There's about a hundred thing wrong with what he's doing before you even get to the fact that he's firing at a fucking dog.
There's about a hundred thing wrong with what he's doing before you even get to the fact that he's firing at a fucking dog.
He'll be wearing body armour as well. Take the bite, man.
By all means shoot the dog if it's 'coming right for ya' and is close, but that wasn't what happened on that video.
Not even then, look at the surroundings, no way of knowing where your shots are going to go when you inevitably miss a moving target. It going across his field of vision makes it a thousand times worse, you're turning so you have no idea what you're about to be aiming at as you fire far more times than necessary for an animal about the size of a toddler.
Get that man in the bin.
If the dog is a couple of feet away from you you should be able to put one in its noggin without taking a school down too.
So standard US police force training then?Originally Posted by Yevrah
Atleast 18 people shot in a Walmart in El Paso, Texas.
Odds on the shooter having just bought the gun there and going on the rampage?
Well, he's already done better than Randy Stair.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eaton_...rkets_shooting
This is the classic of that genre.
There are no words.
Does their training consist exclusively of watching Hollywood shoot-outs?
I reckon Marge going through police training might actually be an accurate depiction of what goes on.
Don't worry lads, we move on. 19 dead in a mall in El Paso.
In a rare turn of events, the 20 year-old incel is in custody. They won't even touch you in prison, mate.
And he looks like you.
Not with that hairline.
Fuck me, I didn't think he was going to do it.
Fairs fair though, what he does after he stops was pretty ballsy.
Shooting in Dayton, Ohio
https://www.daytondailynews.com/news...26CylnDLdZQxM/
Lol everyone was saying statistically it would be 2 days before the next one.
Murica.
Ooooofffff
Such a backwards shithole country
I honestly think you guys love this shit.
More white terrorism. Isn't it time they were sent back with their backward views?
You don't call them terrorists if they are white, remember?
Only because it's entirely self-inflicted.
"Oh, I'm sorry. This is a hate crime. And a public health epidemic."
New Zealand had one guy go mental with an assault rifle and banned them all immediately.
The US have this happen pretty much once a week, if not more, but wont do anything but point at a 250 year old piece of paper. @bruhnaldo
Just imagine how many more times it would happen if guns were illegal though.
There's 4.7 million people in New Zealand. There's 6.1 million people in Miami.
There's probably and quite literally more assault rifles in this country than there are people in New Zealand.
There's more assault rifles in your country then there are people.
I mean okay I'll play along.
Let's pretend we're the government. Please present a plan to eliminate mass shootings in America.
Let's say "Ban assault rifles" is #1.
Okay, there's millions of assault rifles circulating in this country already. How do we go about confiscating them from millions of citizens who would literally rather die than "disarm" themselves?
Without total confiscation all it takes is a psychopathic white nationalist terrorist to find one guy desperate to make a quick buck (whose assault rifle(s) now have increased in value because of the inability to purchase them otherwise) to sell him that assault rifle and commit atrocities.
So now what do we do? I'm serious let's figure it out.
Which doesn't help our newfound cause of trying to eliminate mass shootings considering it only takes one assault rifle and one psychopathic white nationalist terrorist to commit such atrocities.
But I'm willing to try and figure it out if we can! I'm personally not smart enough to figure out how to eliminate 300 million assault rifles owned largely by people who would rather die than give them up.
And I mean it's hardly as if the psycho white nationalist terrorist cares how much it costs or how many hoops he has to jump through because again he plans to die as a martyr for the "pUrItY oF oUr NaTiOn" or whatever the fuck.
Ban all guns, have an amnesty collecting them. Arrest anyone found carrying one post amnesty.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/d...00/3110949.stm
Amnesties do work after something being made illegal.
Your amnesty idea works to eliminate 100,000,000 assault rifles from the streets. Awesome! 1/3rd is a great start.
We now have 200,000,000 assault rifles remaining.
People hardly just carry assault rifles around, so I'm not sure we'd get very far with regards to arresting anyone carrying one around.
Otherwise, how would you really police that? You can't just go into people's houses without warrants. Are they going to give out millions of warrants to raid people's houses that are already armed with assault rifles?
It seems like we'd be on the brink of a civil war at that point, but I'm open to ideas.
America could use a civil war at this point
Break America into 50ish chunks, equal size to a small country, such as New Zealand, and then have each chunk (let's call it a 'state') manage the process of disarmament. So, rather than trying to eliminate 300,000,000 at a federal level, each state only has to manage the process of removing 6,000,000 firearms.
Might not work, I think America is probably to far gone, but just an option.
Just ban them and wait for idiots to lose interest, it might take a generation but you'll get there in the end.
Why doesn't Trump see illegal Immigrants this way? 'Oh, there's too many, what's the point?'. It's a horse shit argument. If you want something to change (and let's be Frank - we're talking about innocent people, often school children, getting shot in the faces here) you make the changes and undertake the work required to get it done
Fuck me lad. You live in the land of 'can do attitudes', grow a pair of balls.
Last edited by Spikey M; 04-08-2019 at 09:29 PM.
This is some stellar "we can't solve the problem completely so why even try"-logic.
"But if we try to restrict guns there might be some shootings"
It's been a while, but, HURR DURR HERP DERP.
You could also tie in the amnesty with a monetary incentive. Then double down on it.
Give people say a 6 month warning to hand over all automatic weapons with money per weapon. Then after the date, anyone who still owns one has it removed and is fined.
You'll probably take a generation to properly get rid of them, but then you have to start somewhere.
I also love the fact that the Muricans are proud that their police force managed to neutralize the second guy within a minute of him opening fire. So that he only could kill 9 and injure 27, you know. Perfect example of "only thing stopping a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun" in action.
You can have guns in a society and not have people be able to shoot up a place with ease. Every 18 year old male in Switzerland has an assault rifle in their house but their basically in lockdown, regulated to the point of annual check ups and bullet count breakdowns and not able to be transported unless visible on your person and dismantled while in uniform.
Which wouldn't stop anyone taking one out and shooting a load of people if they wanted.
You also don't have mandatory national service that comes with regular psychological assessments and weapons training, so not everyone's allowed to carry one. Handguns and other personal arms are incredibly hard to get etc. It's what comes with it.
The second amendment says you have a right to bare arms as part of a regulated militia, not as some bloke that's watched too much Fox news and has gone from not locking his door for the last 30 years to thinking the Mexicans are going to rob his farm (my ex-girlfriends Iowan fathers road to gun ownership).
Guns now, slaves in the 1840s. Same shit, different decade.
It will take something similarly cataclysmic as then to solve the issue.
At least this thread proves that it's a lot easier to talk down on people than it is to come up with real solutions that might actually work.
The way you say this implies that a federal initiative wouldn't need to employ the individual states themselves to see to the execution of federal law. With all due respect I don't reckon you've actually said anything that wasn't already implied with the initial idea that 300,000,000 guns need to be eliminated. You're just kinda... restating the initiative.1. "So, rather than trying to eliminate 300,000,000 at a federal level, each state only has to manage the process of removing 6,000,000 firearms." - @John Arne
Idk fam have you seen how much folks like guns? The people who play around with guns mostly just want them because they look cool and they can go take them to a shooting range once every 3 months and get the adrenaline rush of shooting them. If a bunch of little kids getting murdered wasn't enough to start a huge culture shift away from these types of cheap thrills I'm not really sure what would?2. "Just ban them and wait for idiots to lose interest, it might take a generation but you'll get there in the end." - @Disco
Well I mean, in all fairness, I'm pretty sure Trump realizes that. He just pushed those lines because that's the only way he could possibly get elected / re-elected. There's not going to be any real way to deport millions of illegal immigrants that are already in America. There will always be illegal immigrants. Just like there will always be illegal guns, even if they ban all guns. Which is was my point. It only takes one.3. "Why doesn't Trump see illegal Immigrants this way? 'Oh, there's too many, what's the point?'. It's a horse shit argument." - @Spikey M
I mean you kinda made the point though in a way. The American government wants to get rid of all illegal immigrants and there's basically no possible way for them to actually do that. So you're saying "make the changes" and "undertake the work required"... bro I'm asking you, how would we even do such a thing? You can't just go round up the illegals and ship them out. They're everywhere. You don't see them because they just seem like everyday people. They work jobs, they have families. It's the same thing with guns. I probably go pass 100 people every day that own assault rifles. I would never know. How do we get those people to turn them in... how do we make sure those people don't just say "oh fuck I don't want this problem but I also don't want to give my gun to the government... better sell it really quick to whoever the fuck so I can make a little profit. We sure aren't going to leave a paper trail because this now even more illegal than it was before....""If you want something to change (and let's be Frank - we're talking about innocent people, often school children, getting shot in the faces here) you make the changes and undertake the work required to get it done
Fuck me lad. You live in the land of 'can do attitudes', grow a pair of balls." - @Spikey M
Now you have guns just floating around that no one has any track of. Which is already the problem.
I'm not against the idea of trying. That wasn't the point of this. The point of this was to ask you all how exactly we could do such a thing, considering every time someone in my country gets shot by some loner douchebag you all get very excited to bump this thread and more or less laugh at it because it's "what we deserve" basically. Let's fucking try, why not. After that we should ban cocaine and opioids. After that we should consider banning murder.4. "This is some stellar "we can't solve the problem completely so why even try"-logic."
I'm being a bit of a dick but I'm serious. Why not give it a go. If we could get rid of 100,000,000 assault rifles that's 100,000,000 assault rifles less for crazy people to get a hold of.
What my overarching point is ... is that it's not actually going to change anything but stroke the egos of the politicians who would be blessed to have their name on such an initiative. But fuck it, let 'em stroke themselves silly. It doesn't matter to me, I don't own assault rifles.
If 100,000,000 people own assault rifles and had to have them removed by force you're basically guaranteeing a million Americans, between police and gun owners, would be injured or killed trying to enforce said bans."It's been a while, but, HURR DURR HERP DERP." - @Spikey M
So really at that point all we are trading again is.. idk... 10,000 innocent lives for 1,000,000 lives who were presumably innocent until it's government decided to go against the "fabric of our country" and try to take away their "right" to own assault rifles..... just so government officials can say "well we did a good try but gosh we can't get 'em all can we!" Our government cannot guarantee the safety of it's people from violence, I'm not sure any government truly can. The idea, though, on display is basically to just incite nationwide riots which could easily divulge into a left vs. right ... just to not actually fix the problem.
Mind you, it's not that i necessarily believe we need assault rifles or have a right to own them.
It's just things like you guys keep saying "Ya it would take a generation or so.." What you're really asking for is a cleansing of the American people. So while you claim it to be under the pretense of saving innocent lives, you'd rather put a million more lives in danger than ever thought about being involved in a mass shooting as the perp or victim at risk instead.... solely because you don't like the culture of guns that we have. Which truthfully listen at this point I'm kinda over it myself. I'm not saying you're necessarily wrong to think this way.
But when you come on here and pretentiously throw around non-solutions just so you can subconsciously pat yourself on the back for being so morally sound... it's not really that you value human life, you value some human lives more than others. Which is entirely your prerogative, but it's hardly with some moral obligation to do so. You'd very easily kill 1,000,000 people who never in their life would've bothered a single soul otherwise so that the lives of 10,000 would-be victims of gun violence could live.
But again, let's fucking try it why not. Let's see how it works out for us. America is fucking doomed regardless, we might as well go for it and live with the results.
But you all treat this shit like it's some kinda game where if someone smarter had the controls it'd just be a breeze in the park to deal with. I've literally held friends in my arms crying because they lost family or friends in the Orlando shooting. This shit actually involves real people man.
So it fucking perturbs me that you can sit here on your keyboards and talk down to me simply because I'm trying to understand just how in the flying fuck you'd solve such a complex, enormous problem... knowing that there are millions of Americans who will literally board up their homes and shoot it out with any federal/state/government official tasked to take away their precious little assault rifles.
I think it would have to come with monetary incentive or maybe even a tax break... but then you're asking a republican majority government to pass a billion dollars in incentives and tax credits (strike 1) to take away guns (strike 2) and supposedly piss all over the Constitution by doing so (strike 3).6. You could also tie in the amnesty with a monetary incentive. Then double down on it.
Give people say a 6 month warning to hand over all automatic weapons with money per weapon. Then after the date, anyone who still owns one has it removed and is fined.
You'll probably take a generation to properly get rid of them, but then you have to start somewhere. - @Gray Fox
But let's throw all that to the side. The idea that people could be enticed by reward of $$$$$ i think would probably be the best bet to make a good start.
IDEALLY it would be nearly impossible to do. Knowing what we know about the corruption in the American police force as a whole, it would turn into an excuse to shoot brown/black people for "not complying with federal firearms search parameters" or some kinda bullshit at worst and harassment of regular, law-abiding citizens at best.
I'm upset because I fucking feel helpless man.
I realize no one is going to read all of this but I don't know what the fuck to do bro. Nobody actually gives a fuck.
There's a good chapter in Freakonomics about how gun amensties with financial incentives are one of the least effectual and financially irresponsible policies there is.
I haven't listened to the podcast version but it's here: http://freakonomics.com/podcast/how-...radio-podcast/
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote