Shooting in El Paso

[37L1]

Do you think your guns could stop tanks coming down your street?

Do you think your words will have a better chance?

 

[DynaLo]

You don’t think crazies getting weapons of war is a problem?

Weapons of war.. so the actual military issued those weapons to those shooters? How did they get them out of the arms rooms and off base? If they had weapon of war, why didn't they switch over to full auto or at least 3 round bursts to inflict more carnage?

 

[C-south]

Do you think your guns could stop tanks coming down your street?

Maybe I need a tank and more guns then.

 

[hog88]

The second amendment was written in 1789. Doubt it would be exactly the same if they knew how powerful firearms would become.

LOL

It would. The founding fathers would be dumbfounded at how we have allowed the 2A to be as restricted as it is.

 

[C-south]

Or the internet and how does that effect the First Amendment?

Depends on the mod.

 

[Smartvol17]

Do you think your words will have a better chance?

If we have let America get to that point then there’s no chance in that situation.

 

[37L1]

Yeah, guns overwhelmingly do more harm to our society than any good they may provide.

Says you. You don't like guns, you don't own guns, you are afraid of guns, you have never been the victim of a serious crime.

As you can tell I respectfully disagree.

 

[SLICKYINC]

The second amendment was written in 1789. Doubt it would be exactly the same if they knew how powerful firearms would become.

But wait, firearms of 1789 were the exact same for both “civilians” and the military. Yet today civilians can’t own the same weapons that the military uses. Weird stuff man. It’s almost like our .gov has already taken away some of the right the 2nd amendment meant to fix.

 

[Smartvol17]

LOL

It would. The founding fathers would be dumbfounded at how we have allowed the 2A to be as restricted as it is.

They would support since we don’t just use muskets anymore!

 

[37L1]

If we have let America get to that point then there’s no chance in that situation.

Good thing our Founding Fathers had something you are apparently lacking.

 

[Smartvol17]

But wait, firearms of 1789 were the exact same for both “civilians” and the military. Yet today civilians can’t own the same weapons that the military uses. Weird stuff man. It’s almost like our .gov has already taken away some of the right the 2nd amendment meant to fix.

So civilians should have nukes then? Wild take

 

[hog88]

If we have let America get to that point then there’s no chance in that situation.

Do you realize that it wasn't very long ago that access to guns was much easier than it is today. You could buy semi-auto rifles from mail order catalogs and have them mailed to your house, no background checks at all. Guns aren't the problem, people are the problem so we need to start there.

 

[Smartvol17]

Well apparently they’re still too easy to access.

 

[hog88]

They would support since we don’t just use muskets anymore!

By your logic the founding fathers wouldn't have written the first amendment the way they did because of the internet.

They were brilliant men that knew technology would advance.

 

[hog88]

Well apparently they’re still too easy to access.

No they're not.

 

[hog88]

So civilians should have nukes then? Wild take

Luther alternate...

 

[C-south]

Well apparently they’re still too easy to access.

Criminals find ways to get a lot of things.

 

[ajvol01]

Well the average person shouldn’t be able to get one either.

Read the 2nd amendment

 

[37L1]

Well apparently they’re still too easy to access.

How so?

And what would you do to get rid of all the "assault weapons" (hah) that are currently in circulation?

Before you go there you should read up on the latest SCOTUS rulings on this subject.

 

[DynaLo]

The second amendment was written in 1789. Doubt it would be exactly the same if they knew how powerful firearms would become.

So your theory is that the founding fathers, who took up arms for independence, wouldn't have loved to have had more powerful firearms and would have written 2A differently if they would have know more powerful firearms would eventually exist?

 

[RavinDave]

He's not offering a buy back. His plans is to "imminent domain" them. Declare possession illegal and pay you what he says they are worth.

That sounds more like what I would expect from Bernie.

 

[InVOLuntary]

LOL, I see.

Is it your assertion then that people shouldn't be threatened by open carry because taxis and pressure cookers are "open"?

I see you are still grasping. I bet you feel threatened when you see a Muslim out in public. Just because someone has gun doesn't mean they are a threat. How judgmental of you.

 

[InVOLuntary]

I've said nothing about any other poster. I simply addressed your points and you have yet to respond with anything other than meaningless nonsense. You simply can't support any of your claims yet prance around like they're brilliant facts.

Your initial response to me was your white knight response to a post I made about Luther. You don't even know what your arguing about. You're just being your normal ass self.

 

[joevol33]

OK. For the 11th time, there is no evidence that the Dayton shooter's politics motivated him to do what he did. In contrast, there is overwhelming evidence that politics were the motivating factor for the El Paso shooter. No matter how much you ignore that reality, it is not going to change.

I've never said his views didn't, but if we're using Twitter as evidence, then you are the one picking only one story to glorify politics. They both had politics on their twitter is all I'm saying.

 

[DynaLo]

Do you think your guns could stop tanks coming down your street?

Hmm...maybe you should read some real history about our infantryman holding off Panzer units and get back to us on that.