RE: At "least" 27 People killed in Texas church

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

RE: At "least" 27 People killed in Texas church

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: At "least" 27 People killed in Texas church

Page: << < prev 10 11 [12] 13 14 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: At "least" 27 People killed in Texas church - 11/8/2017 5:02:53 PM

jlf1961

Posts: 14840
Joined: 6/10/2008
From: Somewhere Texas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

Again, if you actually used your brain to learn something you could have googled the subject, but you didnt, proving you would rather post an invalid argument rather than figure out the facts.

I was taking the piss, to be honest, Jeff. I don't really give a swivelling rat's anus about the relatively tiny number of people who may have trouble with feral hogs as a result of not having the requisite guns to to shoot them, should a ban on the relevant guns come into effect - which it almost certainly won't, anyway. As a matter of fact, I find it almost surreal - as well as mind-numbingly disgusting - that this thread has even got on to the matter of feral hogs and the need for guns to deal with them, so soon after this appalling massacre - about which, to recall, all you gunsters were so keen to express your utterly heartfelt 'thoughts and prayers'. It's always the same: "Terrible massacre - deplorable - but, hey, the crucial thing is NOBODY SHOULD BE TAKING OUR GUNS!". And that's how this this thread has gone, just as every thread has gone on this forum, after every one of the atrocious mass-shootings that's taken place, since I can remember.

Someone asked the simple question why anyone would want to buy one, what purpose do they serve, and we answered the fucking question.

Of course while people are concentrating on the type of gun used, they are neglecting a simple fact that allowed this guy to buy the gun that he used to kill all those people.

A fact that is the same in this incident as it has been in 56% of all mass shootings, this individual had at 3 factors that would have barred him from purchasing any kind of gun, and those things were not reported to the National Crime database, you know, that thing that is used to do the back ground checks.

Those being:

1) Dishonorably discharged from the US Air Force
2) Convicted of a Domestic Violence crime (does not matter if it was a felony conviction or misdemeanor conviction, any conviction involving domestic violence is one that will bar someone from legally purchasing a firearm)
3) Convicted of a charge that had a mandatory 18 month sentence, making it a felony in civilian courts, which again would have barred him from purchasing any kind of gun.

Granted the Air Force is going to do an investigation on the matter, which is to say that who ever was putting the data into the computer failed to hit the submit button that would have also sent the data to the National Crime Database.

The dems in Washington introduced another assault ban bill, completely ignoring the fact that under existing laws, this guy could not have purchased even a single shot target pistol, had that information been in the data base, compounding that with the fact that in the majority of mass shootings, the shooter could not have legally purchased a gun in the first place, but was able to do so because the back ground check did not have the prohibiting information.

Then the two Texas dems did not want the fact that this guy had mental issues and had even escaped from a mental institution in New Mexico used as an issue because 'they do not want to stigmatize people with mental or emotional problems" ignoring the fact that again, a large number of mass shooters had a severe mental issue that would have been enough to bar them from purchasing a gun.

So, in response to your bullshit, how about you go piss up a rope?

Better yet, research mass killings and learn for yourself that the majority of them would not have been able to buy a gun IF THE FUCKING SYSTEM WAS MADE MANDATORY so that the information that would prevent them from buying again would show up when the retailer ran the back ground check.

Of course there is a real fucking kicker to the problem, Dems supported an amendment to a bill that made it impossible to sue the person or store that sold a gun to a prohibited individual because he passed a back ground check that didnt come back with a denial result.

So at some point, the liberal shit for brains congressman realized it was not the fault of the retailers if the sold a gun after an okay to purchase result came back from the back ground check, but fuck, why fix it?

_____________________________

Boy, it sure would be nice if we had some grenades, don't you think?

You cannot control who comes into your life, but you can control which airlock you throw them out of.

Paranoid Paramilitary Gun Loving Conspiracy Theorist AND EQUAL OPPORTUNI

(in reply to PeonForHer)