Topic: 20 Killed in El Paso, TX Mass Shooting - page 2. (Read 1009 times)

How could have things gone differently if this man was armed?

http://www.stationgossip.com/2019/08/unsung-hero-took-on-el-paso-shooter.html

Fear and mass hysteria...




 

Why would anyone need an "assault rifle" (not an assault rifle): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3GnbJrHcYpU


Fear and mass hysteria, just as intended.

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-08-07/edge-chaos-ensues-times-square-after-crowd-mistakes-backfiring-motorcycle-mass

If I were in a crowd of 100 people, and a shooter started blasting away at us, I would want the whole crowd to have, and be active with, firearms. We could protect each other from the shooter.

The only reason why there is such a push against US guns is that gun freedom in the USA is keeping the whole world free. Governments aren't going to enslave their people when they know that their people can get guns from the USA.

When I read news headlines like this one I think that there is a lot of freedom in the US.
And I don't mean freedom of exchanging ideas etc. I mean that even not adult people can buy guns and have access to a lot of illegal activities. This is the root cause in my opinion. They need stricter regulations about that.

You DO have part of a point, you know. A slave knows a shooter might not get him. But a dead freeman doesn't know anything.

Take the guns away, and government slavery might not get very bad. I mean, it will take government a while to turn the masses into full-time slavery. Only your grand-kids, and theirs, will have to put up with it. We won't. They'll have to do what they can do in their life.

Good thing you aren't in the majority. Free people like it the way it is... freedom... including gun freedom. Fear-slaves are just stuck. Their protection comes from the free people who honor gun freedom, but they are too fearful to even recognize it.

Stay inside your mindset. We don't want your kind with us when we need to stand up against shooters, within goverment or without. We just hope that we are trustworthy to our own freedom. We absolutely know, from your own statements, that you don't even want to be trusted to be free.

One of the things that amazes us is that you are even bold enough to speak you mind. I guess it's part of Government implanted Stockholm Syndrome.

I have been on vacation during all of these shootings.  Was surprised to see TECSHARE and SPENDULUS blaming them on capitalism. 

With a possible tactical disadvantage, yes they can.

But this will not get you where you think you want to get to, not in the least.

"Semi-automatic" is a mechanism that replaces the revolving cylinder, and the long tube containing bullets.

"Assault rifle" really is a phrase that's related to appearance, not function. The primary battle rifles of WW1 and WW2 look like "hunting rifles."

AK-47s are assault rifles. Semi-automatic weapons are not. It is possible as much as defending yourself with a pointy stick is. Not optimally.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/08/owner-of-8chan-says-the-manifesto-was-not-uploaded-by-the-el-paso-walmart-shooter/

You mean normal people carrying guns like jewelry, then the US should be renamed to the United States of Armed People. The problem with the US is that it's too large and the society is too complicated and hence not easy to control. Talking about this, China is doing better under its monopoly communism party (I'm not praising China's communism). You're supporting gun purchasing but it's the root of the problem. Using guns to prevent gun assaults only makes everything become more chaotic. I'm not wise enough to propose a solution for the US but I don't think encouraging guns will improve the situation.

"New Legislation Outlawing Violent Gun-Wielding Groups Accidentally Bans Federal Government"

https://babylonbee.com/news/new-legislation-targeting-violent-gun-wielding-groups-accidentally-bans-government

Except the problem with your logic is that all you are doing is shifting the crime to being done using another device. Guns don't make people murder. It is not a legitimate metric because you were claiming a correlation between "leniency in gun laws" whatever the fuck that means with gun deaths. First of all anyone familiar with scientific method can tell you correlation does not automatically equal causation. A lot of people who happen to be criminals are shot while engaged in criminal activity, by your metric all of those people are implied victims of gun crime. Again, this includes police use, defensive use, and suicides. Are you suggesting police should be disarmed along with the general public, and that people intent on suicide will not find another way? So everyone gets their rights stripped because some people are intent to hurting themselves? Another issue with your supposed logic is you totally ignore the lives saved by defensive and legal use of firearms. Of course this doesn't fit your belief system so that doesn't count does it? Nope, chock those all up to "gun deaths", and mark guns as the problem, not the criminals.


Except you don't get to claim all defensive uses of firearms and intentional self harm are caused by firearm ownership. It is like saying obesity is caused by food, so we need food control laws because people might hurt themselves eating too much. People have a right to defend themselves, and that self defense by your metric gets added on to "gun deaths" when they are in fact proof of the protection gun ownership offers. Your metric is completely intellectually dishonest and deceptive.



Yes, lets look at some sources:



https://www.heritage.org/crime-and-justice/commentary/here-are-8-stubborn-facts-gun-violence-america

https://crimeresearch.org/2017/04/number-murders-county-54-us-counties-2014-zero-murders-69-1-murder/

https://mises.org/wire/few-gun-laws-new-hampshire-safer-canada

https://crimeresearch.org/2014/03/comparing-murder-rates-across-countries/



So removing potential victims from the scene does not potentially reduce the rate at which he can take victims, effectively slowing him down? If you watched the statement video he made, you would know he did in fact draw his weapon. What other assumptions based on zero information are you making? If you read the story two days ago why is it you are pretending it never happened?


Not at all. A firearm can be used to protect life as much as it can be used to take life. You just ignore the part that protects life and in your fantasy world that never happens, and if it did fuck those people who would have otherwise been victims right? The very first sentence of your link has problems.

"The man who invented the iconic AK-47 automatic rifle wrote of his regret at creating the weapon. "

If you knew anything about firearms, you would know the AK-47 is an AUTOMATIC rifle, a type of rifle which is VERY heavily restricted and expensive to obtain in the USA. Of course you know jack shit about firearms, but are still willing to strip people's rights over your ignorant assumptions based on movies and sensationalized media. I am sure your death bed regrets of a weapon designer are all the proof you need that is was "designed to inflict mass human casualties", even though almost no one in the US owns any of these weapons.



The only thing you would add is "Fuck everyone who doesn't want their rights taken so they can be made victims, black rifles are scary and need to be banned so my irrational fears can be assuaged." You are only taking the rights of other people after all, no skin off your back. It is much easier that way isn't it?

I am not heartless. It's not like that at all.

Weapons cannot be prohibited, but legislation needs to be tightened somehow. Although, any crazy can pretend to be normal. But I feel much calmer when I have a gun.

Be that as it may, if that Walmart still had their gun counter and ammo for sale, a dozen customers could have, and would have, gone after the shooter.

And why were they taken out? Wasn't it because of pressure from the PC crowd?

Everybody are talking about it but nothing changes

This is the stuff that gun owners point to when people tell them that mass shootings are the biggest problem. Mass shootings seem like a much larger problem then they are due to the fact that they're on the news all the time -- do you want to know why they're on the news all the time --> IT'S BECAUSE THEY'RE RARE.

They're not going to put shootings in Chicago on the news, because that's not news anymore. It's common at this point.

It's not madness. It's anger at how stupid you are proving yourself to be.

When you ban the guns, ban them out of the hands of the military, as well. After all, guns are guns, right? Then we can go back to using swords and hacking each other into little bits, right?

A 250-pound bully can easily overpower, rape, mug, and kill a 90-pound teenage girl... even if she knows karate, btw. But if Girly has a gun, she has a chance... even if the bully has a gun, as well.

You really need to check the statistics of how many women are arming up these days, just for self-protection.

You've now thoroughly descended into madness. There's no point in attempting to converse with you any further.

Here's the society it works in. The Walmart society. What do I mean?

The average person goes to Walmart simply for groceries or other items. Many go for the fun of shopping. Do you know what else these people do? They get mad at Walmart Associates who make a mistake. They call the manager in. And if the manager sticks up for the associate, he better be right... because the customers stick up for each other.

Get over to Walmart. This happens all the time. The customers are sheep until they detect something going on that is not right. Then they become aggressive.

I'd much rather have a few dozen angry customers around me, helping me fight off a shooter, than sit there and cry in my blood before I died.

What in the world kind of a sissy are you? Arm the people so they have a fighting chance against a shooter.