|
Newtype posted:Can we take some time to think about the real heroes? https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...m=.285b70c905ba https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/12/31/the-inside-story-of-how-an-idaho-toddler-shot-his-mom-at-wal-mart/ http://www.cbsnews.com/news/police-recommend-charge-for-mother-shot-by-4-year-old-son/
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 05:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 17:35 |
|
|
Rick_Hunter posted:Either you've culled your friend's list so thoroughly that none of your ancap former friends are ever visible or this chucklefuck likes the sounds of his own voice so much he doesn't care if anyone reads it. The only people I've seen respond to his posts are one or two friends and his immediate family (who are all exactly like him), I assume everyone else has removed him from their facebooks. Dude just loves to rant. His posts are all either just like the stuff posted or him complaining about a company trying to screw him out of money or how he called Amazon because a movie he bought from them 2 years ago is now selling at a lower price and he managed to yell someones ear off for a few hours in order to get his 30 cent refund.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 05:19
|
|
|
Are you saying we should be allowed to bring guns on planes? Jurgan fucked around with this message at 06:58 on Jun 15, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 05:27
|
|
|
AbsoluteLlama posted:I think there is a real difference though. You can actually buy an assault rifle in the US for real. You need like 20k+USD, a bunch of paperwork, A way-more-than-NICS background check (or corporation/trust Lol this is what I was talking about. "You can't buy an assault rifle without lots of paperwork! You can't just have a full auto AK-47 with no background check, that would be crazy! A semi-auto AK-47 though, that's no problem because it's not an assault rifle." I dunno it just strikes me as a silly thing to say on its face. You can go to a gun show and buy an assault rifle, for any definition of assault rifle that is not narrowly legalistic. I guess I'm just tired of all the stuff about how modern military high-cap rifles with pistol grips and high sights are just the same as a hunting rifle with a traditional stock and sights. It's true there's not one particular feature that makes an M-4 more lethal than a hunting rifle, but you see a convergence on the modern military rifle design because that combination of features is optimal for accurate, sustained, rapid fire. Arglebargle III fucked around with this message at 05:34 on Jun 15, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 05:29
|
|
. They're people too 
), and a lot of patience.
types would stop posting all that poo poo. Nobody should have to carry a firearm to feel safe. For most people basic situational awareness and descalation training, etc would be far better. And these guys are just as likely to shoot you in the back or shoot themselves.
|
  Then how do you explain the billions of Muslims who have died of natural causes?
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 05:30
|
|
|
Scruff McGruff posted:Oh man, the ancap on my facebook is still going apeshit. From the third one: "See what happens when the government comes to take your guns? You die!" Still true today. So why do folks pretend a rifle is going to keep Uncle Sam at bay?
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 06:08
|
|
|
follow that camel!! posted:From the third one: "See what happens when the government comes to take your guns? You die!" There's this weird duality where they're convinced that Obama and the rest of the government are ready and waiting to illegally steal their guns from them at a moment's notice with absolutely no regard for the law or the Constitution, and the only thing holding them at bay is the 2nd Amendment. "The only reason they haven't illegally stolen my guns is because it's against the law for them to do it!"
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 08:32
|
|
|
The planes were the weapons, and the US passed laws and spent poo poo loads protecting planes from happening again. gently caress, they had watch lists where you can't fly if you are on them, or at least will be searched throughly. And this cant be done for guns because penis size.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 10:12
|
|
|
Hmm, I wonder why he went to a nightclub with a gun to kill 50 people, when he could have just as easily hi-jacked a 767 and killed 3000
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 10:19
|
|
|
Well, I guess you don't need a line of argument when you can just make poo poo up like 'guns are illegal in France'.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 10:21
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:Well, I guess you don't need a line of argument when you can just make poo poo up like 'guns are illegal in France'. I went shooting with a friend in Brocéliande just last weekend, am I going to be deported? 
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 12:01
|
|
|
I ran into some full-on Crisis Actor/False Flag people on my FB last night. Thankfully, he seems to have deleted it, and I didn't engage them beyond a "Seriously with this poo poo??" response. Apparently, their main evidence is a short video of a victim being carried by a few other people back TOWARDS the nightclub and this is the smoking gun. I don't know how you can concoct an entire conspiracy out of a 10 second video of confused and scared people, but there it is. Allegedly, all these people are crisis actors and they were carrying this person around to make a show (???). It was literally one of the most asinine things I've seen in a while.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 12:30
|
|
|
robotsinmyhead posted:I ran into some full-on Crisis Actor/False Flag people on my FB last night. Thankfully, he seems to have deleted it, and I didn't engage them beyond a "Seriously with this poo poo??" response. I got one of these too from a guy that usually posts about false flags and crisis actors after any shooting. The evidence in his thing was one of the  victims that was shot in the leg that miraculously starts walking once they "think they're out of view of the cameras". He's a super nice dude in general but he is 100% chemtrails crazy. He posted the same thing about Sandy Hook and maintained it even after a mutual friend who lived in that area posted that her personally knew one of the children that was killed and could assure him it was real.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 14:19
|
|
|
If only one of the victims had a gun then they could have stopped 9/11
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 15:34
|
|
|
Scruff McGruff posted:He posted the same thing about Sandy Hook and maintained it even after a mutual friend who lived in that area posted that her personally knew one of the children that was killed and could assure him it was real. This is the worst part. Evidence that is contrary to the conspiracy is somehow just more evidence FOR the conspiracy because they just slide it over into the "they're in on it" column and smile smugly. In response to their inane bullshit, I posted the Ben Franklin quote, "Three can keep a secret if two of them are dead." I'm not sure what kind of world people live in where they assume that there are literally thousands of people willing to keep 100% quiet about a false flag event and never mess up. Did they not go to High School, where literally any secret, no matter how insignificant, can and will get exposed within a day or two of its creation?
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 15:47
|
|
|
 I mean, they're beyond the point of explaining that "hey, Syrian refugees have to wait 3 years in a refugee camp to get to the US while they're vetted."
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 15:57
|
|
|
FYI we've accepted 750,000 refugees since 9/11 and none of them have committed any acts of terror.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 15:58
|
|
|
Goatman Sacks posted:FYI we've accepted 750,000 refugees since 9/11 and none of them have committed any acts of terror. You just wait. Even if it takes 50 years for one of those refugees to screw up they'll still hoot and holler that they were right all along.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 16:07
|
|
|
Rick_Hunter posted:You just wait. Even if it takes 50 years for one of those refugees to screw up they'll still hoot and holler that they were right all along. The thing no one seems to be mentioning at all is that Omar's parents came to the US from Afghanistan because of St. Ronnie's policies towards Afghanistan.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 16:09
|
|
|
Moxie posted:If only one of the victims had a gun then they could have stopped 9/11 Eric S. Raymond actually wrote a whole essay in early 2002 about how 9/11 could have been stopped if we let passengers carry guns on planes. His main point of evidence that this would work was fact that there was never a hijacked plane in Israel (he seemed to believe that Israel let people carry guns on planes, when of course they actually have some of the most strict airport controls in the world).
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 16:16
|
|
|
The whole reason that 9/11 'worked' was that no one actually expected the hijackers to weaponize the planes. The overwhelming trend in airplane hijackings before then was that people would hijack the plan and divert it to a different country/airport to land, and then the passengers would be held as hostages to demand the release of prisoners/etc. The standard guide was to stay calm and comply with demands so that the plane was not endangered, and the crew would try to alert controllers to the situation. Even if people had been armed, the guidance for the situation would have been 'please do not start a firefight at 35,000ft with people who may have explosives, because you are going to kill us all' - because most hijackings ended with very few injuries or deaths using the standard playbook. Once people realized what was happening the reaction changed (US 93) and even unarmed passengers were able to overwhelm the attackers. If they had done that as a first response (which is what would probably happen now) the hijacker likely would have failed completely.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 16:37
|
|
|
If the twin towers had an AA gun 9/11 never would have happened.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 16:38
|
|
|
OMG, Dale Earnhardt's death was a false flag! 1. Immediate national coverage 2. A judge refused to release the autopsy and death photos 3, 4. There had just been discussion about increasing NASCAR safety features, and drivers including Earnhardt had opposed these features. 5. "NASCAR is an emotion sport" - 6,7. Mainstream media stories: initial reports were unclear on cause, controversy continues on the role of the seat belt in the accident 8. US Supreme Court refuses to hear appeal from parties seeking access to the autopsy photos FALSE FLAG
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 17:01
|
|
|
TerminalSaint posted:If the twin towers had an AA gun 9/11 never would have happened. Well it would have, just over a different part of Manhattan or maybe Jersey
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 17:13
|
|
|
robotsinmyhead posted:In response to their inane bullshit, I posted the Ben Franklin quote, "Three can keep a secret if two of them are dead." I'm not sure what kind of world people live in where they assume that there are literally thousands of people willing to keep 100% quiet about a false flag event and never mess up. Did they not go to High School, where literally any secret, no matter how insignificant, can and will get exposed within a day or two of its creation? I agree with what your saying, but when it was revealed that hundreds if not thousands of NSA employees were passing around screencaps of unknowing, not-under-investigtion Americans, it kind of gave it more credence. That isn't a counter argument to what you are saying, because no, I don't believe thousands would stand by utterly silent while a 'false flag' was carried out. But for $200k/ a year they would rub one out to the intercepted nude pic your girlfriend sent you
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 17:16
|
|
|
Ashcans posted:The whole reason that 9/11 'worked' was that no one actually expected the hijackers to weaponize the planes. The overwhelming trend in airplane hijackings before then was that people would hijack the plan and divert it to a different country/airport to land, and then the passengers would be held as hostages to demand the release of prisoners/etc. The standard guide was to stay calm and comply with demands so that the plane was not endangered, and the crew would try to alert controllers to the situation. Even if people had been armed, the guidance for the situation would have been 'please do not start a firefight at 35,000ft with people who may have explosives, because you are going to kill us all' - because most hijackings ended with very few injuries or deaths using the standard playbook. I read a book a while back on the history of the US Air Marshals Service and, while not the best written book, it gives essentially a timeline of every plane hijacking since 1962. It also discusses exactly this, where, for a long time, hijackings were sort of a "oh it might happen but it's not that big a deal" thing that was actually romanticized early on (DB Cooper). In the 60's and early 70's nearly every US hijacking was "take me to Cuba" to the point that every airline had a standard procedure for their crews about what to do when they inevitably ended up in Cuba for a few days and the FAA considered building a fake Havana airport for hijacked planes to land at because it happened all the time. During the 70's hijackings became less "lone wolf wanting to go somewhere" to more of a "we're an organized group holding the plane/passengers hostage until you pay or release political prisoners" so that's what policy was built around. The possibility of planes as weapons was discussed in a theoretical sense but it had never really happened so it was relegated to a "what if" kind of thing where it was agreed that they should keep an eye on if a hijacked plane begins heading toward any nuclear power plants but other than that it's probably not an issue. Of course, this opens the door for people to say "Look at this report from the FAA about the dangers of people using airplanes as weapons, THEY KNEW IT COULD HAPPEN AND DID NOTHING!" when the FAA had reports written for virtually every possible scenario. Like how people get outraged when some pentagon report about how to best occupy Cleveland surfaces and people go bananas despite explaining that there are guys who's whole lives are devoted to planning for every and any possible scenario they might need, including a scenario for an alien invasion.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 17:20
|
|
|
Ashcans posted:The whole reason that 9/11 'worked' was that no one actually expected the hijackers to weaponize the planes. The overwhelming trend in airplane hijackings before then was that people would hijack the plan and divert it to a different country/airport to land, and then the passengers would be held as hostages to demand the release of prisoners/etc. The standard guide was to stay calm and comply with demands so that the plane was not endangered, and the crew would try to alert controllers to the situation. Even if people had been armed, the guidance for the situation would have been 'please do not start a firefight at 35,000ft with people who may have explosives, because you are going to kill us all' - because most hijackings ended with very few injuries or deaths using the standard playbook. Yeah, in 2001 I told a friend there would never be another successful hijacking in America in our lifetimes because the passengers would kill the hijackers. She did not agree. 15 years later there have been no successful hijackings of US planes but at least one person has been killed by passengers for getting violent in a plane.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 20:52
|
|
|
Scruff McGruff posted:The possibility of planes as weapons was discussed in a theoretical sense but it had never really happened so it was relegated to a "what if" kind of thing where it was agreed that they should keep an eye on if a hijacked plane begins heading toward any nuclear power plants but other than that it's probably not an issue. iirc there were at least two failed attempts to hijack a plane to use it as a bomb. off the top of my head a disgruntled fedex employee tried to jack a cargo plane in 95 to destroy fedex hq, and there's one other incident i've read about. and probably more it's not a complicated idea
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 21:35
|
|
|
There was a guy who wanted to assassinate Nixon by crashing a plane into the White House. But he got shot after killing the pilots while the plane was still on the tarmac. And there was the guy who killed himself by crashing a little plane on the White House lawn. This was when Clinton was president.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 22:43
|
|
|
Whoops
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 23:09
|
|
|
 This basically already happens so I agree. VV I think we might be FB friends cause I posted the link on my page 
Seraphic Neoman fucked around with this message at 01:17 on Jun 16, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 23:31
|
|
|
Someone shared this on my FB feed today, it's sad how on point The Onion is. http://www.theonion.com/blogpost/its-honor-continue-being-valued-over-countless-hum-53094
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 00:28
|
|
|
Twelve by Pies posted:Someone shared this on my FB feed today, it's sad how on point The Onion is. They also put a new spin on the ' ‘No Way To Prevent This,’ Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens' articles. http://www.theonion.com/article/nation-wishes-it-could-just-once-be-reminded-preci-53080
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 00:41
|
|
|
Rick_Hunter posted:They also put a new spin on the ' ‘No Way To Prevent This,’ Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens' articles. It's horrifying how appropriate that article remains.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 00:46
|
|
|
Hail SS-18 Satan, let his passage cleanse the earth. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 01:12
|
|
|
 Pretty sure I've seen this here before but it made my eye twitch and its from one of those friends I don't want to engage politically since it's a small town and we do other activities together. But that "gang related" bit... Are they not Americans?
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 01:20
|
|
|
Ron Jeremy posted:
Why did they remove the homicides? Or wait... I don't see how they ended up with their final numbers. Dr. Arbitrary fucked around with this message at 01:25 on Jun 16, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 01:23
|
|
|
Ron Jeremy posted:
Gun problems aside, it definitely has a math problem
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 01:33
|
|
|
lancemantis posted:Gun problems aside, it definitely has a math problem No citation to the CDC - check. Broad approximations to make numbers seem relevant - check. Upon inspection you find out that the CDC doesn't classify data according to gang activity.... - check? Wait a minute...I just looked up the CDC annual statistics and they give exact numbers - check plus? This gish gallop of stats is about as bad as Crime Statistics Bureau - San Francisco.jpg. Suprisingly, searching for 'cdc gun violence gang' gives you a reddit r/Firearms post where somebody is skeptical about the 80% gang thing, finds out it's about 1 city (maybe Chicago?) and assumes, "Oh, cities are urban feral hellholes, makes sense". Like you were this close to understanding that statistics can be misused.  Edit: As for removing gang homicides it's because they aren't people so they don't matter. Rick_Hunter fucked around with this message at 01:59 on Jun 16, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 01:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 17:35 |
|
|
Dr. Arbitrary posted:Why did they remove the homicides?
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 02:48
|
|
