RE: Another day, another "small" mass shooting

RE: Another day, another "small" mass shooting (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

jlf1961 -> RE: Another day, another "small" mass shooting (11/16/2017 12:15:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods quote: ORIGINAL: heavyblinker Holy fuck... I literally JUST got finished talking about how rational conversations never take place precisely because the RWNJs are constantly pretending that it's about imposing a TOTAL GUN BAN. If they can't insist that any discussion is about something unacceptable they have no argument at all. i'd have thought that was obvious by now. That coming from the guy that always has "We need to get rid of the guns" in his first post, at which point, what is his argument? Take away the guns. Tell him why the system doesnt work, he does not suggest ways to fix it, his suggestion is take away the guns. So, who is incapable of having a rational conversation, the person who explains why the system doesnt work, or the person who suggests that the cops that should have 1) enforced a court order to take this guys guns and didnt, and 2) A whole department that seems to have failed to follow standard procedure on how to enforce the court order after getting complaints that this guy still had guns? And calls it human error. Human error is the accidental failure to follow procedure, most often happening with people who have not been on the job very long, people who are overly tired, or people who are being unnecessarily rushed to accomplish a task. In medicine it results in malpractice suits, and in more serious cases, criminal prosecution. In the case of airline pilots, it often results in a lot of people killed. In the case of truck drivers, it often results in accidents with fatalities. So in the case of this Sheriff's department, are we to assume that a) the entire force are rookies with limited on the job experience, b) over worked and exhausted, or c) they are being rushed to do a bunch of unrelated tasks? Since none of the above could possibly apply to the entire department, this leads to the following statement: these guys did not do their jobs for whatever reason and failed to follow procedure and 5 people died as a result, and did so knowing that the individual in question had a history of violence, at least one attack with a deadly weapon, and a judge ordered him to turn over his guns and clearly he ignored the court order. In any department I ever worked for, any one of those things would result in being fired and charged with criminal dereliction of duty.

BamaD -> RE: Another day, another "small" mass shooting (11/16/2017 12:23:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods quote: ORIGINAL: heavyblinker Holy fuck... I literally JUST got finished talking about how rational conversations never take place precisely because the RWNJs are constantly pretending that it's about imposing a TOTAL GUN BAN. If they can't insist that any discussion is about something unacceptable they have no argument at all. i'd have thought that was obvious by now. That coming from the guy that always has "We need to get rid of the guns" in his first post, at which point, what is his argument? Take away the guns. Tell him why the system doesnt work, he does not suggest ways to fix it, his suggestion is take away the guns. So, who is incapable of having a rational conversation, the person who explains why the system doesnt work, or the person who suggests that the cops that should have 1) enforced a court order to take this guys guns and didnt, and 2) A whole department that seems to have failed to follow standard procedure on how to enforce the court order after getting complaints that this guy still had guns? And calls it human error. Human error is the accidental failure to follow procedure, most often happening with people who have not been on the job very long, people who are overly tired, or people who are being unnecessarily rushed to accomplish a task. In medicine it results in malpractice suits, and in more serious cases, criminal prosecution. In the case of airline pilots, it often results in a lot of people killed. In the case of truck drivers, it often results in accidents with fatalities. So in the case of this Sheriff's department, are we to assume that a) the entire force are rookies with limited on the job experience, b) over worked and exhausted, or c) they are being rushed to do a bunch of unrelated tasks? Since none of the above could possibly apply to the entire department, this leads to the following statement: these guys did not do their jobs for whatever reason and failed to follow procedure and 5 people died as a result, and did so knowing that the individual in question had a history of violence, at least one attack with a deadly weapon, and a judge ordered him to turn over his guns and clearly he ignored the court order. In any department I ever worked for, any one of those things would result in being fired and charged with criminal dereliction of duty. Any place reasonable it would result in a general house cleaning and at a minimum a new chief.

DesideriScuri -> RE: Another day, another "small" mass shooting (11/16/2017 1:08:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: heavyblinker quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri] It's because it's been identified in our Founding as a 'right' and not as a 'privilege.' We have the privilege of driving, so we have to prove we aren't going to go out and fuck shit up through lack of knowledge of how to drive. Yes I know... that's the problem. You might as well be screaming 'America, fuck yeah' over and over... because that is pretty much the extent of your rationale here. Do you think there is a difference between a right and a privilege (in general; not limited to any specific right)? I'm sure you don't agree that owning a firearm should be a right. Be that as it may, under the US Constitution, it is a right for US Citizens to own a firearm. You don't have to agree or disagree with it being a right. In your opinion, how can the US prevent nutcases from going postal and engage in human target practice?

BamaD -> RE: Another day, another "small" mass shooting (11/16/2017 1:15:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: heavyblinker quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri] It's because it's been identified in our Founding as a 'right' and not as a 'privilege.' We have the privilege of driving, so we have to prove we aren't going to go out and fuck shit up through lack of knowledge of how to drive. Yes I know... that's the problem. You might as well be screaming 'America, fuck yeah' over and over... because that is pretty much the extent of your rationale here. Do you think there is a difference between a right and a privilege (in general; not limited to any specific right)? I'm sure you don't agree that owning a firearm should be a right. Be that as it may, under the US Constitution, it is a right for US Citizens to own a firearm. You don't have to agree or disagree with it being a right. In your opinion, how can the US prevent nutcases from going postal and engage in human target practice? In the current case they had plenty of evidence to take his guns. They even had a court order to do so. The problem here was that the police didn't even make any real attempt to do their job. this one, under current law lies squarely on the shoulders of the police.

DesideriScuri -> RE: Another day, another "small" mass shooting (11/16/2017 1:17:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: heavyblinker quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri] It's because it's been identified in our Founding as a 'right' and not as a 'privilege.' We have the privilege of driving, so we have to prove we aren't going to go out and fuck shit up through lack of knowledge of how to drive. Yes I know... that's the problem. You might as well be screaming 'America, fuck yeah' over and over... because that is pretty much the extent of your rationale here. Do you think there is a difference between a right and a privilege (in general; not limited to any specific right)? I'm sure you don't agree that owning a firearm should be a right. Be that as it may, under the US Constitution, it is a right for US Citizens to own a firearm. You don't have to agree or disagree with it being a right. In your opinion, how can the US prevent nutcases from going postal and engage in human target practice? In the current case they had plenty of evidence to take his guns. They even had a court order to do so. The problem here was that the police didn't even make any real attempt to do their job. this one, under current law lies squarely on the shoulders of the police. I agree completely. But my response to heavyblinker goes beyond just this case.

BamaD -> RE: Another day, another "small" mass shooting (11/16/2017 1:22:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: heavyblinker quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri] It's because it's been identified in our Founding as a 'right' and not as a 'privilege.' We have the privilege of driving, so we have to prove we aren't going to go out and fuck shit up through lack of knowledge of how to drive. Yes I know... that's the problem. You might as well be screaming 'America, fuck yeah' over and over... because that is pretty much the extent of your rationale here. Do you think there is a difference between a right and a privilege (in general; not limited to any specific right)? I'm sure you don't agree that owning a firearm should be a right. Be that as it may, under the US Constitution, it is a right for US Citizens to own a firearm. You don't have to agree or disagree with it being a right. In your opinion, how can the US prevent nutcases from going postal and engage in human target practice? In the current case they had plenty of evidence to take his guns. They even had a court order to do so. The problem here was that the police didn't even make any real attempt to do their job. this one, under current law lies squarely on the shoulders of the police. I agree completely. But my response to heavyblinker goes beyond just this case. HB speaks from a combination of bias and ignorance. His answer to this is to repeal the 2nd.

PeonForHer -> RE: Another day, another "small" mass shooting (11/16/2017 1:43:22 PM)
quote: these guys did not do their jobs for whatever reason A story that's becoming familiar by now. You don't think it might have something to do with there being so many guns around that it's considered 'normal' - not something for the police to prioritise?

DesideriScuri -> RE: Another day, another "small" mass shooting (11/16/2017 2:21:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer quote: these guys did not do their jobs for whatever reason A story that's becoming familiar by now. You don't think it might have something to do with there being so many guns around that it's considered 'normal' - not something for the police to prioritise? It may be 'normal' for guns to be around, but it's not (at least I hope it's not) 'normal' for police to not execute their duties properly, regardless of how many people have a gun in their home.

BamaD -> RE: Another day, another "small" mass shooting (11/16/2017 2:49:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer quote: these guys did not do their jobs for whatever reason A story that's becoming familiar by now. You don't think it might have something to do with there being so many guns around that it's considered 'normal' - not something for the police to prioritise? No, when a court order is posted there is nothing normal about not enforcing it.

jlf1961 -> RE: Another day, another "small" mass shooting (11/16/2017 2:50:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer quote: these guys did not do their jobs for whatever reason A story that's becoming familiar by now. You don't think it might have something to do with there being so many guns around that it's considered 'normal' - not something for the police to prioritise? Okay, you have a known dangerous subject... Are you saying that dealing with this individual should NOT be priority? What could possibly be more important? Jaywalkers? Someone spitting on the sidewalk? As a gun owner, I am saying with all seriousness, a known dangerous subject with a gun should be the highest priority, and if necessary dealt with in the most expedient way possible. Which considering this guy's recent past, a no knock warrant with authorization of deadly force if necessary. I have no clue what you have been smoking, drinking, or ingesting or if you have been dropped on your head a number of times, but armed dangerous subjects is the highest priority in law enforcement... Followed by the mandatory shift donut run.

PeonForHer -> RE: Another day, another "small" mass shooting (11/16/2017 3:14:56 PM)
quote: I have no clue what you have been smoking, drinking, or ingesting or if you have been dropped on your head a number of times, but armed dangerous subjects is the highest priority in law enforcement... Well, apparently not, in this case. But if not the police, then other agents of the state.

BamaD -> RE: Another day, another "small" mass shooting (11/16/2017 4:12:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer quote: I have no clue what you have been smoking, drinking, or ingesting or if you have been dropped on your head a number of times, but armed dangerous subjects is the highest priority in law enforcement... Well, apparently not, in this case. But if not the police, then other agents of the state. The police in hat city are guilty of malpractice. Were it anyplace else the chief of police would be looking for work, and possibly a lawyer.

jlf1961 -> RE: Another day, another "small" mass shooting (11/16/2017 4:50:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer quote: I have no clue what you have been smoking, drinking, or ingesting or if you have been dropped on your head a number of times, but armed dangerous subjects is the highest priority in law enforcement... Well, apparently not, in this case. But if not the police, then other agents of the state. which is why we have been saying negligence, dereliction of duty, and criminal incompetence. And bama is right in any other town or state, the Sheriff or chief of police would be facing criminal charges and have no job

BamaD -> RE: Another day, another "small" mass shooting (11/16/2017 8:33:42 PM)
FR Another apparent screw up by the cops. The handguns he turned in were registered to someone else. He had them illegally ne rifles he turned in were also illegal. Why aren't the cops going after who provided the handguns?

BamaD -> RE: Another day, another "small" mass shooting (11/16/2017 10:10:43 PM)
FR "Laws are only for people who obey them". Assistant Sheriff in the town of the Ca shooting in explanation for why they let the guy get away with so much.

ThatDizzyChick -> RE: Another day, another "small" mass shooting (11/17/2017 1:10:07 AM)
See? That's the beauty of the whole "It's too soon" argument against serious discussion of the problem, there is a new shooting spree every week, so it is always going to be "too soon". Those fuckers are brilliant.

heavyblinker -> RE: Another day, another "small" mass shooting (11/17/2017 4:32:38 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods quote: ORIGINAL: heavyblinker Holy fuck... I literally JUST got finished talking about how rational conversations never take place precisely because the RWNJs are constantly pretending that it's about imposing a TOTAL GUN BAN. If they can't insist that any discussion is about something unacceptable they have no argument at all. i'd have thought that was obvious by now. That coming from the guy that always has "We need to get rid of the guns" in his first post, at which point, what is his argument? Take away the guns. Truly unbelievable. Shocking, in fact.

heavyblinker -> RE: Another day, another "small" mass shooting (11/17/2017 4:37:51 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: heavyblinker quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri] It's because it's been identified in our Founding as a 'right' and not as a 'privilege.' We have the privilege of driving, so we have to prove we aren't going to go out and fuck shit up through lack of knowledge of how to drive. Yes I know... that's the problem. You might as well be screaming 'America, fuck yeah' over and over... because that is pretty much the extent of your rationale here. Do you think there is a difference between a right and a privilege (in general; not limited to any specific right)? Yes. quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri I'm sure you don't agree that owning a firearm should be a right. Be that as it may, under the US Constitution, it is a right for US Citizens to own a firearm. You don't have to agree or disagree with it being a right. In your opinion, how can the US prevent nutcases from going postal and engage in human target practice? I do disagree with it being a right, that is exactly my point. If it wasn't a right, you wouldn't have as many nutcases going postal and engaging in human target practice. Anyone who argues that gun ownership is a right is saying that protecting some obsolete vision of what your 'rights' are is worth having all of these mass shootings. You can talk about the constitution all you like... I don't have to mindlessly agree with the constitution. It isn't the 10 commandments. It isn't a sacred document. God didn't write it. The second amendment was written by people who had no idea what the 21st century would be like.

DesideriScuri -> RE: Another day, another "small" mass shooting (11/17/2017 6:33:29 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: heavyblinker quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri Do you think there is a difference between a right and a privilege (in general; not limited to any specific right)? Yes. At least we have common ground there. quote: quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri I'm sure you don't agree that owning a firearm should be a right. Be that as it may, under the US Constitution, it is a right for US Citizens to own a firearm. You don't have to agree or disagree with it being a right. In your opinion, how can the US prevent nutcases from going postal and engage in human target practice? I do disagree with it being a right, that is exactly my point. If it wasn't a right, you wouldn't have as many nutcases going postal and engaging in human target practice. Anyone who argues that gun ownership is a right is saying that protecting some obsolete vision of what your 'rights' are is worth having all of these mass shootings. You can talk about the constitution all you like... I don't have to mindlessly agree with the constitution. It isn't the 10 commandments. It isn't a sacred document. God didn't write it. The second amendment was written by people who had no idea what the 21st century would be like. Under the US Constitution, it is a right to own a gun. I don't give a fuck that "God didn't write it." We aren't a theocracy, so that doesn't matter anyway. You don't have to mindlessly agree with the Constitution, and no one else has to, either. However, considering it's the law of the land here, we in the US have to work under that rule, until it's taken out (which I truly hope it never is). So, with the understanding that it's a right in the US, other than amending the Constitution to take it out, how do you think the US can prevent nutcases from going postal and engage in human target practice?

Page: << < prev 4 5 [6] 7 8 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.109375