying it because its emotionally gratifying.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cisco Kid
Thanks for letting me know I'm right.
Well son, you are consistent in the way to dodge understanding.