Tulsa police: Multiple people shot at medical building

What are you talking about? That’s been the USA from the get go. What do you think the people in 1780 would have done if the government tried to ban their firearms or neuter the second?

It would have been war. Immediately. Nothing has changed except the left feels like they now have enough authority to force it on us. But they’re going to be sadly mistaken.

 

Oh SURE. your kids are more likely to get bitten to death by a dog, but PLEASE make all the drama and hand waving you can. AHAHHAHA do you have any idea how statistics works? It looks like you do not, but please keep worrying about how dramatic you look!

 

Nah you just enjoy living in a country that can strip you of your rights as they please and throw you into a quarantine against your will and essentially imprison you under the guise of safety.

And what are y’all going to do about it when they use that excuse to remove all your rights? Not a damn thing because your populous was retarded enough to give up their guns. All you’re going to do is surrender, bend over, grab your ankles and give up everything you got.

 

Probably, yes.

Then you're saying there's nothing to address? If you want to look at cause and effect, you have to consider strong policing. But policing can only do so much. With turbulence and discontent building, we see it overrunning the restraints of law and order. The current violence is the worst in thirty years, not as you suggest the lowest in thirty years.

Funny you say that identifying the issue is blame shifting, while you ignore the issue and blame the gun. LOL You do realize that a non violent person will remain non violent regardless the number of guns he/she possesses. While a violent person will be violent having only one gun or even none at all.

 

Really.

Which shooters expressed "conservative ideals".

I bet he should have been ineligible. All but one mass shooter I can think of should have been.

 

It's quite simple really.

When we weren't a nation of single mother raised kids on welfare addicted to drugs and living in a culture that tells everyone they're a victim we didn't have mass shootings.

 

When "rights" are violated, is it this "creator" that comes to restore them, or is it socially organized law enforcement (aka, "government")?

 

The shooter was suffering intensive pain and was trying to get the doctor to do something about it. Such chronic pain drives people to do anything and everything to rid themselves of it even to the point of killing themselves. This was not some random shooting it was specifically targeted at the person who the shooter believed was the cause and the cure and he was getting nor relief or help. Anyone who has suffered from such chronic pain knows to what ends it will drive you and many experience doctors and laws that prevent them the desperate relief they seek.

It's a terrible situation all around and should be addressed in the proper context.

 

When it is the government that is violating them is the people who have to restore them. That is the purpose of the Constitution, to insure the government does not violate our inherent rights with which we were created.

 

Cause and effect of crime dropping 50% in past 30 years? I guess we did something right. Now we have all these mass shootings, but the typical shooters are usually not welfare recipients.

You can call the spike of 2020-21 'current', but its not a new normal. Covid response had everything to do with it.

Huh? Can you point me to the post where I blamed the gun? And nor do I ignore the issue, I offer solutions (even to the single mother issue).

 

Thus, rights are established and protected by people.

 

No where in The United States are kids "likely to be slaughtered at school". Kids in this country are more likely to die under anesthesia than to be shot at school.

 

Except, AGAIN, your chart doesn't depict the stats from the periods when you could buy as many machine guns as you wanted through the mail without ID or background check and pay when the guy showed up IE you could murder the mailman and go on a rampage if you wanted.
Its interesting how you prefer to cherry pick the data, isn't it?

 

Last I checked replacement 30 wasn’t something being talked about much on MSNBC

Let’s look at the last two school shootings — what would have made them ineligible?

 

Student brought guns in their vehicles because they went hunting prior to or after school.
Marksmanship and basic safety courses were part of PE.
Disciplining your children was a thing.
https://compass.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/soc4.12497

 

If the parents or grandparents or sister had reported the Uvalde ****stain for torturing animals, shooting at people with a pellet gun, etc, and had him placed under a conservatorship because he was insane, he'd have been ineligible.

 

As self evidence truths that are inherent to our being that no other person can deny to them.

 

One goes back to 1986, how far do you want the data to go?

I love that you keep accusing me of cherry picking data, Do you believe I’m making these charts?

You can feel free to contribute some actual sources instead of just complaining about everyone else’s.

 

Sure it is. MSNBC tells us about the evil white people every day. They espouse the virtues of "black only graduations" and separating groups by color every day.

Well we don't know much about this shooter, but the extensive criminal behavior of the other school shooter has been reported on.

His cases of domestic violence on it's own would have precluded legal ownership, let alone all of the other things he was doing.

 

Safety courses are something that should be required prior to owning a weapon.

 

That isn’t really replacement theory though and it is more of understanding people need spaces where they feel welcome. I don’t necessarily agree with it but I understand it.

So then you support additional layers of reporting and enhanced background checks to purchase a weapon?

 

Of course it is.

They're telling everyone that white people don't want them in this country, that white people are hunting them, etc etc. It's exactly what it is.

No, I don't support "additional layers" when they don't use the layers they have.

Are violent felons caught with guns put in jail now or are they put back on the streets?

People right now are committing murder, arson, rape and other violent crimes and the mantra from the left is "bail is racist".

No additional laws are going to stop something that they could stop now, and don't.

They don't care about criminals or crime, and one only has to look at the vast increases in violent crime where democrats run the show to see the obvious truth.

 

The issue is violence by use of gun. The status quo or current mentality by those in charge is to blame the gun and the liberty. I say it's not the gun but how one is raised. You say it is not how one is raised. That leaves the gun and the liberty. So yes you blame the gun and ignore the root cause. You also shift blame by invoking covid. I have a gun. Covid didn't make me go out and shoot people. How about you? Did covid make you go out and shoot people, shoot cops, poison the punch, run down pedestrians, slug old people in the face, carjack, smash windows, loot, burn down buildings, etc.?

 

Since your thesis is about access to "assault weapons" why don't you include the entire period that full auto was available to the civilian market without a background check?
Start there.

I believe you're digging them up and offering them as PROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF for your theory there fussy britches so I'll continue to point out they don't actually support your argument.

 

You cannot require that, see 2a. You could however require that safety courses should be taught as part of public school curriculum like it used to be.
Or you can have every adult serve compulsory militia service 1 month out of the year and train them there.