Democrats condemn Trump, white nationalism after two mass shootings

[metisdead]

Posts containing content with no supporting links have been removed as being in violation of fair use policy.  The replies were removed as well.

 

Some off topic posts and replies were removed. 

[chokrai]

https://nationalpost.com/news/five-wounded-one-critically-in-north-toronto-club-shooting  Those damn White nationalists are shooting up Canada now. 

[Longcut]

2 hours ago, geoffbezoz said:

I will have to ask again, where are these facts ? You do understand what a fact is do you ?

Are you for real? Or are you just trolling? Can't watch U.S. news without seeing it or hearing about it.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/dayton-shooting-hit-list-rape-list-bellbrook-high-school-classmates-say-ohio-shooter-connor-betts/

 

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/aug/4/connor-betts-ohio-gunman-was-elizabeth-warren-supp/

Edited August 6, 2019 by Longcut

[geoffbezoz]

7 minutes ago, Longcut said:

Are you for real? Or are you just trolling? Can't watch U.S. news without seeing it or hearing about it.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/dayton-shooting-hit-list-rape-list-bellbrook-high-school-classmates-say-ohio-shooter-connor-betts/

 

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/aug/4/connor-betts-ohio-gunman-was-elizabeth-warren-supp/

I'm for real but you are clearly not.   In court room no news article can be taken as evidence, because simply it is not just that. But hey, you believe everything you hear as a fact then carry on in your world of unproven evidence, anyway at least it gives many of us a laugh.

Edited August 6, 2019 by geoffbezoz

[EVENKEEL]

Won't tightening up the gun laws perhaps even increase these shootings? Look at me, you stupid people, make all the laws you want....I'm still a crazy MF'er and I will get the job done. When I grew up in the 70's I had a 22 semi-auto rifle at age 12 and a 22 revolver at age 16. This is Callie I'm talking not W. Virginia. Never once did I have any thought of harming anyone except for ground squirrels and frogs. I could take my rifle on my Honda 90 scrambler drive down the road to a friends house without anyone batting an eye.

What happened???? I haven't owned a gun in years, I'm mainly overseas. 

 

As stated earlier, there's something far more sinister going on than being able to buy guns. What ever the solution is, I deep in my heart don't feel radical gun laws will change a thing.

[Longcut]

4 minutes ago, geoffbezoz said:

I'm for real but you are clearly not.   In court room no news article can be taken as evidence, because simply it is not just that. But hey, you believe everything you hear as a fact then carry on in your world of unproven evidence, anyway at least it gives many of us a laugh.

Who cares about a court room. The shooter is dead!

[Longcut]

4 minutes ago, geoffbezoz said:

I'm for real but you are clearly not.   In court room no news article can be taken as evidence, because simply it is not just that. But hey, you believe everything you hear as a fact then carry on in your world of unproven evidence, anyway at least it gives many of us a laugh.

I guess eyewitness accounts is not good enough for you. But, these are the same people that would be witnesses in the courtroom you speak of. 

[EVENKEEL]

5 minutes ago, geoffbezoz said:

I'm for real but you are clearly not.   In court room no news article can be taken as evidence, because simply it is not just that. But hey, you believe everything you hear as a fact then carry on in your world of unproven evidence, anyway at least it gives many of us a laugh.

In that case we might as well shut this part of TV down.

[Longcut]

3 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said:

Won't tightening up the gun laws perhaps even increase these shootings? Look at me, you stupid people, make all the laws you want....I'm still a crazy MF'er and I will get the job done. When I grew up in the 70's I had a 22 semi-auto rifle at age 12 and a 22 revolver at age 16. This is Callie I'm talking not W. Virginia. Never once did I have any thought of harming anyone except for ground squirrels and frogs. I could take my rifle on my Honda 90 scrambler drive down the road to a friends house without anyone batting an eye.

What happened???? I haven't owned a gun in years, I'm mainly overseas. 

 

As stated earlier, there's something far more sinister going on than being able to buy guns. What ever the solution is, I deep in my heart don't feel radical gun laws will change a thing.

Not to worry. The Democrats have a solution. "Call the President names". 

[Longcut]

13 minutes ago, geoffbezoz said:

I'm for real but you are clearly not.   In court room no news article can be taken as evidence, because simply it is not just that. But hey, you believe everything you hear as a fact then carry on in your world of unproven evidence, anyway at least it gives many of us a laugh.

You are wrong. There are exceptions to the hearsay rule when it comes to Newspaper articles.

see;

Dallas County v. Commercial Union Assurance Co

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

29 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said:

What ever the solution is, I deep in my heart don't feel radical gun laws will change a thing.

 

You mean "radical" gun laws like preventing civilians from buying (and hopefully possessing) assault rifles and automatic weapons?

 

Or does your version of "radical" also encompass legislation that would require better and more comprehensive pre-purchase background checks.... Now that's REALLY getting "radical"!!!

[albertik]

2 hours ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

No, it's the simple truth...

 

I can't say yes or no that the two specific shooters in these cases were directly motivated by Trump.

 

But I can definitely say, that Trump's inflammatory rhetoric and actions have clearly stoked the rise of racist and nationalist right-wing groups and activity.

Did his inflammatory rhetoric and actions stoke the 52+ shootings and 7 dead in Chicago over the weekend?

[marcusarelus]

3 hours ago, jonesthepost said:

The yanks have had mass shootings for many years long before Trump. They never learn that as long as any one can go and buy what ever weapon they want it will go on and on. As long as  most  of the senators in the pocket of N.G.A wackos it will not change.   

What do you do with the 400,000,000 guns in circulation in the USA.  Search every house and batter down the doors and use a crowbar to check every hollow panel in the house?  

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

17 minutes ago, albertik said:

Did his inflammatory rhetoric and actions stoke the 52+ shootings and 7 dead in Chicago over the weekend?

 I never said Trump has played a role in all shootings... Just the white nationalist-inspired ones.

 

But if you feel so bad about the Chicago murders, as any sane person should, then I presume that means you're now willing to support expanded background checks and gun control legislation at the federal level to help end this epidemic of senseless gun violence and death?

 

Edited August 6, 2019 by TallGuyJohninBKK

[EVENKEEL]

8,000,000 or so AR-15's owned in the USA. How would you go about confiscating all those guns? The Vegas shooting was first to use a fully auto weapon. 

 

Better background checks to weed out the nutters couldn't hurt.

 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2018/02/14/ar-15-mass-shootings/339519002/

[albertik]

1 minute ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 I never said Trump has played a role in all shootings... Just the white nationalist-inspired ones.

 

But if you feel so bad about the Chicago murders, as any sane person should, then I presume that means you're now willing to support background checks and gun control legislation at the federal level to help end this epidemic of senseless gun violence and death?

 

I do. But my prior post was trying to point out that the Chicago homicides do not provide any political capital for the Liberals or the Liberal media.

[mikebike]

2 hours ago, geoffbezoz said:

I'm for real but you are clearly not.   In court room no news article can be taken as evidence, because simply it is not just that. But hey, you believe everything you hear as a fact then carry on in your world of unproven evidence, anyway at least it gives many of us a laugh.

Have a look around... I don't see a courtroom. You are in the forum of public opinion where rarely do we see the DNA. Fingerprints have to do...

[Jim1000]

As a fairy normal and balanced individual I wonder  if I would  feel better if I were shot by a radicalized white supremacist or a radicalized

Muslim Islamist ?

[Longcut]

2 hours ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

You mean "radical" gun laws like preventing civilians from buying (and hopefully possessing) assault rifles and automatic weapons?

 

Or does your version of "radical" also encompass legislation that would require better and more comprehensive pre-purchase background checks.... Now that's REALLY getting "radical"!!!

Civilians cannot buy automatic weapons without a Federal permit.

[Longcut]

5 hours ago, Cryingdick said:

Also as probably the only person here who has bought a gun in the USA in the past 6 months on TV I know there are background checks already. When you go to buy a gun you are given a form. If you answer that you smoke weed for example you will be denied. Even though it may be legal in your state the gun laws are the feds. 

 

They ask about your medical history and if you have been hospitalized in the past and of course if you are a felon or a fugitive. Both political parties are acting like this doesn't exist already. 

 

The gun dealer sent the application to the FBI over the computer for review and the ATF for approval. It came back with a white piece of paper printed from the dealers computer. The paper simply had a couple details like my name and the word "pending".

 

So I went on my trip and left it at that. When I came home I went to visit the gun shop and there was a white paper with my name and it said "proceed." That's all it said. 

 

If Pelosi is serious and her squad is with her they should push for a full out ban because this background check game will never work. You can may be spot some crazies with the previous record but you will never catch those with access to firearms whose mentality may change later.

 

Go the tough on crime route to begin with and make any transport of a weapon illegally a very serious matter. You have the right to own and transport a weapon but during transport it must be unloaded and broke down. This is standard but make the penalty 20 years for any violation of gun laws period. This wouldn't infringe upon the second amendment. Add life in prison if a clip is used that carries more than 6 rounds. Any gun offense in a public area outside of your home or a licensed range becomes a very severe penalty. You could eliminate a lotto posers and wannabes. 

 

I think any crime committed using a gun should be considered an argument for life without parole. It isn't a cure however I feel that some of what I am saying could be implemented with out much difficulty until a broader solution can be ratified through the court systems. 

 

There is probably some sick bastard in El Paso that will open carry an AR 15 near a Walmart and post it to YouTube. Make this sort of senseless display illegal. Start with a ban on semi-autos by first banning guns that have that assault rifle look, they all do the same thing but the AK and AR15 are the fashionable gun of choice for psychotic idiots. A law that says firearms can not resemble or emulate a member of the military might have a better chance than an outright ban.

 

A complete gun ban is not in the cards anytime soon but you can put teeth in to what exists already. 

 

 

I bought my first AR-15 at Walmart.

[Longcut]

On 8/5/2019 at 9:10 AM, Thaifriends said:

Many people dont want or does not know history. First amendment is to protect citizens. If you disarm citizens, then arm gangsters, thug police and all enforcenent agencies who may all turn against or supress you then "what would you do"? Give them flowers?

First 

amendment is freedom of speech. ????

[Longcut]

On 8/5/2019 at 10:06 AM, newnative said:

   No one is taking away your 'gun'.  That will never happen in America.   But, do you need a high-capacity assault rifle?  Do you need high-capacity magazines?  Do you need bullets that will pierce police protective vests?  Do you need to own 20 guns when you only have 2 hands?  Most gun control advocates are only looking for a little sanity with the gun laws--and having a difficult time just with that.  

The reason the second amendment exist. Is for protection from an oppressive government. Not for hunting. So yes. If the government has high powered rifles with high capacity magazines. Then the populace should have them too.

[newnative]

10 minutes ago, Longcut said:

The reason the second amendment exist. Is for protection from an oppressive government. Not for hunting. So yes. If the government has high powered rifles with high capacity magazines. Then the populace should have them too.

555  I guess you'll be wanting a nuclear weapon, too, since the government has them.

[bristolboy]

21 minutes ago, Longcut said:

The reason the second amendment exist. Is for protection from an oppressive government. Not for hunting. So yes. If the government has high powered rifles with high capacity magazines. Then the populace should have them too.

Where did you come up with that idea. The reason for the 2nd amendment is stated right in the Amendment: 

“A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

It's all about a well regulated militia.  This was in the days before police and before standing armies. Nothing at all to do with your nonsense about an oppressive government. A militia was useful when certain freedom loving Americans decided to rebel because of an imposition of a tax on whiskey. Actually one of the main uses of militias was to suppress certain freedom loving people from rebelling. You know, the slaves.

[mogandave]

It is interesting that the same people that call Trump a tyrant, want to take away the only means of resistance the citizenry has to a tyrant. 

 

 

 love the "atomic bomb" analogy, as if the secret service is going to throw atomic bombs out onto the mall to stop the riots. 

 

Something over 50% of the households in the US have one or more firearm. If that were true in Hong Kong I think things might be going a little differently there.

Edited August 6, 2019 by mogandave

[Longcut]

4 hours ago, bristolboy said:

Where did you come up with that idea. The reason for the 2nd amendment is stated right in the Amendment: 

“A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

It's all about a well regulated militia.  This was in the days before police and before standing armies. Nothing at all to do with your nonsense about an oppressive government. A militia was useful when certain freedom loving Americans decided to rebel because of an imposition of a tax on whiskey. Actually one of the main uses of militias was to suppress certain freedom loving people from rebelling. You know, the slaves.

You need a history lesson.

[Longcut]

4 hours ago, bristolboy said:

Where did you come up with that idea. The reason for the 2nd amendment is stated right in the Amendment: 

“A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

It's all about a well regulated militia.  This was in the days before police and before standing armies. Nothing at all to do with your nonsense about an oppressive government. A militia was useful when certain freedom loving Americans decided to rebel because of an imposition of a tax on whiskey. Actually one of the main uses of militias was to suppress certain freedom loving people from rebelling. You know, the slaves.

The Constitution was written in 1787. Slavery wasn't a concern. Since blacks were not allowed to own firearms.

[Slip]

4 minutes ago, Longcut said:

The Constitution was written in 1787. Slavery wasn't a concern. Since blacks were not allowed to own firearms.

All the more reason to give whites the right to have them.  It's called oppression.

[Longcut]

3 minutes ago, Slip said:

All the more reason to give whites the right to have them.  It's called oppression.

Apparently, you don't know the difference between history and present day.

[Slip]

9 minutes ago, Longcut said:

Apparently, you don't know the difference between history and present day.

Your post was about history.  The post you replied to was about history.  My post (in respsonse to yours) was about history.  Apparently you are confused.

Edited August 6, 2019 by Slip