https://www.wthr.com/article/news/local/multiple-victims-reported-in-shooting-at-greenwood-park-mall/531-df15bbf5-8eca-4220-b149-7de4735fbe37 (https://www.wthr.com/article/news/local/multiple-victims-reported-in-shooting-at-greenwood-park-mall/531-df15bbf5-8eca-4220-b149-7de4735fbe37)
Shooter killed by Good Samaritan
Quote from: lawdog77 on July 18, 2022, 07:42:54 AM
https://www.wthr.com/article/news/local/multiple-victims-reported-in-shooting-at-greenwood-park-mall/531-df15bbf5-8eca-4220-b149-7de4735fbe37 (https://www.wthr.com/article/news/local/multiple-victims-reported-in-shooting-at-greenwood-park-mall/531-df15bbf5-8eca-4220-b149-7de4735fbe37)
Shooter killed by Good Samaritan
In today's America, "only" four people dead and two injured because of our dumb gun laws is apparently cause for celebration, at least among the wingnuts. I'm guessing the victims' loved ones would have much preferred the killer never gotten a gun in the first place than this outcome.
And, remind me, in which part of Jesus' parable did the Good Samaritan blow away the robbers?
Quote from: Pakuni on July 18, 2022, 08:53:42 AM
In today's America, "only" four people dead and two injured because of our dumb gun laws is apparently cause for celebration, at least among the wingnuts. I'm guessing the victims' loved ones would have much preferred the killer never gotten a gun in the first place than this outcome.
And, remind me, in which part of Jesus' parable did the Good Samaritan blow away the robbers?
Well, we don't have the details yet about the killer. How'd he get the rifle etc, but the Good Samaratin was legally carrying a handgun, so skip over that part, I guess. I would think you could see the nuance Pakuni.
Lock I am before you are in dare I say hallelujah
Quote from: lawdog77 on July 18, 2022, 09:16:02 AM
Well, we don't have the details yet about the killer. How'd he get the rifle etc, but the Good Samaratin was legally carrying a handgun, so skip over that part, I guess. I would think you could see the nuance Pakuni.
I would argue he is seeing the nuance.
Another mass shooting. But it could have been worse, so high five.
Quote from: MUBurrow on July 18, 2022, 09:59:27 AM
I would argue he is seeing the nuance.
Nobody is forgetting people needlessly lost their lives.
Quote from: lawdog77 on July 18, 2022, 10:03:49 AM
Nobody is forgetting people needlessly lost their lives.
If you carry the "good guy with a gun" narrative to its logical conclusion, it requires that you accept large numbers of people needlessly losing their lives.
Quote from: MUBurrow on July 18, 2022, 10:07:22 AM
If you carry the "good guy with a gun" narrative to its logical conclusion, it requires that you accept large numbers of people needlessly losing their lives.
That's not how I see it. I see it as, there is a huge gun problems, but getting rid of all guns is a BAD idea.
Quote from: lawdog77 on July 18, 2022, 10:11:12 AM
That's not how I see it. I see it as, there is a huge gun problems, but getting rid of all guns is a BAD idea.
You are entitled to your opinion and we've had this debate multiple times here already. But I don't think it was a fair characterization that Pakuni's opinion lacks nuance.
Quote from: lawdog77 on July 18, 2022, 10:11:12 AM
That's not how I see it. I see it as, there is a huge gun problems, but getting rid of all guns is a BAD idea.
It would actually be a great idea, but it will never happen. Hell, a 90% reduction (which also will never happen) would still leave, what, 40 to 50 MILLION guns floating around?
Quote from: MUBurrow on July 18, 2022, 10:12:39 AM
You are entitled to your opinion and we've had this debate multiple times here already. But I don't think it was a fair characterization that Pakuni's opinion lacks nuance.
We will agree to disagree then.
Quote from: lawdog77 on July 18, 2022, 10:11:12 AM
That's not how I see it. I see it as, there is a huge gun problems, but getting rid of all guns is a BAD idea.
If you got rid of all guns, there would have been zero dead. Surprised you think 3 deaths is better than zero. ?-(
Quote from: brewcity77 on July 18, 2022, 10:25:59 AM
If you got rid of all guns, there would have been zero dead. Surprised you think 3 deaths is better than zero. ?-(
Self defense. An intrufer comes into a 21 year old females apartment with the intent to rob and/or rape. Getting rid of all guns, is a BAD idea.
Quote from: lawdog77 on July 18, 2022, 10:32:34 AM
Self defense. An intrufer comes into a 21 year old females apartment with the intent to rob and/or rape. Getting rid of all guns, is a BAD idea.
Well if people who commit crimes with guns would just commit crimes with knives or other weapons if guns were banned, wouldn't 21 year old females who self defend with guns just self defend with knives or other weapons?
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on July 18, 2022, 10:38:33 AM
Well if people who commit crimes with guns would just commit crimes with knives or other weapons if guns were banned, wouldn't 21 year old females who self defend with guns just self defend with knives or other weapons?
Unrealistic, and even if the intruder didnt have a weapon, what type of self defense do you think this 21 year old female could use realistically?
Quote from: lawdog77 on July 18, 2022, 10:45:35 AM
Unrealistic, and even if the intruder didnt have a weapon, what type of self defense do you think this 21 year old female could use realistically?
I am less serious about the second part of that that sentence than anti-gun responsibility conservatives are about the first part of that sentence. Both parts are illogical.
Imagine if Jesus had a gun? He'd still be here
Quote from: Uncle Rico on July 18, 2022, 10:59:56 AM
Imagine if Jesus had a gun? He'd still be here
https://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/2cf7d22a-67fe-4a67-83f8-aabc5dc1a0ce
Mods, please lock. Politics and religion are again focus.
Quote from: lawdog77 on July 18, 2022, 10:32:34 AM
Self defense. An intrufer comes into a 21 year old females apartment with the intent to rob and/or rape. Getting rid of all guns, is a BAD idea.
Interesting choice of a total non-sequitur dodge of the question at hand.
Statistically, it's more likely that 21-year-old female would shoot herself or another resident of said apartment than the intruder. And given the options in either scenario, getting rid of all guns would be by far the safest scenario.
Quote from: lawdog77 on July 18, 2022, 10:32:34 AM
Self defense. An intrufer comes into a 21 year old females apartment with the intent to rob and/or rape. Getting rid of all guns, is a BAD idea.
1. There is no serious, substantial effort afoot to get rid of ALL guns. This is what is referred to as a "straw man."
2. Are you under the impression that 21-year-old females sit around in their apartments locked and loaded at all times?
3. Having a gun in the home makes you twice as likely to be a homicide victim than not having a gun in the home. The odds are even greater if you're a woman.
Quote from: NCMUFan on July 18, 2022, 12:04:11 PM
Mods, please lock. Politics and religion are again focus.
MYOB.
Quote from: Pakuni on July 18, 2022, 12:30:02 PM
1. There is no serious, substantial effort afoot to get rid of ALL guns. This is what is referred to as a "straw man."
But 2 people in the thread have made the argument for it in the thread already.
No meaningful effort legislatively? Yes I agree. But to act like its not a commonly expressed sentiment and anyone thinking in response to it is just hysterical and creating a straw man is also not entirely fair.
Ive already spoken in favor of more regulation and in admiration of the policies of a number of European countries that I would support, but I can also be honest and admit that "there is no reason for guns/should be no privately held guns" is not some rare or minimally held opinion.
Quote from: JWags85 on July 18, 2022, 12:42:04 PM
But 2 people in the thread have made the argument for it in the thread already.
No meaningful effort legislatively? Yes I agree. But to act like its not a commonly expressed sentiment and anyone thinking in response to it is just hysterical and creating a straw man is also not entirely fair.
Ive already spoken in favor of more regulation and in admiration of the policies of a number of European countries that I would support, but I can also be honest and admit that "there is no reason for guns/should be no privately held guns" is not some rare or minimally held opinion.
No one made that claim until lawdog brought it up in this post:
Quote from: lawdog77 on July 18, 2022, 10:11:12 AM
That's not how I see it. I see it as, there is a huge gun problems, but getting rid of all guns is a BAD idea.
From that post, he very blatantly deflected away from the topic at hand to a completely fabricated straw man about a 21-year-old female that really has no relevance to the discussion at hand. The "2 people in the argument" you reference were simply responding to that post and the subsequent straw man.
Quote from: JWags85 on July 18, 2022, 12:42:04 PM
But 2 people in the thread have made the argument for it in the thread already.
Two people on internet message board
No meaningful effort legislatively? Yes I agree. But to act like its not a commonly expressed sentiment and anyone thinking in response to it is just hysterical and creating a straw man is also not entirely fair.
Ive already spoken in favor of more regulation and in admiration of the policies of a number of European countries that I would support, but I can also be honest and admit that "there is no reason for guns/should be no privately held guns" is not some rare or minimally held opinion.
Are you just trolling, Wags?
I intentionally used the phrase "serious, substantial effort" to draw a very clear line of demarcation between serious, substantial efforts and what someone says on the internet. Disappointed you couldn't catch on. More disappointed if you could catch on and wrote this reply anyhow.
Sad people died in an another mass shooting, the bazillionth in Gunmerica this year. Glad someone who knew how to use a gun intervened before it got even worse. Glad others weren't packing and just indiscriminately started raining bullets on the scene.
If only every man, woman and child had multiple guns, just think of how safe we'd all be.
Quote from: Pakuni on July 18, 2022, 01:02:18 PM
Are you just trolling, Wags?
I intentionally used the phrase "serious, substantial effort" to draw a very clear line of demarcation between serious, substantial efforts and what someone says on the internet. Disappointed you couldn't catch on. More disappointed if you could catch on and wrote this reply anyhow.
No I'm not trolling. And I'm not talking about "oh I saw a post on Twitter" from a random egg. I'm talking about hearing from friends, neighbors, coworkers, family, etc... that support the notion of no guns. That influences many people's thoughts and perspectives on sentiments cause they're not watching CSPAN.
Its unfounded, cause as we both agree, there is not "serious, substantial effort" in Congress to that end. But to act like its some baseless fairytale they only got from a Fox News talking head or some spurious internet post isn't fair either.
I don't think its a legitimate concern and I think its not a compelling fear. I also don't think the "21 year old female needs protection" angle is compelling either.
But I also don't have to be trolling to find nuance in discussion and not assume everyone is arguing in bad faith cause their perspective or experience is not completely grounded in the day to day legislative process.
Well, a 2021 Harvard Study showed women accounted for half of all gun purchases between 2019 and 2021., and that new gun owners were likely to be female. Women are also more lilely to take gun safety classes as well. So the threat of protecting themselves from bigger intruders is compelling
Quote from: lawdog77 on July 18, 2022, 01:53:20 PM
Well, a 2021 Harvard Study showed women accounted for half of all gun purchases between 2019 and 2021., and that new gun owners were likely to be female. Women are also more lilely to take gun safety classes as well. So the threat of protecting themselves from bigger intruders is compelling
Compelling for what?
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on July 18, 2022, 02:14:08 PM
Compelling for what?
That females are worried for their safety. Wags had stated that the need for females to protect themselves from intruders was not compelling (unless I misread).
First, we let women vote and then drive and then get jobs men do. Now we let them own guns? What's next? Letting them control their bodies? Not in my America
Quote from: lawdog77 on July 18, 2022, 02:16:42 PM
That females are worried for their safety. Wags had stated that the need for females to protect themselves from intruders was not compelling (unless I misread).
And yet it's wildly irrelevant to this topic. If you wanted to talk about female purchases of firearms, why not start that topic? All it is here is a straw man for you to deflect from the actual topic at hand or a take you made that you (apparently) cannot defend. According to the article you linked in the OP, the "good samaritan" was male. The only compelling thing about this entire thread is why you deviate completely from the topic at hand, which again, you started in the first place.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XbkNIoJ-9jY
Quote from: JWags85 on July 18, 2022, 01:38:38 PM
No I'm not trolling. And I'm not talking about "oh I saw a post on Twitter" from a random egg. I'm talking about hearing from friends, neighbors, coworkers, family, etc... that support the notion of no guns. That influences many people's thoughts and perspectives on sentiments cause they're not watching CSPAN.
Its unfounded, cause as we both agree, there is not "serious, substantial effort" in Congress to that end. But to act like its some baseless fairytale they only got from a Fox News talking head or some spurious internet post isn't fair either.
I'm trying hard not to put words in your mouth here, but it sounds like you're saying that a) even though there is no political/legislative movement to ban private gun ownership, b) no major gun control advocacy group (Brady, Giffords, March for Our Lives, Moms Demand Action, etc.) is pushing for a ban on private gun ownership and c) any attempt to ban all private gun ownership would clearly be unlawful barring a constitutional amendment, you think it's still a
totally reasonable concern because you know people who think there should be no guns.
I mean, OK, I guess?
I occasionally read posts on Scoop from people who want the school to bring back its football program. I guess that means it's rational to believe it's going to happen.
Quote from: lawdog77 on July 18, 2022, 01:53:20 PM
Well, a 2021 Harvard Study showed women accounted for half of all gun purchases between 2019 and 2021., and that new gun owners were likely to be female. Women are also more lilely to take gun safety classes as well. So the threat of protecting themselves from bigger intruders is compelling
A compelling argument to take all guns away from men and give them to women?
Quote from: MU82 on July 18, 2022, 03:42:26 PM
A compelling argument to take all guns away from men and give them to women?
(https://64.media.tumblr.com/04a0700f7bc3033b40141e226a602fae/tumblr_n6ichwQp2z1qaro8ho5_500.gifv)
Quote from: MU82 on July 18, 2022, 03:42:26 PM
A compelling argument to take all guns away from men and give them to women?
Seems to me that the issue isn't guns, it's men
Quote from: warriorchick on July 18, 2022, 04:08:34 PM
Seems to me that the issue isn't guns, it's men
Why the teal?
Quote from: warriorchick on July 18, 2022, 04:08:34 PM
Seems to me that the issue isn't guns, it's men
Truer words have never been spoken.
Quote from: Pakuni on July 18, 2022, 04:21:32 PM
Why the teal?
To cut down on the apesh!t reactions.
I just hope these mass shootings in Buffalo, Uvalde, Highland Park and Greenwood don't hurt Marquette's enrollment.
Quote from: brewcity77 on July 18, 2022, 02:22:49 PM
And yet it's wildly irrelevant to this topic. If you wanted to talk about female purchases of firearms, why not start that topic? All it is here is a straw man for you to deflect from the actual topic at hand or a take you made that you (apparently) cannot defend. According to the article you linked in the OP, the "good samaritan" was male. The only compelling thing about this entire thread is why you deviate completely from the topic at hand, which again, you started in the first place.
Boy, you're easily triggered. Try to follow: Burrow states good guys with guns=OK for people to needlessly lose lives=to me that means all guns are bad. I countered with taking away all guns is a bad idea, such as self defense, and I gave an example. Others countered that giving people guns is more likely to injure themselves than criminals. So that is the topic at hand.
Quote from: lawdog77 on July 18, 2022, 04:38:43 PM
Boy, you're easily triggered. Try to follow: Burrow states good guys with guns=OK for people to needlessly lose lives=to me that means all guns are bad. I countered with taking away all guns is a bad idea, such as self defense, and I gave an example. Others countered that giving people guns is more likely to injure themselves than criminals. So that is the topic at hand.
You bring up an irrelevant straw man and now that's the topic? Lol.
Quote from: lawdog77 on July 18, 2022, 09:16:02 AM
Well, we don't have the details yet about the killer. How'd he get the rifle etc, but the Good Samaratin was legally carrying a handgun, so skip over that part, I guess. I would think you could see the nuance Pakuni.
I'm not sure on the semantics involved, but weapons are not permitted at this mall. So, a law-abiding citizen should not have had one.
Quote from: jesmu84 on July 18, 2022, 05:19:22 PM
I'm not sure on the semantics involved, but weapons are not permitted at this mall. So, a law-abiding citizen should not have had one.
Lock him up
Quote from: Uncle Rico on July 18, 2022, 05:20:45 PM
Lock him up
We don't need gun control, we need to enforce the laws on the books.
In the OP Lawdog 77 merely provided a link to the story and correctly pointed out that, had someone with a concealed carry permit not intervened, the carnage could have been worse. That's all he said.
Yet the very next post started yapping about "dumb gun laws" and the like. And others tried to see who could offer more hyperbole than the last guy. So just who hijacked the thread and who is creating strawmen.?
For all you whiners and bitchers, the Second Amendment has been around for 200+ years. Deal with it.
Quote from: Dickthedribbler on July 18, 2022, 05:31:28 PM
In the OP Lawdog 77 merely provided a link to the story and correctly pointed out that, had someone with a concealed carry permit not intervened, the carnage could have been worse. That's all he said.
Yet the very next post started yapping about "dumb gun laws" and the like. And others tried to see who could offer more hyperbole than the last guy. So just who hijacked the thread and who is creating strawmen.?
For all you whiners and bitchers, the Second Amendment has been around for 200+ years. Deal with it.
And mass shootings where innocent people will be killed will be around, too. Deal with it, I guess.
Quote from: Uncle Rico on July 18, 2022, 05:35:19 PM
And mass shootings where innocent people will be killed will be around, too. Deal with it, I guess.
I am dealing with it. I'm advocating that anyone who commits ANY Felony while armed, receive a life sentence with no possibility for parole.
Quote from: Dickthedribbler on July 18, 2022, 06:12:06 PM
I am dealing with it. I'm advocating that anyone who commits ANY Felony while armed, receive a life sentence with no possibility for parole.
That'll stop them.
Quote from: Uncle Rico on July 18, 2022, 05:20:45 PM
Lock him up
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NQXOHsHkJV4
Quote from: NCMUFan on July 18, 2022, 06:23:51 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NQXOHsHkJV4
Lock him up
Quote from: lawdog77 on July 18, 2022, 04:38:43 PM
Burrow states good guys with guns=OK for people to needlessly lose lives=to me that means all guns are bad.
I mentioned it in a previous (locked) thread, and it probably won't matter, but this is an error of logic built on favoring narrative over statistics. If a person believes that what stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun, then when faced with a mass shooting, logically that person explains a cause of that shooting to be the absence of a good guy with a gun. Therefore the answer to gun violence would be to arm more good guys. This is great if your dad is a door-to-door gun salesman, but it ignores the wealth of available statistics that show the greatest predictor of gun violence is gun prevalence.
So if you believe the answer to bad guys with guns is good guys with guns, you believe in more guns. And given that data shows that more guns = more gun deaths, if you subcribe to the good guys with guns theory, then you are okay with more people needlessly losing their lives.
Quote from: Dickthedribbler on July 18, 2022, 06:12:06 PM
I am dealing with it. I'm advocating that anyone who commits ANY Felony while armed, receive a life sentence with no possibility for parole.
Why?
Many here have already pointed out that laws or punishments like you've suggested won't stop evil people from doing bad things.
I've been in Canada for the past 12 days. It's been pretty refreshing not hearing about someone being a hero for shooting and killing someone, because that person was shooting and killing more people.
The idea that America doesn't have a gun problem is wild.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highway_of_Tears
Quote from: Dickthedribbler on July 18, 2022, 05:31:28 PM
For all you whiners and bitchers, the Second Amendment has been around for 200+ years. Deal with it.
Weapons from 200 years ago? Cool, carry'em as much as you'd like.
Quote from: Dickthedribbler on July 18, 2022, 06:12:06 PM
I am dealing with it. I'm advocating that anyone who commits ANY Felony while armed, receive a life sentence with no possibility for parole.
Criminals don't care about laws.
Also, enjoy the massive tax hike. Incarceration ain't cheap.
Quote from: Dickthedribbler on July 18, 2022, 05:31:28 PM
For all you whiners and bitchers, the Second Amendment has been around for 200+ years. Deal with it.
Apologies for trying to find ways to get the USA out of the runaway leader in gun deaths spot. I have a hunch the founders would have felt something needed to change with the interpretation of the Second Amendment when confronted with this problem.
Back to the topic at hand:
But Dicken's act, though heroic, was also a statistical unicorn. An examination of 433 active shooter attacks in the United States between 2000 and 2021 showed that only 22 ended with a bystander shooting an attacker, according to data from the Advanced Law Enforcement Rapid Response Training Center at Texas State University. In 10 of those cases, the armed bystander was a security guard or off-duty law enforcement officer. In other encounters, civilians attempting to step in and stop an assailant were themselves shot to death by police.
"It is exceedingly rare, the exception rather than the rule," Adam Skaggs, chief counsel and policy director at the Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, said of scenarios like the one in Indiana. "The reality is that more people carrying guns means more conflicts escalating into deadly violence and more people being shot and killed."
https://www.yahoo.com/news/indiana-mall-shooting-one-hero-114208727.html
For the first time in my life, I found myself a little less proud of being an American last week while in Scotland. In having friendly discussions with some of the locals the mass shootings were brought up in every conversation and they knew of all of them or so it seemed. For almost 59 years I have always found a silver lining or spin to the USA's shortcomings, but I literally was at a loss of words. That said, I take solace that every person felt horribly that shootings were happening and were hoping for better days ahead in the USA. The USA needs to get our act together and get it done quickly or we might be at a crossroad that divides us for a long time.
Quote from: Pakuni on July 20, 2022, 10:52:34 AM
Back to the topic at hand:
But Dicken's act, though heroic, was also a statistical unicorn. An examination of 433 active shooter attacks in the United States between 2000 and 2021 showed that only 22 ended with a bystander shooting an attacker, according to data from the Advanced Law Enforcement Rapid Response Training Center at Texas State University. In 10 of those cases, the armed bystander was a security guard or off-duty law enforcement officer. In other encounters, civilians attempting to step in and stop an assailant were themselves shot to death by police.
"It is exceedingly rare, the exception rather than the rule," Adam Skaggs, chief counsel and policy director at the Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, said of scenarios like the one in Indiana. "The reality is that more people carrying guns means more conflicts escalating into deadly violence and more people being shot and killed."
https://www.yahoo.com/news/indiana-mall-shooting-one-hero-114208727.html
And yet this event will be the gun porn that the NRA and gun owners everywhere use to justify why they have to have their guns.
Quote from: brewcity77 on July 20, 2022, 11:25:20 AM
And yet this event will be the gun porn that the NRA and gun owners everywhere use to justify why they have to have their guns.
Individuals don't need this to justify having guns. There are plenty of studies out there that show hundreds of thousands if not millions of crimes are prevented by having a gun.
One study showed Of the 2,500,000 annual self-defense cases using guns, more than 7.7% (192,500) are by women defending themselves against sexual abuse.
Another study showed the number of times per year an American uses a firearm to deter a home invasion alone is 498,000.
Do most think that there needs to be better gun control/gun management laws? Hell yeah.
Quote from: Pakuni on July 20, 2022, 10:52:34 AM
Back to the topic at hand:
But Dicken's act, though heroic, was also a statistical unicorn. An examination of 433 active shooter attacks in the United States between 2000 and 2021 showed that only 22 ended with a bystander shooting an attacker, according to data from the Advanced Law Enforcement Rapid Response Training Center at Texas State University. In 10 of those cases, the armed bystander was a security guard or off-duty law enforcement officer. In other encounters, civilians attempting to step in and stop an assailant were themselves shot to death by police.
"It is exceedingly rare, the exception rather than the rule," Adam Skaggs, chief counsel and policy director at the Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, said of scenarios like the one in Indiana. "The reality is that more people carrying guns means more conflicts escalating into deadly violence and more people being shot and killed."
https://www.yahoo.com/news/indiana-mall-shooting-one-hero-114208727.html
The point lost on most people that use this as a shining example is the dude wasn't stopped by a civilian carrying an AR-15. So the vast majority of commonly agreed upon gun legislation wouldn't curb the "good" in this story.
Quote from: jesmu84 on July 18, 2022, 05:19:22 PM
I'm not sure on the semantics involved, but weapons are not permitted at this mall. So, a law-abiding citizen should not have had one.
Yeah, he was still legally carrying a gun. The mall had a policy of no guns, so if someone would have asked him to leave, and he did not, it would have been trespassing. Since nobody did, he was completely legal.
Quote from: lawdog77 on July 20, 2022, 01:08:50 PM
Individuals don't need this to justify having guns. There are plenty of studies out there that show hundreds of thousands if not millions of crimes are prevented by having a gun.
One study showed Of the 2,500,000 annual self-defense cases using guns, more than 7.7% (192,500) are by women defending themselves against sexual abuse.
Another study showed the number of times per year an American uses a firearm to deter a home invasion alone is 498,000.
Do most think that there needs to be better gun control/gun management laws? Hell yeah.
You sound like the "Guns don't kill people, I do" guy from UHF. This isn't enough gun porn, so you're trying to expose more of it. Adding lethal measures to a situation doesn't make those involved safer.
If I were sitting at that food court, I am eternally grateful to the citizen who took his motherfooker out and saved my life along with possibly dozens also.
Some of y'all need to get your heads out of your asses, wake up, and get the fook real. Assault weapons don't spontaneously fire. Sick and evil people pull the triggers, hey?
Quote from: brewcity77 on July 20, 2022, 01:22:23 PM
Adding lethal measures to a situation doesn't make those involved safer.
Yeah, actually it can. If the potential victim has been trained properly. Sorry you are so triggered by facts. Handguns aren't going away. We do need better background checks, a gun registry, and stricter red flag laws, though.
Quote from: 4everwarriors on July 20, 2022, 01:32:09 PM
If I were sitting at that food court, I am eternally grateful to the citizen who took his motherfooker out and saved my life along with possibly dozens also.
Some of y'all need to get your heads out of your asses, wake up, and get the fook real. Assault weapons don't spontaneously fire. Sick and evil people pull the triggers, hey?
Sick and people exist all over the world. The U.S. is the only civilized country where we allow those sick and evil people easy access to military rifles.
The chances of being saved by a "Good Samaritan" is such situations is about 1 in 40. Only a person with his head up his ass would take those odds.
If its not an assault rifle, it will be a bomb, a car, a machete, a hand grenade, poison or gas. Evil minds can find anything they want on the internet, even how to stick one's head up their own ass, aina?
Quote from: 4everwarriors on July 20, 2022, 01:32:09 PMAssault weapons don't spontaneously fire.
Exactly why we should restore the assault weapons ban.
Quote from: lawdog77 on July 20, 2022, 01:54:29 PMYeah, actually it can. If the potential victim has been trained properly. Sorry you are so triggered by facts. Handguns aren't going away. We do need better background checks, a gun registry, and stricter red flag laws, though.
The fact that matters is America is the only first world country where this is a problem. The only one. What we need is a SCOTUS that actually reads the Constitution (a militia is only legal if it is called and armed by Congress (Article I, Section VIII, Clauses 15-16) and doesn't just adhere to the wet dreams of the people that bought them off. We also need a legislation and administration willing to acknowledge that the correct action was what New Zealand, Australia, and other first world countries that suffered these types of terrorist attacks did in stripping weapons of war (which starts with handguns all the way up).
America is so big on freedom, but unless we have the freedom to go out in public without fear of the "sick and evil people" 4ever is alluding to without needing another armed killer like Dicken to provide gun porn, we will never be free.
Quote from: lawdog77 on July 20, 2022, 01:12:07 PM
Yeah, he was still legally carrying a gun. The mall had a policy of no guns, so if someone would have asked him to leave, and he did not, it would have been trespassing. Since nobody did, he was completely legal.
This is sheer ignorance, and is not how the law works. Breaking the law is still breaking the law whether or not you're caught.
By this very bad logic, I can bring a gun aboard an airplane, and unless someone asks me to leave, I'm well within the law. Wut???
I mean, read the statute. It clearly says you're guilty of a misdemeanor if you carry a concealed firearm on property you don't own without the owner's permission. Doesn't say anything about being caught or asked to leave or trespassing.
https://codes.findlaw.com/in/title-35-criminal-law-and-procedure/in-code-sect-35-47-2-1.html
Quote from: 4everwarriors on July 20, 2022, 02:08:15 PM
If its not an assault rifle, it will be a bomb, a car, a machete, a hand grenade, poison or gas. Evil minds can find anything they want on the internet, even how to stick one's head up their own ass, aina?
Oh, do tell about all the mass hand grenade and machete attacks we're seeing.
Quote from: Pakuni on July 20, 2022, 02:16:07 PM
This is sheer ignorance, and is not how the law works. Breaking the law is still breaking the law whether or not you're caught.
By this very bad logic, I can bring a gun aboard an airplane, and unless someone asks me to leave, I'm well within the law. Wut???
I mean, read the statute. It clearly says you're guilty of a misdemeanor if you carry a concealed firearm on property you don't own without the owner's permission. Doesn't say anything about being caught or asked to leave or trespassing.
https://codes.findlaw.com/in/title-35-criminal-law-and-procedure/in-code-sect-35-47-2-1.html
Hate to tell you Pak, but you are wrong.
Greenwood Park Mall's no-weapons policy is akin to a "no shoes, no shirt, no service" sign you might see at a gas station, or a sign requiring masks in order to shop, said Guy Relford, an Indiana attorney and firearms instructor who is a prominent voice on the state's gun laws. Such signs are simply stating a business owner's policy.
If a customer does not adhere to the policy, a business owner can demand that the customer leaves. And if the customer ignores that demand, the customer is now trespassing, which is an Indiana crime.
But if no one asked Dicken to leave, then he wasn't trespassing.
"So the fact that (Greenwood Park Mall) had a no-gun policy creates no legal issue whatsoever for this gentleman," Relford said, "and it certainly has no effect whatsoever on his ability to use force to defend himself or to defend the other people in the mall."
Jody Madeira, an Indiana University law professor, echoed Relford's sentiment, agreeing that Dicken may have violated Simon Mall's policy prohibiting firearms at the mall, but "he wasn't committing a crime unless they asked him to leave and he refused."
"It's disrespectful," she said of violating the mall's policy, "but it's not unlawful."
https://www.in.gov/attorneygeneral/files/Gun-Owners-Bill-of-Rights_Web.pdf (https://www.in.gov/attorneygeneral/files/Gun-Owners-Bill-of-Rights_Web.pdf)
Quote from: Pakuni on July 20, 2022, 02:17:07 PM
Oh, do tell about all the mass hand grenade and machete attacks we're seeing.
Some people need to get their heads out of their asses
Since Columbine we've had how many mass shooting instances?
The blame has changed through the years from music to video games to medication and so on.
But never the guns. It's never the guns even though that's always the weapon of choice.
It's the guns
Quote from: lawdog77 on July 20, 2022, 02:34:17 PM
Hate to tell you Pak, but you are wrong.
I'm just reading the statute.
Quote from: Pakuni on July 20, 2022, 02:46:54 PM
I'm just reading the statute.
You might want to read the updated laws. And hold off on calling someone ignorant.
https://www.in.gov/attorneygeneral/files/Gun-Owners-Bill-of-Rights_Web.pdf (https://www.in.gov/attorneygeneral/files/Gun-Owners-Bill-of-Rights_Web.pdf)
Quote from: lawdog77 on July 20, 2022, 02:47:45 PM
You might want to read the updated laws. And hold off on calling someone ignorant.
https://www.in.gov/attorneygeneral/files/Gun-Owners-Bill-of-Rights_Web.pdf (https://www.in.gov/attorneygeneral/files/Gun-Owners-Bill-of-Rights_Web.pdf)
If my reading is wrong, then I'm wrong.
But I'll never stop calling people ignorant when they're, you know, ignorant.
Quote from: Pakuni on July 20, 2022, 02:51:12 PM
If my reading is wrong, then I'm wrong.
But I'll never stop calling people ignorant when they're, you know, ignorant.
So you're calling me ignorant because I gave you an example of how the law works? You are wrong, there is no If.
Quote from: lawdog77 on July 20, 2022, 02:56:00 PM
So you're calling me ignorant because I gave you an example of how the law works? You are wrong, there is no If.
I didn't call "you" ignorant, so put away your victim card.
But if I've offended you, I apologize.
Quote from: MUBurrow on July 18, 2022, 06:38:35 PM
I mentioned it in a previous (locked) thread, and it probably won't matter, but this is an error of logic built on favoring narrative over statistics. If a person believes that what stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun, then when faced with a mass shooting, logically that person explains a cause of that shooting to be the absence of a good guy with a gun. Therefore the answer to gun violence would be to arm more good guys. This is great if your dad is a door-to-door gun salesman, but it ignores the wealth of available statistics that show the greatest predictor of gun violence is gun prevalence.
So if you believe the answer to bad guys with guns is good guys with guns, you believe in more guns. And given that data shows that more guns = more gun deaths, if you subcribe to the good guys with guns theory, then you are okay with more people needlessly losing their lives.
That's a big jump. What you fail to factor in is all the crimes prevented because people have guns. I don't believe in more guns (nobody needs more than 1). I believe that those that want guns for self defense need to be heavily vetted, trained, and put on a registry. I don't think anyone needs a gun for hunting. Bow hunting only.
just some more facts for you guys to roll your eyes at and refer to as more "talking points" and no, the source isn't one of your bibles-ny times, cnn, usatoday...
https://www.heritage.org/firearms/commentary/6-reasons-gun-control-will-not-solve-mass-killings
Quote from: rocket ALM surgeon on July 20, 2022, 03:45:21 PM
just some more facts for you guys to roll your eyes at and refer to as more "talking points" and no, the source isn't one of your bibles-ny times, cnn, usatoday...
https://www.heritage.org/firearms/commentary/6-reasons-gun-control-will-not-solve-mass-killings
I don't think anyone is saying we can eliminate mass shootings, but how about not having one every week?
rocket is a pure example of someone who only seeks out sources to reinforce his preordained beliefs. The exact opposite of what his Marquette education should have taught him.
Quote from: rocket ALM surgeon on July 20, 2022, 03:45:21 PM
just some more facts for you guys to roll your eyes at and refer to as more "talking points" and no, the source isn't one of your bibles-ny times, cnn, usatoday...
https://www.heritage.org/firearms/commentary/6-reasons-gun-control-will-not-solve-mass-killings
This is classic Rocket, a real callback to a simpler time. Air quotes, ellipses and a link to a right-wing website as absolute proof.
I give the a 9 out of 10
Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court's opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. (United States v Miller - 1939) holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those 'in common use at the time' finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons.
- Former Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, District of Columbia v Heller, 2008 (Scalia was appointed by Reagan)
The Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees a "right of the people to keep and bear arms." However, the meaning of this clause cannot be understood apart from the purpose, the setting, and the objectives of the draftsmen. At the time of the Bill of Rights, people were apprehensive about the new national government presented to them, and this helps explain the language and purpose of the Second Amendment. It guarantees, "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." The need for a State militia was the predicate of the "right" guarantee, so as to protect the security of the State. Today, of course, the State militia serves a different purpose. A huge national defense establishment has assumed the role of the militia of 200 years ago. Americans have a right to defend their homes, and nothing should undermine this right; nor does anyone question that the Constitution protects the right of hunters to own and keep sporting guns for hunting anymore than anyone would challenge the right to own and keep fishing rods and other equipment for fishing. Neither does anyone question the right of citizens to keep and own an automobile. Yet there is no strong interest by the citizenry in questioning the power of the State to regulate the purchase or the transfer of such a vehicle and the right to license the vehicle and the driver with reasonable standards. It is even more desirable for the State to have reasonable regulations for the ownership and use of a firearm in an effort to stop mindless homicidal carnage.
- Former Chief Justice Warren Burger, 1992 (Burger was appointed by Nixon)
Good evening, everybody. This here is Archie Bunker of 704 Hauser Street, veteran of the big war, speaking on behalf of guns for everybody. Now, question: what was the first thing that the Communists done when they took over Russia? Answer: gun control. And there's a lot of people in this country want to do the same thing to us here in a kind of conspiracy, see. You take your big international bankers, they want to - whaddya call - masticate the people of this here nation like puppets on the wing, and then when they get their guns, turn us over to the Commies. ... Now I want to talk about another thing that's on everybody's minds today, and that's your stick-ups and your skyjackings, and which, if that were up to me, I could end the skyjackings tomorrow. All you gotta do is arm all your passengers. He ain't got no more moral superiority there, and he ain't gonna dare to pull out no rod. And then your airlines, they wouldn't have to search the passengers on the ground no more, they just pass out the pistols at the beginning of the trip, and they just pick them up at the end! Case closed.
- Archie Bunker
Quote from: rocket ALM surgeon on July 20, 2022, 03:45:21 PM
just some more facts for you guys to roll your eyes at and refer to as more "talking points" and no, the source isn't one of your bibles-ny times, cnn, usatoday...
https://www.heritage.org/firearms/commentary/6-reasons-gun-control-will-not-solve-mass-killings
If anyone spends the time to read this, it is horrifically bad.
Heritage sold out its credibility long ago, but this is shoddy work even for them.
Quote from: lawdog77 on July 20, 2022, 01:08:50 PM
Individuals don't need this to justify having guns. There are plenty of studies out there that show hundreds of thousands if not millions of crimes are prevented by having a gun.
One study showed Of the 2,500,000 annual self-defense cases using guns, more than 7.7% (192,500) are by women defending themselves against sexual abuse.
Another study showed the number of times per year an American uses a firearm to deter a home invasion alone is 498,000.
Do most think that there needs to be better gun control/gun management laws? Hell yeah.
Do you have the sources for the studies?
Quote from: Pakuni on July 20, 2022, 05:01:00 PM
If anyone spends the time to read this, it is horrifically bad.
Heritage sold out its credibility long ago, but this is shoddy work even for them.
I think it's a spectacularly good article that Rocket cited.
Quote from: Dickthedribbler on July 20, 2022, 05:27:46 PM
I think it's a spectacularly good article that Rocket cited.
Which was your favorite part?
1. That Norway, which has had four mass shootings in its history, has a worse mass shooting problem than the United States, which has had 11 mass shootings this week.
2. Their claim that the Oklahoma City bombing proves that mass killers will just find another way.
3. Their claim that Australia's 1996 gun laws didn't work, despite the fact there's been only one mass shooting in Australia since.
Quote from: User Name #251 on July 20, 2022, 03:49:42 PM
rocket is a pure example of someone who only seeks out sources to reinforce his preordained beliefs. The exact opposite of what his Marquette education should have taught him.
what the...so tell me sully, am i supposed to seek out sources that contradict my beliefs?? MU should have taught me this?? no, MU taught me how to think, not WHAT to think. this was before the indoctrination that you and many others here must have been to weak to understand
Quote from: rocket ALM surgeon on July 20, 2022, 06:00:06 PM
what the...so tell me sully, am i supposed to seek out sources that contradict my beliefs?? MU should have taught me this?? no, MU taught me how to think, not WHAT to think. this was before the indoctrination that you and many others here must have been to weak to understand
Great post.
8 of 10
Quote from: Pakuni on July 20, 2022, 05:58:05 PM
Which was your favorite part?
1. That Norway, which has had four mass shootings in its history, has a worse mass shooting problem than the United States, which has had 11 mass shootings this week.
2. Their claim that the Oklahoma City bombing proves that mass killers will just find another way.
3. Their claim that Australia's 1996 gun laws didn't work, despite the fact there's been only one mass shooting in Australia since.
No. My favorite part is that it obviously got under your skin.
Quote from: rocket ALM surgeon on July 20, 2022, 06:00:06 PM
what the...so tell me sully, am i supposed to seek out sources that contradict my beliefs?? MU should have taught me this?? no, MU taught me how to think, not WHAT to think. this was before the indoctrination that you and many others here must have been to weak to understand
Which undergrad teacher was your favorite?
Quote from: Dickthedribbler on July 20, 2022, 06:15:14 PM
No. My favorite part is that it obviously got under your skin.
OK, Chicos.
Quote from: rocket ALM surgeon on July 20, 2022, 06:00:06 PM
this was before the indoctrination
Marquette didn't teach theology when you were there?
Quote from: Pakuni on July 20, 2022, 05:58:05 PM
Which was your favorite part?
1. That Norway, which has had four mass shootings in its history, has a worse mass shooting problem than the United States, which has had 11 mass shootings this week.
2. Their claim that the Oklahoma City bombing proves that mass killers will just find another way.
3. Their claim that Australia's 1996 gun laws didn't work, despite the fact there's been only one mass shooting in Australia since.
Nah, I personally liked the equalizing of "well, if they didn't have guns, they would just burn the whole building down like this event 50+ years ago".
Beyond all the weird event call outs, it was just WAYYYY too heavy on the whole "if we can't stop every single bad event, why bother" fallacy
Quote from: rocket ALM surgeon on July 20, 2022, 06:00:06 PM
what the...so tell me sully, am i supposed to seek out sources that contradict my beliefs?? MU should have taught me this?? no, MU taught me how to think, not WHAT to think. this was before the indoctrination that you and many others here must have been to weak to understand
If Marquette's job was to teach you how to think, they failed. Spectacularly.
Quote from: Dickthedribbler on July 20, 2022, 05:27:46 PM
I think it's a spectacularly good article that Rocket cited.
No one is surprised by this.
Quote from: rocket ALM surgeon on July 20, 2022, 06:00:06 PM
what the...so tell me sully, am i supposed to seek out sources that contradict my beliefs?? MU should have taught me this??
MU taught me this They encouraged me to seek out other perspectives, especially ones that challenged my pre-conceived notions. What did they teach you?
Quote from: User Name #251 on July 20, 2022, 09:20:24 PM
No one is surprised by this.
Not just "interesting" or "had some points I thought were decent"...but SPECTACULARLY good.
Quote from: Pakuni on July 20, 2022, 01:59:53 PM
Sick and people exist all over the world. The U.S. is the only civilized country where we allow those sick and evil people easy access to military rifles.
This has been explained to him and those like him dozens if not hundreds of times. They are incapable of processing that which hasn't been blathered endlessly on Faux.
At least some Justice is being served: https://news.yahoo.com/blm-rioter-found-guilty-murdering-123728631.html
nm
Quote from: User Name #251 on July 20, 2022, 09:19:35 PM
If Marquette's job was to teach you how to think, they failed. Spectacularly.
well they taught me to think NOT to vote for this spectacularly incompetent loser you guys put in the WH
Quote from: rocket ALM surgeon on July 21, 2022, 08:10:34 AM
well they taught me to think NOT to vote for this spectacularly incompetent loser you guys put in the WH
Pretty weak effort. 81,000,000 people voted for an incompetent loser, a 5% clear victory. That's a rout in any language. 306 electoral college votes to 232. Ouch! If an incompetent loser can pull that off, whoever he defeated must be a spectacular loser. Anyway, I give your effort a 5 out of 10. Sad!
What's with Joe and giving invisible people handshakes?
He's clearly an old, demented, Buffoon, aina?
Quote from: 4everwarriors on July 21, 2022, 08:18:19 AM
He's clearly an old, demented, Buffoon, aina?
He's a dentist?
Quote from: 4everwarriors on July 21, 2022, 08:18:19 AM
He's clearly an old, demented, Buffoon, aina?
Sleepy Joe is a MU Dental School alum?
Quote from: NCMUFan on July 21, 2022, 08:16:12 AM
What's with Joe and giving invisible people handshakes?
He's just practicing so he doesn't look like this while shaking hands...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T84se4fc4KU
He can't spell dentist if you'd spot him all the consonants. What an embarrassing, dismal failure, hey?
Quote from: 4everwarriors on July 21, 2022, 08:21:25 AM
He can't spell dentist if you'd spot him all the consonants. What an embarrassing, dismal failure, hey?
Like rocket?
Quote from: 4everwarriors on July 21, 2022, 08:21:25 AM
He can't spell dentist if you'd spot him all the consonants. What an embarrassing, dismal failure, hey?
And he has cancer! Lowest approval ratings ever.
Quote from: wadesworld on July 21, 2022, 08:20:12 AM
He's just practicing so he doesn't look like this while shaking hands...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T84se4fc4KU
He usually has cash bribes in those handshakes
Quote from: Merit Matters on July 21, 2022, 07:58:07 AM
At least some Justice is being served: https://news.yahoo.com/blm-rioter-found-guilty-murdering-123728631.html
Insecure, inadequate little racist says what?
Quote from: 4everwarriors on July 21, 2022, 08:21:25 AM
He can't spell dentist if you'd spot him all the consonants. What an embarrassing, dismal failure, hey?
It's funny that you and rocket think anyone here is even slightly bothered by your assessment of Biden. We largely agree! You'd be hard-pressed to find anyone here thought Biden was a great candidate, or believe he's been a good president.
We just think he's better than the traitorous man-baby and wannabe dictator who preceded him. It's a very low bar, to be sure, but it is what it is.
Quote from: Pakuni on July 21, 2022, 08:47:52 AM
It's funny that you and rocket think anyone here is even slightly bothered by your assessment of Biden. We largely agree! You'd be hard-pressed to find anyone here thought Biden was a great candidate, or believe he's been a good president.
We just think he's better than the traitorous man-baby and wannabe dictator who preceded him. It's a very low bar, to be sure, but it is what it is.
I guess a testament to the sad leadership in the USA. The bar is laying on the ground.
Biden is who he has ever been. Just older now. He is not an existential threat to democracy whipping up a crowd of brownshirts.
Quote from: rocket ALM surgeon on July 20, 2022, 06:00:06 PM
what the...so tell me sully, am i supposed to seek out sources that contradict my beliefs??
yeah, you should seek the truth, don't stop with just 1 POV because you agree with it, that hasn't been working too well for you here
it must suck that the truth so often contradicts your beliefs
Quote from: tower912 on July 21, 2022, 08:59:26 AM
Biden is who he has ever been. Just older now. He is not an existential threat to democracy whipping up a crowd of brownshirts.
Please, Edward Snowden pretty much revealed that the current administration is as much a threat to democracy as anyone.
Not even close. Actual planning to overturn the results of an election and being willing to incite violence to do it trumps everything.
Ok Big Brother.
LOL
LOL
"You're not going to get COVID if you have these vaccinations." - Joe Biden
Quote from: NCMUFan on July 21, 2022, 09:13:26 AM
Please, Edward Snowden pretty much revealed that the current administration is as much a threat to democracy as anyone.
Citation, please.
Quote from: Merit Matters on July 21, 2022, 09:34:32 AM
"You're not going to get COVID if you have these vaccinations." - Joe Biden
Literally no one here is defending Biden, but go off, King!
Quote from: Pakuni on July 21, 2022, 09:34:43 AM
Citation, please.
Who was VP during Obama admin?
Or was he also clueless then?
Quote from: NCMUFan on July 21, 2022, 09:37:14 AM
Who was VP during Obama admin?
Or was he also clueless then?
So, no citation?
Quote from: Merit Matters on July 21, 2022, 09:34:32 AM
"You're not going to get COVID if you have these vaccinations." - Joe Biden
Well, he misspoke. What he meant, and what the experts in his administration have said, is that it's highly unlikely you'll get very ill from COVID if you've received the vaccine and boosters.
My 96-year-old father-in-law found out Monday that he has COVID for the first time. Like Biden, he was fully vaccinated. Like Biden, being vaccinated helped him avoid COVID for all this time. Like Biden, he has only a mild case. And like Biden, he has received Paxlovid (not a horse de-wormer).
Science is great.
Now, if you want to make this about dopey, inaccurate or bad things that presidents say, OK. I'm sure a highly intelligent, objective person like you would agree that saying a person won't get COVID if he or she is vaccinated is not quite as bad as summoning violent extremists to stage a coup attempt against his own country.
How dare the Buffoon gets covid. Thought Fr. Fauci would have protected him. LOL, hey?
Quote from: MU82 on July 21, 2022, 09:52:20 AM
Well, he misspoke. What he meant, and what the experts in his administration have said, is that it's highly unlikely you'll get very ill from COVID if you've received the vaccine and boosters.
My 96-year-old father-in-law found out Monday that he has COVID for the first time. Like Biden, he was fully vaccinated. Like Biden, being vaccinated helped him avoid COVID for all this time. Like Biden, he has only a mild case. And like Biden, he has received Paxlovid (not a horse de-wormer).
Science is great.
Now, if you want to make this about dopey, inaccurate or bad things that presidents say, OK. I'm sure a highly intelligent, objective person like you would agree that saying a person won't get COVID if he or she is vaccinated is not quite as bad as summoning violent extremists to stage a coup attempt against his own country.
His last booster was in March and their efficacy wanes considerably. There's still potential vulnerability at his age and with his other health problems. He does of course have the best doctors in the world.
Quote from: MuggsyB on July 21, 2022, 10:03:30 AM
His last booster was in March and their efficacy wanes considerably. There's still potential vulnerability at his age and with his other health problems. He does of course have the best doctors in the world.
His predecessor probably would have died if he hadn't been availed the best care available to any human being on the planet. No matter how much I dislike a person, I don't root for his or her death, so it's a good thing he had access to that care. Less good was that when he knew he was infected (but before it became public) he exposed his own supporters to a virus that at the time was killing a significant part of the population. Also less good was that after he recovered, he pretended that Covid didn't exist and again exposed his own supporters to the virus.
I'm not overly concerned about this hurting Biden, despite his age and despite it having been 4 months since he got the booster. He takes care of himself, and he has access to great medications and care.
Quote from: Merit Matters on July 21, 2022, 07:58:07 AM
At least some Justice is being served: https://news.yahoo.com/blm-rioter-found-guilty-murdering-123728631.html
https://news.yahoo.com/maga-fan-accused-setting-fire-101657942.html
Just for all
Quote from: jesmu84 on July 21, 2022, 01:31:05 PM
https://news.yahoo.com/maga-fan-accused-setting-fire-101657942.html
Just for all
People vandalizing their own property to PWN the noobs the other side will never not be funny.
nm
Quote from: JWags85 on July 21, 2022, 02:21:09 PM
People vandalizing their own property to PWN the noobs the other side will never not be funny.
I knew something was wrong when he said he saved 4 puppies. Right wing extremists dont save puppies, they murder them.
Quote from: lawdog77 on July 21, 2022, 03:05:28 PM
I knew something was wrong when he said he saved 4 puppies. Right wing extremists dont save puppies, they murder them.
What about preborn puppies?
Quote from: Pakuni on July 21, 2022, 03:50:56 PM
What about preborn puppies?
Nope. They make the dog have the puppy, stare in its cute little eyes, then strangles them.