Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
51% of mass shooters in 2019 were black, 29% were white, and 11% were Latino.
Comments
-
This is true.HHusky said:
I think your point is that an “established” outlet won’t be interested. But that is my point too. There’s less of a monopoly on news distribution in some ill defined “establishment” than there’s ever been in history. And speaking of getting it reported, isn’t talk radio still a thing? Conservatives own talk radio.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Yeah, you're missing the point.HHusky said:
I think conservatives tend to play the victim of “the press”. Even the term MSM implies that somehow there is a bar to conservative voices in reporting news. Obviously that’s not true.GrundleStiltzkin said:
You're most optimistic than I am.HHusky said:
It doesn’t take every press organization to shine a light on a subject. It can take as few as one.GrundleStiltzkin said:
In principle, of course. But would you honestly expect the LA Times to take up the cause of some guy's guns being illegally seized?HHusky said:
Absolutely nothing prevents an advocate of gun rights from working in the Press. It’s not a monolith; it’s a bunch of private organizations.GrundleStiltzkin said:
I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. I wouldn't presently trust the Fifth Estate to be of any help in defense of violation of gun-related civil liberties.HHusky said:
Well at some point you have to decide whether your distrust of government is so profound that you don't want background checks at all then. "Governments are instituted among men" to secure our rights, I'm told. Governments sometimes fail to do this. We have free press though.UW_Doog_Bot said:
Bc the government can be trusted to do that? It's not like they would ever mass incarcerate a minority population, or allow a group to amass weapons to intimidate another group who they denied weapons to.HHusky said:Swaye, I edited and my post disappeared, so I'll try to restate it. This is regarding your post about "red flags" and background checks.
It seems to me that every person here agrees that if he is unarmed, even for a period of days or weeks, that this very, very unlikely to ever matter. If we are arming ourselves for extremely unlikely, extraordinary events, it seems reasonable to me that we can be very cautions and deliberate in making decisions about whether an individual should be armed and can even err on the side of caution.
Hold on, there's someone from the black panthers here telling me otherwise... -
I'm more cynical about the NRA than you are. While Democrats are shitty and not making the problem better, it's not their fault that the NRA isn't doing anything to help the problems, the NRA is accountable for their actions. The NRA is there to promote gun manufacturers. That's not where they started, but that's where they have been the last 20 years.Swaye said:
The issue is, and I am not trying to make this a shit throwing thing because I have been amazed at how level headed this has been so far, is that the NRA feels attacked right now. They see themselves as the last bulwark between freedom and lunatics who hate THEM. Rightly or wrongly.2001400ex said:
The process should be easy for responsible, knowledgeable gun owners. There's got to be a way for those owners to have easy access. At the same time, people who don't have training or respect for guns, have a few more loopholes before they can exercise their rights. The thinking there is: very very few of these Mass shootings are by gun owners with the proper training. It's usually fucked up people who decide to buy a few guns with little to no barriers.GrundleStiltzkin said:And regarding background checks, my experience as a buyer has been fine. It's been far too long since I've bought a long gun but it was easy. I bought a pistol for my wife a while back, and it was simple with my CPL.
I wish the NRA would step in to fix it.
The NRA could fix this tomorrow. If they called every member of the GOP and said look, we are now for closing all background check loopholes it would be done in a day. The issue is, to me, that some Dems have so vilified the NRA (and its members) that the NRA brass would now refuse to piss on those Dems if they were on fire. I think, perhaps wrongly, that if some of the DNC toned down the rhetoric and actually tried true engagement with the NRA to work toward incremental solutions, something might get done. But in the current climate where Bloomberg and others trash them and their membership every single day, and the NRA gives it right back to them, there is zero chance of that happening.
As others have mentioned, I sometimes wonder if the gun debate is about making real changes, or just a campaign issue to keep everyone pissed off, fired up, and donating (on both sides). -
You know who trained Charles Whitman to shoot Texas students at 200 yards and taught Lee Harvey Oswald how to hit a moving target three times?
The United States Marines! That's who.
Whitman scared the fuck out of me but I was about 10 years old. It was one of the first mass shootings to enter the public mind. Nobody knew why
I blamed LBJ and his support of white supremacy but no one listened -
And those examples are very very few.RaceBannon said:You know who trained Charles Whitman to shoot Texas students at 200 yards and taught Lee Harvey Oswald how to hit a moving target three times?
The United States Marines! That's who.
Whitman scared the fuck out of me but I was about 10 years old. It was one of the first mass shootings to enter the public mind. Nobody knew why
I blamed LBJ and his support of white supremacy but no one listened -
What?2001400ex said:
And those examples are very very few.RaceBannon said:You know who trained Charles Whitman to shoot Texas students at 200 yards and taught Lee Harvey Oswald how to hit a moving target three times?
The United States Marines! That's who.
Whitman scared the fuck out of me but I was about 10 years old. It was one of the first mass shootings to enter the public mind. Nobody knew why
I blamed LBJ and his support of white supremacy but no one listened -
I disagree. It's perspective. I would say the Democrats who constantly demonize them and press for more gun control are responsible for their actions. This is absolutely a two way street. The Brady Bill started it in earnest, and the Federal Assault Weapon ban institutionalized it. That is when the DNC en masse went against the NRA, and the NRA did the same to them. It has been a hate hate relationship ever since, and neither side has any incentive to close the gap.2001400ex said:
I'm more cynical about the NRA than you are. While Democrats are shitty and not making the problem better, it's not their fault that the NRA isn't doing anything to help the problems, the NRA is accountable for their actions. The NRA is there to promote gun manufacturers. That's not where they started, but that's where they have been the last 20 years.Swaye said:
The issue is, and I am not trying to make this a shit throwing thing because I have been amazed at how level headed this has been so far, is that the NRA feels attacked right now. They see themselves as the last bulwark between freedom and lunatics who hate THEM. Rightly or wrongly.2001400ex said:
The process should be easy for responsible, knowledgeable gun owners. There's got to be a way for those owners to have easy access. At the same time, people who don't have training or respect for guns, have a few more loopholes before they can exercise their rights. The thinking there is: very very few of these Mass shootings are by gun owners with the proper training. It's usually fucked up people who decide to buy a few guns with little to no barriers.GrundleStiltzkin said:And regarding background checks, my experience as a buyer has been fine. It's been far too long since I've bought a long gun but it was easy. I bought a pistol for my wife a while back, and it was simple with my CPL.
I wish the NRA would step in to fix it.
The NRA could fix this tomorrow. If they called every member of the GOP and said look, we are now for closing all background check loopholes it would be done in a day. The issue is, to me, that some Dems have so vilified the NRA (and its members) that the NRA brass would now refuse to piss on those Dems if they were on fire. I think, perhaps wrongly, that if some of the DNC toned down the rhetoric and actually tried true engagement with the NRA to work toward incremental solutions, something might get done. But in the current climate where Bloomberg and others trash them and their membership every single day, and the NRA gives it right back to them, there is zero chance of that happening.
As others have mentioned, I sometimes wonder if the gun debate is about making real changes, or just a campaign issue to keep everyone pissed off, fired up, and donating (on both sides).
But laying all this at the NRAs feet is BS. They are certainly a party to it, but the DNC is an equal partner in the acrimony.
I do agree, as a Life NRA member and guy who got my first real professional safety training from them in the early 80's as a kid, that the NRA has strayed from their core mission the last couple of decades. That change also coincided with the AWB I might add. The NRA saw safety in money, and cozied up to the gun manufacturers as a way to increase their power. I am very much nonplussed that half the shit I receive from the NRA now is offers to buy insurance or some other bullshit. That is not their mission - it is gun safety and the last 30 years protection of the 2nd Amendment. But, they are still the best game in town to protect my rights, even if they aren't what they once were.
-
When it comes to money the NRA is not in the same league as major democrat donors who want to keep the focus strictly on guns and not anything else.
Never owned a gun or joined a group. Always been a big fan of the Bill of Rights though and never trusted the government. -
We're in that future totalitarian world right now, or at least in the initial stages of it. It always begins without notice, the frog is already in the water, with the heat cranked up to 10, but it's a big pot, so it'll take time for the frog to boil and croak.Swaye said:HHusky said:
I'd be talking to people like you, who know something about guns, about legitimate reasons why anyone would ever want own particular types of weapons. It's not immediately obvious to me why someone should have an AK-47, for example. I realize Sled wants to over throw the Deep State, but I want to talk about reality.Swaye said:
Which classes of guns would you ban, and why?HHusky said:SFGbob said:
I think guns should be difficult to obtain and retain. Some guns should simply be illegal per se. I think penalties for misuse or illegal possession be stiff. But I’m not for banning them.UW_Doog_Bot said:
Conflate and dissemble all you'd like, does anyone think you actually care about anyone beyond your immediate ideological motives?HHusky said:
If you’re saying more than common sense gun laws are required to combat terrorism, I agree. Domestic terrorism seems to be a very white phenomenon recently.UW_Doog_Bot said:
It's funny that these are both the same when discussing "common sense" gun laws but different now.HHusky said:
Yeah, when some fucker kills his whole family or a drug deal goes South, that’s exactly like a Build the Wall white dude slaughtering Hispanic shoppers in a Wal-Mart because of Replacement Theory.SFGbob said:
That's some super Kunt logic you have working there O'Keefed. We are told that most all of these mass shootings are carried out by whites. Why does it make your snatch so sore to have facts that refute that claim?HHusky said:Yes. They’re accurate. It’s also accurate to say that you, me and Tom Brady have 6 Super Bowl wins between us.
Does it challenge your narrative O'Keefed?
I'd respect you more if you were less disingenuous. At least APAG and Cdawg just come out and say what they really think.
Other than repeating above exactly what I said days ago, I never say what I really want.
So, I am not a right wing nutjob that hopes or thinks the populace will go to war with the federal government - at the same time, in some future world that I cannot even fathom right now, it could be required. And I'd like my great great great grandkids to be able to exercise their inalienable right to existence free from tyranny by fighting for that freedom with something a little more favorable than a .22 caliber pistol. So while I do not believe in my lifetime we will need to rise up and exert any force on this government, I do believe in protecting the rights of future generations to do just that in some future totalitarian world I cannot even fathom right now. We don't own these rights. We are caretakers of them for future generations because we can't know what that future will look like. And it bothers me when people are so happy to give them away for some personal safety in the present. That is why I think we should be able to keep semi-automatic rifles with large capacity magazines. Asked and answered.
'Hate Speech Laws' to overturn the right to speak freely. 'Red Flag' Gun Laws to make it easy for the state to confiscate guns, first from the 'mentally ill' but gradually more classes of people will be added to that list until eventually everyone and their guns will be a state target. 5g weaponry and surveillance installed on every block. The social credit score system is coming.
The NSA listens in on everything you say and do. The CIA engages in clandestine experiments on US citizens and attempted coups of duly elected presidents. The IRS engages in massive theft and political intrigue. They are all criminal organizations that peddle tyranny.
Unfortunately the population is too ill-informed, brainwashed and lethargic to do anything about it. They would get run over like a car, then ask the driver to please back up and run them over again. The greatest generation is gone and the backthepack generation have more in common with nazis and communists than they do with blue-blooded OG patriots like us.
Orwell would be so proud. -
As corporate interests go, the firearms industry isn't big or monolithic money. Sturm Ruger is around $500 million annually.
-
Thanks for the civil and rational conversation guys. OBK is here to remind us that all good things must end.oregonblitzkrieg said:
We're in that future totalitarian world right now, or at least in the initial stages of it. It always begins without notice, the frog is already in the water, with the heat cranked up to 10, but it's a big pot, so it'll take time for the frog to boil and croak.Swaye said:HHusky said:
I'd be talking to people like you, who know something about guns, about legitimate reasons why anyone would ever want own particular types of weapons. It's not immediately obvious to me why someone should have an AK-47, for example. I realize Sled wants to over throw the Deep State, but I want to talk about reality.Swaye said:
Which classes of guns would you ban, and why?HHusky said:SFGbob said:
I think guns should be difficult to obtain and retain. Some guns should simply be illegal per se. I think penalties for misuse or illegal possession be stiff. But I’m not for banning them.UW_Doog_Bot said:
Conflate and dissemble all you'd like, does anyone think you actually care about anyone beyond your immediate ideological motives?HHusky said:
If you’re saying more than common sense gun laws are required to combat terrorism, I agree. Domestic terrorism seems to be a very white phenomenon recently.UW_Doog_Bot said:
It's funny that these are both the same when discussing "common sense" gun laws but different now.HHusky said:
Yeah, when some fucker kills his whole family or a drug deal goes South, that’s exactly like a Build the Wall white dude slaughtering Hispanic shoppers in a Wal-Mart because of Replacement Theory.SFGbob said:
That's some super Kunt logic you have working there O'Keefed. We are told that most all of these mass shootings are carried out by whites. Why does it make your snatch so sore to have facts that refute that claim?HHusky said:Yes. They’re accurate. It’s also accurate to say that you, me and Tom Brady have 6 Super Bowl wins between us.
Does it challenge your narrative O'Keefed?
I'd respect you more if you were less disingenuous. At least APAG and Cdawg just come out and say what they really think.
Other than repeating above exactly what I said days ago, I never say what I really want.
So, I am not a right wing nutjob that hopes or thinks the populace will go to war with the federal government - at the same time, in some future world that I cannot even fathom right now, it could be required. And I'd like my great great great grandkids to be able to exercise their inalienable right to existence free from tyranny by fighting for that freedom with something a little more favorable than a .22 caliber pistol. So while I do not believe in my lifetime we will need to rise up and exert any force on this government, I do believe in protecting the rights of future generations to do just that in some future totalitarian world I cannot even fathom right now. We don't own these rights. We are caretakers of them for future generations because we can't know what that future will look like. And it bothers me when people are so happy to give them away for some personal safety in the present. That is why I think we should be able to keep semi-automatic rifles with large capacity magazines. Asked and answered.
'Hate Speech Laws' to overturn the right to speak freely. 'Red Flag' Gun Laws to make it easy for the state to confiscate guns, first from the 'mentally ill' but gradually more classes of people will be added to that list until it eventually everyone and their guns will be a state target. 5g weaponry and surveillance installed on every block. The social credit score system is coming.
The NSA listens in on everything you say and do. The CIA engages in clandestine experiments on US citizens and attempted coups of duly elected presidents. The IRS engages in massive theft and political intrigue. They are all criminal organizations that peddle tyranny.
Unfortunately the population is too ill-informed, brainwashed and lethargic to do anything about it. They would get run over like a car, then ask the driver to please back up and run them over again. The greatest generation is gone and the backthepack generation have more in common with nazis and communists than they do with blue-blooded OG patriots like us.
Orwell would be so proud.
