Public Shooting and GC Thread: Active Shooter reported at LAX

With all these mass shootings popping up, I wonder when young white males will start getting profiled. Hmmmm…:coffee:

Never.

God I hope so, paying for college sucks.

I dunno, I saw quite a op-eds urging people to not let the Patriot Act pass.

Can you blame them? Mass killings, spree killings, and assassinations/attempts by lone individuals are almost always carried out by white males, usually in their 20s.

Then again, we’re also the most awesome of all the demographics, which is why we’re in the most movies, TV shows, and successful rock bands. Perhaps this has a balancing effect. :coffee:

I’ve got to post this some where, I’m choosing your post simply because its in view of the topic that’s grating me at this point. All over FB I got people bitching on both sides of the gun argument and its gotten fucking STUPID. Pardon my language, but its just grown frustrating how stupidly stubborn people get.

"I have the right to protect my family"
Great. You have the right to get a gun appropriate for protecting your family, getting licensed for the shit, practice the shit so you don’t have a fucking accident blowing a family member away.

Why the FUCK do niggas think they need some amped up shit? How many rounds does it take to protect your family? How many shots do you have to get off quickly? Its like when ignant ass rappers talk about “I got a thousand guns” - idiot it only takes ONE gun, with ONE bullet to put a perp down. If you have to actually learn how to use it effectively then good. the shit should not be so ‘fire and forget’.

My brother in law collects guns and goes hunting, he doesn’t need amped up shit for that. Hell he even has a gun for shooting arrows - and I thoroughly approve that shit, no problem with his gun collection. A ban won’t affect him. It won’t affect his ability to hunt. It won’t affect his ability to protect his family.

"Well someone who wants to do something illegal can still do it"
True.
"Well someone can kill with just a handgun"
True.

But the point isn’t to zero it out. Its to stop unstable mofos who ‘snap’ from grabbing shit off the shelf and mowing down a family. The idea of something being illegal still being possible isn’t the point - its deterring the low level folks - just like piracy, anyone who wants to get some shit that’s in theaters now can get it if they know what they are doing, but the MPAA doesn’t worry about some random 50 year old lady getting online, googling the movie once and on the first link DLing their movie. If I want ot steal your car and see an alarm - I pause. If someone REALLY wants to steal your car, nothing you can do wil lstop them as there is always a way, but if that blinking LED and horn deters everyone else, then the shit has done its job.

The whole fucking gun thing is just idiotic. I’m seeing shit like this massacre and think about nothing but what if my son was in school and some shit pops up. Do you think I’d give a flying fuck about liberties declared in a WAY over-dated document? How many people who have guns to protect themselves even actually need that shit? How often is someone going to break into your house with you there? There is a higher chance of some negative shit happening than of you actually using your gun for its intended purpose.

But its a liberty :rolleyes:. Or ‘there is more to it than what the average person knows about’.

It doesn’t fucking matter at ALL. Its unneccessary, and nothing can convince me otherwise - its typical American overkill. Whats the point in a car that can accelerate to 60 in 3 seconds if you are always behind someone?

The shit has just grown sickening. Again - I’ve got no issue with the concepts at hand, but I’ve got a major issue with the ‘political creep’ associated with gun control laws. If you want a gun to protect your fam go ahead! I’ve really got no problem, but outside of firing reliably, there is NO reason to step up to anything that can fall into the assult weapon category. If you think you need more shots, then you need more practice.
/rant

  • :bluu:

Revision is one thing… but I’ve heard random things about prohibiting guns period… and then vilifying those that simply like to collect guns… “we use to call those that have multiple guns, ‘gun nuts’, but now we have dropped the term and instead call them gun enthusiast” ~Stupid Bitch on radio(we should start replacing euphemisms with dysphemisms and stop calling them what they are(‘gun collectors’) and makes a wild assumption that you have to be crazy to have a gun)…

And the masses are responding to arguments such as these as a reason… it’s easier to play on emotions and public sentiment to push laws through that do not address a specific problem… the problem is those with questionable mental health gaining access to firearms, not the ability to have firearms period…

I’ve never used a firearm, or owned one… and it is definitely not legal for me to have one… however if I wanted to, the purchase of a firearm is only a couple of phone calls away for me… how would regular people defend themselves from people such as me?..

Hey, nice, completely ignore the part where I talked about how one case defines the law where the other doesn’t. That’ll lead to a productive discussion that’s sure to help each of us understand the other’s position.

To repeat: drunk driving, in the U.S. anyway, tends to actually affect laws and instigate preventative action. Mass murders involving automatic weapons does not. So no, the comparison doesn’t hold water beyond “they’re both bad.”

I’m going to assume this is referring to gang violence. If not, clarify. If so:

Gangs aren’t shooting up movie theaters, elementary schools, and malls. Which isn’t to say gangs aren’t A Bad Thing™; they totally are and we must take meaningful action to prevent them from operating and obtaining weapons. It also isn’t to say gang warfare can’t catch up its surroundings in the crossfire, so don’t go there please (I know you’re itching to).

It’s either: mentally ill young men or older, sane men with a mostly-baseless vendetta against society that carry out these horrific mass murders.

Stricter gun control won’t eliminate gun violence. You can’t eliminate gun violence. Its aim is to reduce it, to make it more difficult for messed-up dudes (and I suppose the gangsters Juan and Treyvon from your bullshit example) from getting their hands on the deadliest of weapons.

A much more open-minded view on mental illness, with more government initiatives to help combat and treat it, also helps for obvious reasons.

Here’s what won’t help: “STEADY AS SHE GOES, RIGHT TO THE NEXT MASSACRE.” That’s idiotic at best.

PROTIP: Don’t make comparisons to arguments about evolution when you yourself make such backwards arguments. You’re right that “we didn’t evolve from monkeys” is a bullshit argument against evolution, but so is “but gun crime will still happen” when talking about gun control.

Yeah, and there’s another stupid bitch on the radio (I think his name is Rush something-or-other) who, without a shred of irony, was instantly telling his audience how the Democrats were probably going to politicize the Newtown shooting. That’s what stupid bitches on the radio do for a living. The gun prohibition thing is an extreme response, and a very unlikely one. Most of the actual conversation is not about this–it is just that some of the people in the conversation shout while the rest simply talk.

There are two options.

  1. Tuck themselves away in a locked room and call the cops, which is what usually happens in home invasion situations even when guns are kept in the home.

  2. Keep a gun for home defense, which is very unlikely to be used to defend against someone such as yourself and much, much, much more likely to accidentally harm a friend or a loved one.

I don’t know why people are stocking up on weapons while they can. I’m freezing the fuck out of all the loaves of French bread I can find and practicing moves with my bicycle pump. Because if my group of lovable underdog rebels *really *wants to win the next civil war, we’ll do it no matter what!

Niggas talking about gang violence?

Nigga this aint the 90’s, most dudes that fly colors don’t even give two fucks about that shit anymore, and if they do they do all they shit on the sly using broads to set niggas up with that kick door action. Shit, most people that get caught up in drive by’s are minorities anyways so I don’t see why you guys even give two fucks, that is why shit like that gets just the basic media attention lol. But let one white girl fall in a well and it’s on 5 major stations.

Anyways all that shit is drug related and drugs drive the entire prison slave labor scheme so it’s hard to fuck with that.

Plus as I stated before white folks love their cocaine, yada yada yada, that’s why they let motherfucking whole submarines that could potentially contain nuclear weapons or biological agents slip past our defenses because they containt a few thousand tons of cocaine.

if they want to put a ban on assault rifles from whenever it passes to whenever they forget about the law again and let it slide but do nothing about everyone who already owns assault rifles, or who plan to get them now since all this bruha, then whats the point of even banning them. everyone, from gun collectors, to people who just like to go shooting every now and then, are about to make the gun makers soooo much money right now, and if it wont be illegal to have them and shoot them like you have been doing, then the law will mean very little. unless they plan to make the ban retroactive, and hefty fines and jail time if you are caught shooting an “assault rifle”. which is not going to happen

not to mention the inevitable loophole that will allow the sale of semi automatic rifles through some other means thats not in store. i mean, why are they even giving a fuck now, obama sat with his thumb up his ass on the lapsed assault rifle ban, and any conversation about guns really his entire first term, and you know bush aint give a fuck. NOT TO MENTION THE GUN THAT DUDE USED WAS OKAY TO BUY EVEN UNDER THE GOD DAMN ASSAULT RIFLE BAN THAT EXPIRED AND EVEN UNDER CONNETICUTS ASSAULT RIFLE BAN. HAHA

ugh, why am i sucking myself into this. i must be bored. its not about what people need. people dont need to eat as much as they do, but they can feel free to scarf shit down their throats all day if they want. if someone enjoys shooting, collecting, and getting together to talk guns, let them be. this isnt like an epidemic of mass murders in comparison to the amount of numbers of people who actually own guns, not to mention that when assault rifles, and FULLY AUTOMATIC MACHINE GUNS are poppin off in low income neighborhoods, no one is talking about shit.

its just frustrating that humans are reactive rather then proactive. i read a beautiful article by some police officers that were talking about firefighters and how the firefighter house has so many redundancies and its like burn proof, even with all these trained professionals in it and around it. seems crazy right, like dude, why do you need all of that on top of already knowing what to do and not to do when it comes to fires and shit, because theyre smart. but you say, the school doors should be locked, all classroom doors locked, escorts to the bathroom to wait outside if you need to pee, one way in and one way out other then for recess and what not, lock the door behind you at all times when leaving (for the teachers), and people are like, WHAT THE FUCK WHY ARE YOU SO PARANOID. no you dumb ass, its called being proactive.

/rant

Fake Morgan Freeman might have been on to something…

Nah bro its true. I read that shit too. Its straight stupid to have an unarmed security guard. Saw one at the hospital yesterday while my wife was having surgery, standing out front all proud like, dude you’re just gonna be the first one to get lit up, good luck with your pepper spray.

i dont even know why people are focusing on the fact the killer used an assault rifle.
its not like he couldn’t kill 20-30 people with a hand gun.
it would just mean he’d have to carry more clips.
whether he used an AR-15 or a 45 does it really matter?
it doesn’t.
the body count wouldn’t have been any less if what he was facing off against was kindergardeners and not something like the Cong or taliban.
:rolleyes:
for americans to focus on the particular firearm he used and to think banning it is somehow gonna lower death counts from firearm murders is completely retarded.
like 1000x more people get shot by handguns than by any other firearm on a yearly basis.
a handgun is way more dangerous than a rifle or shotgun. just for the simple fact you can hide a handgun under your clothes…unlike a rifle/shotgun.

silly americans.

if you wanna ban assault rifles and machine guns…fine. but you’re not gonna lower any firearm murders unless ALL firearms are banned.

i find a 38 much much scarier than a AR-15.
coz i dunno anybody walking around with an assault rifle hidden under their t-shirt.

Time. Both reload time and response time. Both dramatically change the dynamic of the situation. Unless you honestly believe:
[LIST=1]
[]It wouldn’t be easier to take down a dude reloading a handgun than an automatic rifle.
[
]A dude would be able to kill just as many people before being stopped or police arriving.
[/LIST]

What laws??? What exactly has the American government or the American people do to make curb drunk driving?

Make it illegal to drive with a Alcohol level of .0X%? Yup that sure is stopping drunk driving.

Make it illegal to sell Alcohol to individuals under the age of 21? Yup that is definitely doing something.

Yeah, the American government already has laws regarding this.

Illegal to sell firearms to felons, whether you are a private or public dealer
Illegal to own Assault Weapons unless you are police or have the money and time to get one.
Illegal to shoot people and kill them
Illegal to sell handguns, lowers, or firearms under 17 inches of length to people under 21, or sell rifles to minors.
Pay excessive fines and face jail time if your weapons are taken from your house by your child and used in a unlawful manner.
Illegal to carry weapons inside "weapon free zones"
Illegal to buy any weapon pre 1950 and not register it with the DOJ
Illegal to own a weapon for X amount of years if convicted of a felony.

And in states like Connecticut you have mandatory mental health screenings.

The only difference between the two is that

Almost everybody likes to drink and we used education as the main tool to combat drunk driving, compared to firearms, where your camp simply wants to do away with them.

Yeah, I went there. Majority of deaths comes from gang/drug related violence. Not people shooting up theaters or schools. Majority of those guns are illegal as well, so banning Assault Weapons, which they practically are, isn’t going to do anything. You seem to think that firearms are the problem, when its not.

Go ahead and take Fully Automatic Military Grade Assault Weapons away because they are so readily available for public consumption. Let me drop by by any “Gun” store and buy me several of those. It sure going to make it harder for Juan and Treyvon to stop at their local gun store and buy the deadliest of weapons.

And you know what else won’t help?

Lets put all the guns in this ditch and burn them. That will definitely lower the gun violence in Urban areas where the majority of firearm related violence is done by unregistered firearms.

That’s lazy, intrusive, and idiotic response that doesn’t address anything.

NO, your argument is for the banning of these mythical “Assault Weapons”, of which where never used. You might want to know the difference between Assault Weapon and Semi-Automatic Weapon, and realize that “Assault Weapons” weren’t used. The only backwards argument I see is yours, you aren’t addressing the issue and want to ban something that you aren’t even familiar with, or educated. And don’t say you aren’t, its obvious you spouting “Assault Weapons” shows that you don’t know. I know its fun those words, but they aren’t doing anybody any favor.

Where I am willing to accept responsible thoughtful reform with out most respect to personal freedom, you want prohibition.

But there is inherent flaw in this thinking, and that ultimately is a large crux of the argument/debate. Yes - especially since it was kids - he could have still killed that many, but the likelihood of it drops DRAMATICALLY.

  1. Suicide guy? Yeah they empty what they got and pop themselves at the end. He wouldn’t have killed so many with a handgun - lets just be honest about that.
  2. Hand gun? Was he experienced? Would an inexperienced person with a single handgun be able to get past that many people? Compared to (what I read) a ‘high-powered’ rifle, would he have successfully fended off people who jumped at him?
  3. More clips = more time reloading = more time for someone who can do something about to do something about it

Now - you are 100% correct that focusing on the firearm is the wrong thing in this situation, the whole fight is something that’s been brewing since Obama took office and this was merely the powder keg for the anti-gun side.

I try to stay out of it because I know my personal feelings - I have an intense hatred of guns in general - but I always try and be fair to others and understand the other side of it - and I do feel I understand - my dislike is my dislike - so I don’t try and force my ideology on folks, but stop acting as though the multi-people killing power of a rifle is equivalent to that of a handgun, if that was the case, folks would go to war with just handguns - but they don’t for a reason.

  • :bluu:

I like how this woman described herself as being “self-reliant” while receiving six figure checks from her rich ex-husband.