Florida School Shooting Thread

I actually had an argument with a dude about gun control. He started out saying we have to protect the kids. I asked him what his stance was on abortion (he constantly spews the party line) and he said he's for women's rights. So apparently you only protect the chitlins once they've been squirted out. You can't kill them with a gun but it's fine to kill em in the womb. I don't understand their logic.

 

How old is NC? I heard 18 and 19 but the DCF 2016 report has him at 19 which would put him at 21 today.

 

Just saw Trump is having the DOJ write up regulations to ban bump stocks. Not sure if this is retroactive or what. I don't really care much but bump stocks don't make your gun a machine gun... I figure hes probably throwing a bone to the anti-gunners to get them off his back some though.

Still don't agree.

 

Banning bump stocks is a great bone to toss to folk that rail against assault rifles.

 

I agree. It's a gimmick that most people don't use. Just think it's silly as someone trained can bump fire still. Bump stock just helps.

 

LOL, about two years ago I was discussing gun control with this 18 year old "save the world" girl when she asked, "To save just one life wouldn't it be worth outlawing all guns?" She damn near fainted when I looked straight into her eyes and said, "No it wouldn't." It was frigging priceless.

 

Something something ban stuff. No big deal, bump stocks are dumb. But like before they will pile in shit like muzzle devices, grips,forends etc etc.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/02/20/trump-urges-ban-on-bump-stocks-other-gun-modifiers.html

 

What worries me is IF it's still worded "rate increasing devices". If defined loosely there are all kinds of things that could be included later simply by the BATF changing their mind or wanting to crack down.

 

It won't just be stocks. Guarantee on that.

What he really did is set off another buying spree. Vendors will love him. Buy your ammo now if you didn't stock up when you had the chance. Here we go again.

 

An annoying device that makes a firearm less accurate and wasn't used in this latest hype-fest. So the Vegas arms dealer had one or two and it's an easy target that means attack?
Lame, and proves that morons control the narrative.
I hope they are grandfathered, so the one collecting dust here can be sold for stupid money.

 

I read somewhere where they are gonna be NFA'd . Don't know how true that is.

 

By pure luck I put in my orders for enough 9mm and 555 for this years 3Gun matches last Monday.

Out of curiosity I looked at my usual online sites to see about price today. Prices seemed to be holding but I noticed a bunch of sites had a lot of "out of stock" notices

 

How bout we trade bump stocks for sbr’s and suppressors?

 

Mufflers should have never been on that list, talk about asinine decisions.
But I have lost faith in Congress doing the right thing.

 

Rockingham Sheriff's dept is working with the superintendent to put armed trained volunteers in every school. Bravo!

 

1) Please. . .pretty please. . .do tell the exact reason why the Founding Fathers included the 2nd
2) Then explain why this disease you so often refer to is literally best manifested by the US Constitution – you know, that document that was created by ardent believers in Liberalism. . .so much so that they basically plagiarized the “Father of Liberalism” in the Declaration of Independence with one of the most famous lines in modern political history:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

Maybe you should stop taking selfies with over sized guns and crack a book once in a while (they’re those things filled with all sorts of wonderful information that will greatly aid in making you look like less of an idiot). In this particular case, there’s several hundred years you need to catch up on. . .because, once again, it’s painfully obvious that you have no fucking idea what you’re talking about – I mean, really – do you even know what “liberalism” as a political philosophy is? (That was rhetorical, because that answer's a given).

 

So self righteous of you using so many words and yet being unable to make any point of relevance.

Evidently, even liberals don't know what liberalism is.
Shall not be infringed. These are the only words I need to understand. LOL.

Did your Mom and Dad forget to drill this into you.

 

So you're saying what we consider "classical liberalism" is somehow the same as "liberal" is defined today when it comes to government?

Please do tell ......

And please don't fore back with some tirade against the Republican Party or conservatism. Cause I don't think I'm defending them either.

 

Modern day liberalism is a perversion and the antithesis of the intent.

 

Don’t really do emotion when it comes to politics – sort of pointless and there’s way too many examples in history of that simple manipulation leading to disastrous outcomes (G is a perfect example of this).

Complicated subject, but to be extremely condensed: I can probably make as many arguments for “yes” as I can for “no”. At the end of the day, the core tenants remain the same so I’d be inclined to say “yes”.

Care to make the argument why they aren’t? (no talking points – base it on the core philosophy of “classical liberalism” and how tangible political outcomes aren’t being achieved by the adherence to it).