ADVERTISEMENT

POLITICAL THREAD

How will they rule ??!

  • YES - Qualified

    Votes: 41 82.0%
  • NO - Disqualified

    Votes: 9 18.0%

  • Total voters
    50
  • Poll closed .
Basically, you can get an easy to use, quality AR that holds 30 rds and costs less than a glock pistol.

And believe it or not, this may sound crazy, but people buy guns to protect their family and property. Most people don't leave the house with their weapons. They are there just in case. Youtube people defending their homes from bad guys. Happens almost every damn day.
It is also comfortable and easy to operate and shoot. Fairly accurate id you know how to shoot and the 5.56mm round used can cause a lot of damage if it hits something solid like a bone. It begins to tumble and causes more damage, very effective weapon.
 

I concur with all of the 2nd guy's answers. Was just having this convo with a buddy of mine and it's pretty much exactly what I said.

My only question would be what constitutes "mishandles." What if, in the chaos of an active shooting, a teacher shoots at a perp and kills a student or another teacher? Is that punishable or just collateral damage?
 

A school district in Texas has been arming their teachers for over 4 years. The Argyle School Independent School District decided in 2014 to allow highly trained members of staff to carry guns on campus to prevent mass shootings.

Sheriff Paul Cairney of Argyle, Texas, described the process by which staff members can carry firearms in the school district. The Sheriff said that the staff at the school who choose to carry a firearm go through an intense round of interviews and training before they are allowed to carry on campus.

Here is the process to carry a firearm in the Argyle school district, according to a recent ABC report:

To become a school marshal, those employees must undergo extensive active shooter and firearms training with the state. They must also undergo a mental health evaluation.

They receive a school marshal designation by the Texas Commission on Law Enforcement and must renew their license every two years by undergoing the same training and evaluation.

Outside of campuses in Keene and Argyle, signs warn visitors that there are staff members who are armed and are prepared to protect children.
 
I don't know shit about guns. That's why I don't own one. I don't have the knowledge, information or education to properly handle a gun and I know that. I've shot a gun less than 10 times in my life and they were all supervised under the watch of a licensed professional. The far left seems to think that guns can sprout arms and legs and literally kill people on their own. While the far right thinks they need to pack a grenade launcher in their home in the event that a house burglar comes calling one night. I don't ever think we'll reach the point where all firearms are removed from the general public. A base percentage of our culture is far too passionate about guns to allow that to happen. I have friends with CCLs. I hang out with people who have an entire safe full of hunting rifles and handguns. However I don't know anyone (at least I don't think I do) who owns an automatic, semi-automatic, AR-15 or any sort of assault rifle. At least no one I know who wasn't in the military and trained with one as part of their daily function.

My question to those of you who are knowledgeable about guns and firearms is why would anyone need such a powerful assault rifle? For a licensed gun owner, aside from general appeal to collect such heavy duty weapons, what is the basic need to have an automatic assault rifle available to the general public?

This is not a trolling post, I am genuinely interested to get feedback from people who are more informed than me regarding firearms and why there is a need to have weapons like the AR-15 available to anyone who (ideally) follows the proper steps to obtain one.
I'm going to attempt to answer you to the best of my ability.

Let's start off with the notion that need has anything to do with owning anything, much less firearms. We live in a country that believes in individual liberty. No one has to justify why they want to own anything. You can own things, including firearms, simply because you want one.

Second, and perhaps more important, is that the 2nd amendment has nothing to do with the everyday use or need people have of a firearm. Our founding fathers were students of history. They rightly observed that governments had historically turned their military against the people in order to oppress them. They did not trust that power concentrated in a central government could not some day be misused and that power turned against our people. They went to extremes through the Constitution to limit the power of the Federal Government and create checks and balances against the misuse of power against the people. One such check against the misuse of government power is to have an armed population. They observed that governments that used the military to oppress its people generally did not have armed citizens which made it easy for the government gain control of the population. They felt that an armed population was a strong deterrent to the misuse of power. Given that, the general population needs firearms that would be sufficient to deter the government from using the military against its own people. I doubt that pistols, shotguns, and hunting rifles would be sufficient as a deterrent.
 
So how are the kids getting into the school?

That's an excellent question that not only remains unanswered in this instance - it remains to even be asked.

The kid got in somehow. Either the school let in a known threat, didn't have a secure facility, or someone else let him in.

My money is on someone else letting him in. But who? And why is this important fact not being even inquired about
 
That's an excellent question that not only remains unanswered in this instance - it remains to even be asked.

The kid got in somehow. Either the school let in a known threat, didn't have a secure facility, or someone else let him in.

My money is on someone else letting him in. But who? And why is this important fact not being even inquired about

Because it points to something else other than guns being the only problem.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bigblueinsanity
Because it points to something else other than guns being the only problem.

Bingo. It's also proof that way more people are interested in making this about politics than about solving problems.

This was the most preventable of all the mass shootings imo. At least ten different times this kid could've been stopped before he even set foot in that school.
 
27973306_2058680711016500_1642835634972747287_n.jpg
 
Bingo. It's also proof that way more people are interested in making this about politics than about solving problems.

This was the most preventable of all the mass shootings imo. At least ten different times this kid could've been stopped before he even set foot in that school.

Agree 100%
 
Bingo. It's also proof that way more people are interested in making this about politics than about solving problems.

This was the most preventable of all the mass shootings imo. At least ten different times this kid could've been stopped before he even set foot in that school.

What’s worse is a school official saw him on school grounds, and recognized who he was before the shooting. Tried to radio administration but it went unanswered.
 
That's an excellent question that not only remains unanswered in this instance - it remains to even be asked.

The kid got in somehow. Either the school let in a known threat, didn't have a secure facility, or someone else let him in.

My money is on someone else letting him in. But who? And why is this important fact not being even inquired about

Probably has something to do with lawyers.

Same reason the family he was living with came out today to make it known that they required him to buy a safe for his guns and give them the key to it....he just kept a key for himself and they didn’t know about it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bigblueinsanity

I at least got this far before it became way too much...

Tweeden’s account of Franken groping her was first amplified by a network of right-wing media, including KABC in Los Angeles, where Tweeden has a radio show, The Hill, which mobilized within hours of the release of a picture of Tweeden and Franken at a USO performance before he was a senator.

Seriously, KABC and The Hill right wing media? Also, that picture was pretty shocking and damning. I mean, I don't know this for a fact, but I think it's safe to assume that every single news organization in the country was mobilizing and reporting on it hours after its release, including NewsWeek.
 
I concur with all of the 2nd guy's answers. Was just having this convo with a buddy of mine and it's pretty much exactly what I said.

My only question would be what constitutes "mishandles." What if, in the chaos of an active shooting, a teacher shoots at a perp and kills a student or another teacher? Is that punishable or just collateral damage?

Idk what country you’re from, but here in America if you accidentally shoot somebody you just say “oops my bad” and you’re free to go.
 
My money is on someone else letting him in. But who? And why is this important fact not being even inquired about
That's a good question. Even though it appears that he wasn't exactly well liked at his school, he probably still did have a few friends there. Maybe he texted one of them to go let him in? Will be interesting to see how he came in (if we ever learn anyway). In my high school you would have to buzz in to get in. The door was always locked. I bet most schools will end up doing that.
 
I still remember when libs and msm guffawed at the president tweeting about Obama wiretapping him. And all the mentally unstable accusations that followed.

My how that took a turn



Did Franken ever actually resign? Last I heard, he planned to. Then gave a tirade induced speech about planning to.

Didn't know if he ever actually did it
I think he did the first week of January.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bigblueinsanity
You honestly cannot ask a question on here without being accused of having some sort of ulterior motive. For the parts of the replies that were not sarcastic or agitated, much appreciated.
Your questioning needs to be more to your point. Again, define Assault Rifle for me to get perhaps a better answer.

Then again, just because you did not get the answer you were looking for does not mean you were being accused of an ulterior motive. Perhaps you did not understand the responses.
 
Democrats, liberals, talking heads and the media keep using the excuse that the reason the Obama administration didn't say/do anything about Russian meddling is because they didn't want to come off as partisan and/or putting a thumb on the scale for Hillary.

That's a flat out lie. According to the indictment, Russian meddling started in '14, and according to several media reports the Obama administration was aware of it in early '15, before Trump even announced he was running. They had more than a year before the general election to say/do something about it.
 

I’m sure Dems would love to lower the age of voting, which would just be another group of moronic kids like we have in college who vote the way their professor tells them to.

If you spend your entire life in public school and live on social media and don't have to do adult things, of course you're going to be a Democrat. Although, I wasn't registered to vote, I was no different at that age.

But 16 is laughable. I think even 18 is idiotic considering no 18 year old supports a family or has a career or is even individually capable of taking care of themselves these days so I think it's BS that adults can have their lives impacted by morons who still have their parents pay their bills. Unless you were in the military, I'd prefer the voting age to be pushed up to 25.


Democrats, liberals, talking heads and the media keep using the excuse that the reason the Obama administration didn't say/do anything about Russian meddling is because they didn't want to come off as partisan and/or putting a thumb on the scale for Hillary.

That's a flat out lie. According to the indictment, Russian meddling started in '14, and according to several media reports the Obama administration was aware of it in early '15, before Trump even announced he was running. They had more than a year before the general election to say/do something about it.

Yeah, Obama was real tough on other countries and he was totally serious when he said, "You better not cross that line." Haha.

This mother effer empowered ISIS and Iran. No one was a bigger pussy than Obama. Whether that was intentional or not, I don't know.
 
Last edited:
So, basically, fix NICS, enforce existing laws on the books, make sure said laws are being complied with on a state and federal level and address bump stocks.

Since it's basic part of the Democratic Party platform to always blame someone else instead of self analyzing, I'm not surprised that these people can never look in the mirror and wonder...

"Hey, why do these cities that we have run for decades still look like a dump and have a high amount of violent crime?"

"Why are minorities (not Asians..lol) still in these ghettos despite us claiming to help them for years?"

"Why are there more school shootings in schools that we have completely taken over in every single way? Why is there more effed up kids mentally on psych meds that love violent forms of entertainment and don't have a moral compass?"

"Why are there more broken homes and messed up kids after all of our talk about the patriarchy, third wave feminism and men being worthless and to whore around as much as possible?"

Frankly, there's not a damn thing I would listen to Democrats about unless it was how to brainwash someone and steal from someone with no conscience about it.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT