El Paso Mall shooting

[DaveTN]

11 minutes ago, Dirtshooter said:

It seems to be always the weapon be it a gun, knife or vehicle. There is a human body with a finger, hand, foot and part of a brain that does the ASSAULT. The brain is the ASSAULT weapon, not the tool. Which a firearm, hammer, knife or vehicle can be used as a tool. The liberal left won't be happy until all citizens are helpless victims because they won't have any tools to defend themselves. But I bet you all the money you could stuff into Fort Knox that the liberal left will still have walls around their compounds and their personal bodyguards will have all those EVIL black rifles and other assorted weapons. Put the blame where blame belongs and it danged sure isn't at the feet of the law abiding gun owners. Rant ended for now.

Absolutely. The other thing they desperately, desperately need is someone to blame. When the person to blame is dead and robs them of that through killing himself or getting killed by the cops; they are frantic.

[Omega]

1 hour ago, DaveTN said:

Absolutely. The other thing they desperately, desperately need is someone to blame. When the person to blame is dead and robs them of that through killing himself or getting killed by the cops; they are frantic.

I don't see it that way, I think they prefer the perp to be done away with so they don't contradict their narrative supporting their anti-2A agenda.

[beebee233]

1 hour ago, Dirtshooter said:

It seems to be always the weapon be it a gun, knife or vehicle. There is a human body with a finger, hand, foot and part of a brain that does the ASSAULT. The brain is the ASSAULT weapon, not the tool. Which a firearm, hammer, knife or vehicle can be used as a tool. The liberal left won't be happy until all citizens are helpless victims because they won't have any tools to defend themselves. But I bet you all the money you could stuff into Fort Knox that the liberal left will still have walls around their compounds and their personal bodyguards will have all those EVIL black rifles and other assorted weapons. Put the blame where blame belongs and it danged sure isn't at the feet of the law abiding gun owners. Rant ended for now.

Don't Ban Guns

Ban People !

[Erik88]

2 hours ago, DaveTN said:

Who is defending or minimizing his words? I’ve commented about your rant about bump stocks before; because no one gives a rolling rip down a razor blade about bump stocks. It’s a non-issue. That was a BATF screw-up and Trump just directed them to make it right.

We couldn’t have SBR’s and now all of sudden we can; because now they are “pistols”. I took advantage of that. Will I be surprised if a court ever slaps the ignorance out of the BATF on that? Of course not. Common sense and the intent of the law will prevail when questioned. If you want to allow bump stocks or short barrel rifles; repeal the laws banning them.

The law requiring background checks passed the house. When it comes to a vote in the Senate; I expect it will pass. Will you blame him for that also?

I see nothing that makes me think Trump is a gun grabber. But even if I did, what do you want to do? Is there one of those Democrats that has a chance you want to see elected?

 

[Sunfish]

This is the liberal media's opportunity to make this 10 times worse than it is. Someone called it a political platform but that's really shaky ground to be standing on IMHO. Juarez probably has 20 gun deaths a month. Make no mistake this is a terrible thing that happened in Texas and Ohio but what the goober smootchers and attention seeking do gooder's are doing with it is just as bad. Trying to control sick minds is a losing battle and the majority of people know that putting Band-Aids on bullet holes does not work. For every time this sorta thing has happened and the different measures that have been put in place they need to be reminded what the definition of madness is because they are proving over and over that it's true. 

Edited August 6, 2019 by Sunfish

[Wingshooter]

14 hours ago, Whisper said:

Trump would certainly be reelected if he would sit back, keep quiet, and let the performance of the economy be his campaign message.  But because Trump is more focused on saying and doing childish and arrogant things than he is on anything else, including leading the country, I think it's entirely possible he many find a way to lose against the worst field of Democratic candidates in my lifetime.  

I dunno, people said the same thing in 2016!  

It seems to work for him

Edited August 6, 2019 by Wingshooter

[Dirtshooter]

I don't know it anyone saw this, but I saw the news that Neil deGrasse Tyson tweeted this comment:

In the past 48hrs the U.S. horrifically lost 34 people due to mass shootings.

He then commented that on any given 48 hour period in the U.S.

500 die due to medical errors

300 die due to flu

250 die due to suicide

200 die due to car accidents

40 die due to homicide with handgun

Sort of puts things into perspective. This in no way condones what the "idiots" that murdered these innocent people did, it just shows that on most any given 48hrs. in the U.S. about 1,240 people die not related to a gun, 40 due to a gun. Now I for some reason don't hear the left or right complaining about these 1,240 people and how we need to police our medical errors, find cure for flu, give people mental health help so they won't kill themselves. Do something about these car accidents. All of these deaths with the exception of the flu, is due to humans, either there incompetence, lack of training, poor attitude, or a host of other issues, but it is the human. Not the car, not the medical procedure. There is a definite pattern. Not the gun.

 

 

[Erik88]

19 hours ago, Erich said:

I dont really have an opinion on Trump, save he pointed the finger in the right place today. But was curious what your basis for this is in action, based mainly on Bump stocks? 

 

No, Trump has a long history of favoring gun control. He only changed his stance before he decided to run for office.  He has supported of a variety of gun control measures including an assault weapon ban. 

 

Here is his latest words of wisdom. Again, Trump doesn't have to do any of this. We all know he only does what he wants.  All this does is piss off his supporters. 

 

[Moped]

Trump was never a Republican or Conservative, except for convenience.  At best he is pragmetist and at worst a snake in the grass (closet Democrat).  And I'm afraid we are about to see the snake show it's ugly head. I believe he will trade us for his wall along the southern border and immigration reform. 

[Erik88]

1 minute ago, Moped said:

Trump was never a Republican or Conservative, except for convenience.  At best he is pragmetist and at worst a snake in the grass (closet Democrat).  And I'm afraid we are about to see the snake show it's ugly head. I believe he will trade us for his wall along the southern border and immigration reform. 

HE SAID AS MUCH IN HIS TWITTER POST!! It's the "art of the deal" I guess... 

[Moped]

Yes he did.  And this is why I could not vote for him in the last election and chose to vote Libertarian, instead. I do not trust him as far as I could throw him.

[gregintenn]

12 minutes ago, Erik88 said:

HE SAID AS MUCH IN HIS TWITTER POST!! It's the "art of the deal" I guess... 

You may well be correct, but what if he uses this to get democrats on record voting against the very gun control measures they tirelessly call for? He can then say he tried.

[Erik88]

2 minutes ago, gregintenn said:

You may well be correct, but what if he uses this to get democrats on record voting against the very gun control measures they tirelessly call for? He can then say he tried.

Is that really a risk we want to take? What if they vote yes? That is a no win situation. If it passes we now have universal background checks. If it doesn't pass you get no wall and no immigration reform.  I guess that is great negotiation... 

[GlockSpock]

15 minutes ago, Erik88 said:

Is that really a risk we want to take? What if they vote yes? That is a no win situation. If it passes we now have universal background checks. If it doesn't pass you get no wall and no immigration reform.  I guess that is great negotiation... 

Regardless...no wall/immigration and no background checks OR wall/immigration and background checks...

At the end...he yells

I DID IT.

[DaveTN]

28 minutes ago, Moped said:

Trump was never a Republican or Conservative, except for convenience.  At best he is pragmetist and at worst a snake in the grass (closet Democrat).  And I'm afraid we are about to see the snake show it's ugly head. I believe he will trade us for his wall along the southern border and immigration reform. 

 

22 minutes ago, Moped said:

Yes he did.  And this is why I could not vote for him in the last election and chose to vote Libertarian, instead. I do not trust him as far as I could throw him.

What do you suggest (That’s reasonable and has a chance of working)? Are one of those Democrats looking good to you?

I believe…(although I could certainly be wrong) background checks for all gun sales will pass. It’s common sense that most Americans want. Whether it will pass muster with the SCOTUS remains to be seen; I have my doubts it will.

I think Trump knows if it is brought to the floor in the Senate it will pass; regardless of what he says or does. So, is trying to try to tie it to a border wall wrong?

[GlockSpock]

1 minute ago, DaveTN said:

 

What do you suggest (That’s reasonable and has a chance of working)? Are one of those Democrats looking good to you?

I believe…(although I could certainly be wrong) background checks for all gun sales will pass. It’s common sense that most Americans want. Whether it will pass muster with the SCOTUS remains to be seen; I have my doubts it will.

I think Trump knows if it is brought to the floor in the Senate it will pass; regardless of what he says or does. So, is trying to try to tie it to a border wall wrong?

Yes of course, common sense.

Would background checks have stopped the El Paso shooter?

[FUJIMO]

3 minutes ago, DaveTN said:

 

What do you suggest (That’s reasonable and has a chance of working)? Are one of those Democrats looking good to you?

I believe…(although I could certainly be wrong) background checks for all gun sales will pass. It’s common sense that most Americans want. Whether it will pass muster with the SCOTUS remains to be seen; I have my doubts it will.

I think Trump knows if it is brought to the floor in the Senate it will pass; regardless of what he says or does. So, is trying to try to tie it to a border wall wrong?

I guess I'm one lacking common sense in this area then because IMO a background check is pointless for those seeking to do evil and only complicates things for the rest of us. The one big BIG thing it does do is allow the gubment to track you and i ,average law following citizen, with every firearm transaction from the point it becomes law forward. That gets into my personal business and my private life neither of which they should be privileged to. At that point we become much like Australia where I have to ask permission to go shoot the GD thing. No thanks !

[DaveTN]

11 minutes ago, GlockSpock said:

Yes of course, common sense.

Would background checks have stopped the El Paso shooter?

No. Background checks will have zero impact on shootings of any kind.

The problem is that most Americans don’t understand what goes on, or what is being talked about and suggested. They believe that people can buy guns from dealers at gun shows without a background check. They believe that people can order guns online and have them shipped to their house.

However… when most I worked with asked how convicted felons can buy guns; I explained it to them. They didn’t think that was a good idea. And neither does the average American; even most gun owners I know in this state.

I’m buying mostly new guns anymore; so I’m going through background checks. If background checks are required for used gun sales; I don’t think either party should have to pay for them. That’s an unreasonable cost for something that will do nothing and is taxation without representation. Meaning the states don’t agree with it.

[Chucktshoes]

When pro 2A folks start talking about “common sense” gun control measures.

 

Edited August 6, 2019 by Chucktshoes

[btq96r]

1 minute ago, DaveTN said:

They believe that people can buy guns from dealers at gun shows without a background check.

There's some credence behind that...hard to not think someone is a dealer when they make time to rent out a table at a gun show and have a lot of product ready to move, "private collector" moniker being as accurate as "AR pistol" in terms of reality as opposed to labeling.

[GlockSpock]

4 minutes ago, DaveTN said:

No. Background checks will have zero impact on shootings of any kind.

The problem is that most Americans don’t understand what goes on, or what is being talked about and suggested. They believe that people can buy guns from dealers at gun shows without a background check. They believe that people can order guns online and have them shipped to their house.

However… when most I worked with asked how convicted felons can buy guns; I explained it to them. They didn’t think that was a good idea. And neither does the average American; even most gun owners I know in this state.

I’m buying mostly new guns anymore; so I’m going through background checks. If background checks are required for used gun sales; I don’t think either party should have to pay for them. That’s an unreasonable cost for something that will do nothing and is taxation without representation. Meaning the states don’t agree with it.

So I have a hard time seeing "common sense" in something that will have a zero impact on shootings of any kind.

[GlockSpock]

Just now, btq96r said:

There's some credence behind that...hard to not think someone is a dealer when they make time to rent out a table at a gun show and have a lot of product ready to move, "private collector" moniker being as accurate as "AR pistol" in terms of reality as opposed to labeling.

Especially when not only is it advertised as such but he also has more guns on the table for sale that many people here own. Couple that with the fact that many of these people as such are supplementing their income by buying/selling guns, even the ATF would consider them a dealer (albeit not a properly setup one).

Personally, I think you should be able to stop at Ace Hardware on the way home, pay cash, and walkout with an M4 no questions asked. You know, a little concept called freedom.

[DaveTN]

4 minutes ago, FUJIMO said:

I guess I'm one lacking common sense in this area then because IMO a background check is pointless for those seeking to do evil and only complicates things for the rest of us. The one big BIG thing it does do is allow the gubment to track you and i ,average law following citizen, with every firearm transaction from the point it becomes law forward. That gets into my personal business and my private life neither of which they should be privileged to. At that point we become much like Australia where I have to ask permission to go shoot the GD thing. No thanks !

And that’s why it will have to pass muster with the SCOTUS. The SCOTUS has interpreted the 2nd amendment as allowing “reasonable restrictions”. I would suspect they would find that keeping convicted felons, drug users, or documented mentally defectives from getting guns as reasonable restrictions. I doubt they will allow a gun database, and I doubt they may allow any of it based on intrastate vs. interstate.

[DaveTN]

7 minutes ago, Chucktshoes said:

When pro 2A folks start talking about “common sense” gun control measures.

It must be discussed. It is wording the SCOTUS has used. We can use that same wording to argue against changes. In intelligent discussions we use our words.

[DaveTN]

6 minutes ago, GlockSpock said:

Couple that with the fact that many of these people as such are supplementing their income by buying/selling guns, even the ATF would consider them a dealer (albeit not a properly setup one).

Really....huh??