|
On the news tonight they had a person report that someone screamed why would you do this, and he yelled back, because i'm angry and then he got got by police.
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2019 07:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 08:05 |
|
|
so what if you're angry why shoot random people about it you selfish piece of poo poo ugh
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2019 07:45
|
|
|
Holy poo poo what an rear end in a top hat
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2019 08:38
|
|
|
This has got to be some weirdo nutter that was told by Gilroy they can't do Weird Nutter thing and he just decided to be a huge loving rear end in a top hat because I can't imagine any other scenario where killing people at the Garlic Fest makes sense. In conclusion, please ban all guns thank you.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2019 15:17
|
|
|
The shooter was a white supremacistquote:Legan also posted about a fringe white supremacist book written in 1890. Noted indivualist anarchist, revisionist historian and Holocaust denier James J. Martin called, the book, “…one of the most incendiary works ever to be published anywhere.” Legan quoted from the book in a post accompanied by a Smokey the Bear sign about fire danger. He wrote: “Read Might Is Right by Ragnar Redbeard. Why overcrowd towns and pave more open space to make room for hordes of mestizos and Silicon Valley white twats?”
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2019 17:03
|
|
|
VideoGameVet posted:You know there are way more people in Los Angeles than Bakersfield or Fresno, right? e: AND a misogynist.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2019 17:19
|
|
|
The Wiggly Wizard posted:I said this in another thread but I'm almost certain the man in orange is the late, great Huell Howser gently caress with who you want ben but when you go after huell motherfucking howser youre asking for concrete boots and a personal tour of the MAJESTIC NATURAL SPLENDER of mono lake Punkin Spunkin fucked around with this message at 17:22 on Jul 29, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2019 17:20
|
|
|
It's pretty hosed up to pigeonhole Hauser into modern political categories. In his private life Huell was a monarchist, obsessed with finding the true heirs of Emperor Norton.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2019 19:16
|
|
|
Punkin Spunkin posted:Unironically worthy of death if true That's amazing
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2019 21:29
|
|
|
Punkin Spunkin posted:Unironically worthy of death if true
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2019 21:38
|
|
|
come see historic Barstow https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lmB4EVc81B8&t=813s
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2019 22:57
|
|
|
The Wiggly Wizard posted:come see historic Barstow That Del Taco is the best Del Taco.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2019 20:39
|
|
Have you seen my apex seals? I seem to have lost them.
|
Aeka 2.0 posted:That Del Taco is the best Del Taco. It really is. Any of the Barstow locations are great. I like that they actually fill your tacos and burritos with like double the amount that you would get at any other Del Taco. A must stop on the drive to/from Vegas IMO
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2019 07:15
|
|
|
The Del Taco in Barstow also puts little tomato hats on their tacos
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2019 16:56
|
|
|
FilthyImp posted:In conclusion, please ban all guns thank you.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2019 19:59
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:I don't think hilighting a policy failing at its purported purpose is a good argument for doubling down on it. California just passed Prop 63, and expanded assault weapons definitions, and new ammunition restrictions, and red flag laws, and various other gun control measures in the last few years, yet here we are. I agree, we need to have this type of regulation at the federal level. Great point, DR, I appreciate your support.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2019 20:03
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:I agree, we need to have this type of regulation at the federal level. The shooter already violated the law simply by bringing the gun into California. What makes you believe that a federal law would be any better enforced, given that it's been rather comprehensively demonstrated that we cannot check the flow of illegal liquor, drugs, or immigrants across our borders?
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2019 20:47
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:I don't think hilighting a policy failing at its purported purpose is a good argument for doubling down on it. California just passed Prop 63, and expanded assault weapons definitions, and new ammunition restrictions, and red flag laws, and various other gun control measures in the last few years, yet here we are. It's almost like adding insane amounts of gun laws on top of insane amounts of gun laws don't actually prevent gun crime.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2019 20:54
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:The shooter already violated the law simply by bringing the gun into California. What makes you believe that a federal law would be any better enforced, given that it's been rather comprehensively demonstrated that we cannot check the flow of illegal liquor, drugs, or immigrants across our borders?
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2019 21:10
|
|
|
Infinite Karma posted:It's almost like there are organized forces on the political right actively undermining gun control, and states other than California wielding their power to make those laws unenforceable. Also you're a loving racist for acting like this has anything to do with smuggling, immigration, or the drug war. I disagree that pointing out that prohibition failed, the drug war has failed, that Trump's illegal immigration crackdown is in the process of failing, and that there is absolutely no reason to believe that attempts to limit cross border firearm smuggling would go any differently, is somehow racist.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2019 21:27
|
|
|
I don't think most mass shootings are heat of the moment decisions and so I doubt bans on rifles etc really do much because someone who is already premeditating mass murder isn't going to care that the gun is illegal. If you want to address gun violence, well most of it happens with handguns and with 1-2 people shot. But fixing that would require a total unfucking of the drug war and poverty in general.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2019 21:31
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:I know you're being deliberately obtuse, but it doesn't say good things about your ideology if your argument is that it can only succeed if its most strict tenets are adopted everywhere. Yes it does. It's obvious that laws need to be at a federal level if there's wide disparities between places you can get to in an hour from where you are. quote:The shooter already violated the law simply by bringing the gun into California. What makes you believe that a federal law would be any better enforced, given that it's been rather comprehensively demonstrated that we cannot check the flow of illegal liquor, drugs, or immigrants across our borders? I mean, really, why even have laws at all, none of them ever do anything? I know you're DR but it's still fun to make fun of the absolutely hilarious arguments you try to keep trotting out. It's not as if other ammosexuals aren't as dim as you, in earnest.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2019 21:41
|
|
|
Wow, DR arguing that we should use the ag checkpoints to also search for illegal guns and ammo. Good idea!
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2019 22:16
|
|
|
Guns are essentially unstoppable and will be continued to be used for terrible things is the anti-gun argument I didn't expect DR to be making but I'm here for it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2019 22:20
|
|
|
I prefer the formulation of, "playing whack-a-mole trying to outlaw people having the means to harm each other instead of addressing the reasons they want to harm each other in the first place is poor public policy, doomed to failure, and only serves to make criminals out of people who weren't harming anyone."Jaxyon posted:Yes it does. It's obvious that laws need to be at a federal level if there's wide disparities between places you can get to in an hour from where you are. Jaxyon posted:I mean, really, why even have laws at all, none of them ever do anything? Trabisnikof posted:Wow, DR arguing that we should use the ag checkpoints to also search for illegal guns and ammo. Good idea! Why are you so certain that, after 30 years of failure in California, doubling down on the same ideas again will work this time? Dead Reckoning fucked around with this message at 22:43 on Jul 31, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2019 22:40
|
|
|
That dude that shot up the ICE facility just built his gun out of parts.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2019 22:42
|
|
|
Moridin920 posted:That dude that shot up the ICE facility just built his gun out of parts. Pretty sure that martyr firebombed its operational buildings and only shot at cops who came to defend the concentration camp. Or have I misheard?
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2019 23:14
|
|
|
I agree, tight gun regulation at the federal level is the best path forward.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2019 23:19
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:I prefer the formulation of, "playing whack-a-mole trying to outlaw people having the means to harm each other instead of addressing the reasons they want to harm each other in the first place is poor public policy, doomed to failure, and only serves to make criminals out of people who weren't harming anyone." Can you spell this one out for us simple folk Like it sounds like you're signaling "it's not guns, it's mental health!" but you come in and poo poo on universal health care whenever it comes up. Or are you saying open carry would have prevented this?' e: The motivations of mass shooters are really varied so I honestly don't understand. please help
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2019 00:03
|
|
|
Cup Runneth Over posted:Pretty sure that martyr firebombed its operational buildings and only shot at cops who came to defend the concentration camp. Or have I misheard? Yeah I think so and I mean good for him; I was just commenting on the sourcing of guns chat.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2019 00:04
|
|
|
The Wiggly Wizard posted:Can you spell this one out for us simple folk Can't you read his avatar, man?
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2019 00:13
|
|
|
The Wiggly Wizard posted:e: The motivations of mass shooters are really varied so I honestly don't understand. please help
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2019 00:13
|
|
|
other countries with way lower rates of gun violence and death, simultaneously have much stricter gun laws, and much better health care. I think there are surely additional factors, including pervasive and insidious nationalism and military fetishism in the culture, a couple centuries of the american myth of the self-sufficient pioneer type man + half a century of lionizing the gun-toting cowboy that makes huge numbers of people believe (falsely) that gun ownership is fundamental to being an indepenant, powerful, free american, and of course the exploitation of fear by the gun industry and lobbyists to market gun ownership as self-protection to the masses despite all evidence that ownign guns actually puts people at higher risk than not. basically, for a variety of reasons, we're overly terrified of one another, people deeply connect gun ownership with patriotism, and we give too much power to gun interests, plus we're awash in untreated or undertreated mentally ill, impoverished people with little or no social safety nets. And then yeah it's easy to drive across a state line to buy a high-powered semi-automatic rifle. Aaaand, most gun deaths are suicides, which is mostly done with handguns. So restricting access to the scary looking long guns fetishized by the always-wears-camouflage hoorah set can't make a large impact on the gun death rate. We're having way too many mass shootings, but mass shootings still only account for a tiny fraction of overall gun deaths. We still don't really want those mass shootings to continue, though! And there's no sporting or self-defense justification for permitting private ownership of those kinds of guns.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2019 04:29
|
|
|
The Wiggly Wizard posted:Can you spell this one out for us simple folk I don’t agree with dead reckoning on this policy, but this statement is not actually false. According to most criminologists the variable most strongly related to crime rates, including violent crime, is the likelihood that a person committing a crime is caught, or at least the perception of the likelihood of being caught. So putting more cops on the street, increasing the size and scope of the surveillance state, and convincing people to report more crimes, are more likely to reduce homicide than new gun laws. Also policies that eliminate black markets for drugs like drug legalization are likely to reduce violent crime rates, because it allows black market participants to settle disputes in courts instead of with violence. Now bear in mind that is not an argument against gun regulation. It is just that gun regulation is probably not the policy with the most power to reduce homicide. You might also disagree with putting surveillance cameras everywhere even if it is likely to reduce crime, there are other considerations after all. Allowing people to get their cocaine and opiates from a legal clinic instead of on the street really seems like a no brainer to me though, it would instantly solve so many problems related to violent crime.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2019 15:59
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:And there's no sporting or self-defense justification for permitting private ownership of those kinds of guns. The police have them so I should be able to also.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2019 16:33
|
|
|
I'm sorry, i misspoke earlier. What I meant to say was ban all gun owners. Thank you for coming to my ted talk.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2019 16:40
|
|
|
Moridin920 posted:The police have them so I should be able to also. We should take them away from the cops too, precisely
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2019 17:01
|
|
|
Squalid posted:I don’t agree with dead reckoning on this policy, but this statement is not actually false. According to most criminologists the variable most strongly related to crime rates, including violent crime, is the likelihood that a person committing a crime is caught, or at least the perception of the likelihood of being caught. So putting more cops on the street, increasing the size and scope of the surveillance state, and convincing people to report more crimes, are more likely to reduce homicide than new gun laws. Also policies that eliminate black markets for drugs like drug legalization are likely to reduce violent crime rates, because it allows black market participants to settle disputes in courts instead of with violence. In this case there was a "heavy police presence" and the shooter was killed within a minute so nothing you contributed here applies. Thanks for outing yourself as a patriot act fuckboy though
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2019 17:42
|
|
|
The Wiggly Wizard posted:In this case there was a "heavy police presence" and the shooter was killed within a minute so nothing you contributed here applies. Thanks for outing yourself as a patriot act fuckboy though I was not talking about this specific mass shooting. Obviously you can’t stop all crime with any single policy. You have to consider the big picture and look to solve systemic problems. With most mass shootings you can’t really increase the risk that the perpetrators will be caught because generally speaking they plan to die. So in these cases it’s more important to eliminate opportunity and motivation. Keep in mind however that most people who die by homicide do not die in mass shootings. So if you actually want to significantly reduce violent deaths you’re going to have to focus your policy changes on other aspects of the problem . It’s fine though if you don’t like increased surveillance. However you should acknowledge that there are trade-offs we have to make. In this case protecting your privacy might be more important to you than preventing violent deaths. This is a values judgment, there’s no empirical or scientific answer to what the right policy balance is. Dead reckoning makes other trade-offs. For example he values gun rights over reducing the suicide rate. That’s a trade off he’s willing to make, and one I disagree with. That disagreement doesn’t hinge on facts, it’s one of ideology. If you are revolutionary who plans on overthrowing the government crime reduction may not be a priority of yours, that again is a values judgment.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2019 17:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 08:05 |
|
|
Doesn't deterrence not really work that well with regards to homicide though because most people figure they're not going to get caught slash they do it in the heat of the moment and don't care about consequences?atelier morgan posted:We should take them away from the cops too, precisely Agreed, then. Moridin920 fucked around with this message at 18:14 on Aug 1, 2019 |
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2019 18:07
|
|