Gun Violence

[sturg33]

So you do think that local law enforcement or the Feds should investigate people, to the point of confiscating their guns, based on tips or social media posts? Illuminate me.

I think that cops investigating a kid bc he's clearly a conservative and a threat to their utter failure of the shooting is a cause for concern.

But I look forward to your usual quip response of distortion.

I don't know why I always answer questions directed at me when I can never get the same courtesy

[Julio3000]

What?

What did I holler was unconstitutional?

Gun regulations, for one.

[goldfly]

Let me get this straight: you don’t believe that violent video games/a violent entertainment culture might should be “looked at” ... but you want to restrict paper targets at gun ranges?

I think we all agree that using real depictions of people as targets is tasteless, but hella slippery slope advocating that we should investigate those individuals.

i in no way said that

uh, there are for sure people that would be investigated for certain people as targets and should be

i'm not worried about your so called slippery slope in this instance

[Hawk]

i in no way said that

uh, there are for sure people that would be investigated for certain people as targets and should be

i'm not worried about your so called slippery slope in this instance

If that's not what you meant, then please enlighten us all.

"uh, there are for sure people that would be investigated for certain people as targets and should be" sounds wacky and makes no sense, besides.

[goldfly]

if the person was shooting at a picture of trump or Obama etc

they would be investigated/questioned

and they should be.

can't have it both ways and say cops should do more and not overlooks possible warning signs and then be opposed to doing anything that could be a warning sign

[Hawk]

This

if the person was shooting at a picture of trump or Obama etc

they would be investigated/questioned

and they should be.

can't have it both ways and say cops should do more and not overlooks possible warning signs and then be opposed to doing anything that could be a warning sign

doesn't jibe with

The guy who went to a range with a cut out of teenager who survived a mass shooting and shot at said target should be investigated

So

I disagree that they shouldn’t be looked at

this

[Julio3000]

For what it's worth, I think it's pretty ****ed up to be shooting at a picture like that and posting it publicly. It's creepy as hell and arguably an incitement of violence.

It also leads, as I suggested, to the question of parsing exactly what the responsibilities of law enforcement (who are simultaneously asked to head off psycho shooters before they act out and to not infringe upon their rights) are, and what the responsibilities of gun owners are.

Regardless of where you land on the answer, I think it's a fair question, right?

[goldfly]

obviously the kid is a political figure

****, sturg has been saying it for days

it jibes just fine imo

[Hawk]

obviously the kid is a political figure

****, sturg has been saying it for days

it jibes just fine imo

So, now sturg arbitrarily determines who is a "political figure" and who isn't?

but no slippery slope here.

noted.

[goldfly]

So, now sturg arbitrarily determines who is a "political figure" and who isn't?

but no slippery slope here.

noted.

dude, don't take everything so serious

i thought you would see my jab at so called freedom lovers freak outs with that

but so be it

[Hawk]

dude, don't take everything so serious

i thought you would see my jab at so called freedom lovers freak outs with that

but so be it

Trust me, based on your responses about this, it's hard to do anything except not take you seriously.

You have no position except trying to not appear to be wrong - which is understandable, but I'm just trying to pin down what your opinion actually is.

You've made a claim, then denied it, then tried to defend it again.

- Who should be investigated for using paper targets depicting people's faces?
- What illustrations can be used as targets? (if any? 57 contends that all target practice involving the human form is homicidal in nature)

[goldfly]

certain ones should obviously be investigated

let's start with saying hitler is ok to use


i honestly don't see where you think i have changed my opinion that people using cut outs of people should be investigated.

i don't view using depictions of living people (much less children) as just paper targets as i guess you are describing them

[57Brave]

By that logic, a person who uses the human body cutout while at a shooting range is homicidal.

by thanking this post -- " 57 contends that all target practice involving the human form is homicidal in nature "
??/

This explains how so many of these conversations go off the rails.
"leftists think" or "the left says" or ... Randomly assigning beliefs or stances based on ---- I don't know what it is based on
Tell me, when was the last time you read me write, " poster x thinks this" or "poster y thinks that"
I dont.
Only a few here do

as far as gun violence I do contend people that receive monetary profit from selling weapons should be held liable and taxed to high heaven. Along with strict background checks with lengthy waiting periods
Those are my contentions.
Have been my contentions for over 40 years .

So please the next time you assume to know what I think (or anyone for that matter), ask
ok?

[Hawk]

by thanking this post -- " 57 contends that all target practice involving the human form is homicidal in nature "
??/

This explains how so many of these conversations go off the rails.
"leftists think" or "the left says" or ... Randomly assigning beliefs or stances based on ---- I don't know what it is based on
Tell me, when was the last time you read me write, " poster x thinks this" or "poster y thinks that"
I dont.
Only a few here do

as far as gun violence I do contend people that receive monetary profit from selling weapons should be held liable and taxed to high heaven. Along with strict background checks with lengthy waiting periods
Those are my contentions.
Have been my contentions for over 40 years .

So please the next time you assume to know what I think (or anyone for that matter), ask
ok?

"a red flag is being waved by carrying a picture of a person into a gun range"

Your words, not mine.

I assume that you think what you write.

You don't get a waiver because your original thoughts are somewhere in the neighborhood of less than 5%.

You are what you eat.

[goldfly]

you are fine with people shooting at cut outs that depict humans

i feel that seems like an issue and could be a possible threat and maybe a mental issue and should be looked at more


this isn't hard to understand

if you think that is me hurting your freedom cause you think taking targets away that depict living humans or political people. then boo ****ing hoo.

[sturg33]

you are fine with people shooting at cut outs that depict humans

i feel that seems like an issue and could be a possible threat and maybe a mental issue and should be looked at more


this isn't hard to understand

if you think that is me hurting your freedom cause you think taking targets away that depict living humans or political people. then boo ****ing hoo.

But... You love a guy that killed hundreds of actual humans

[Hawk]

you are fine with people shooting at cut outs that depict humans

i feel that seems like an issue and could be a possible threat and maybe a mental issue and should be looked at more


this isn't hard to understand

if you think that is me hurting your freedom cause you think taking targets away that depict living humans or political people. then boo ****ing hoo.

I haven't stated a position here.

I mean, if I have, feel free to point it out. Otherwise, let's try to keep on topic.

I'm probing your stated position; the one you've gone back and forth on three times now.

You want to legislate people shooting at cut outs that depict humans.

Like this:



Oh, but no, you don't mean that. Oh, yes, obviously that doesn't actually depict a human (except, of course, it does).

Just obviously bad people. Like Hitler.

So who defines whose paper pictures we can shoot at and whose paper pictures we can't shoot at?

This is what we call as slippery slope.

What you've posited is naïve and simple-minded.

You should probably give it some more thought.

[goldfly]

which guy that killed 100's that i love are you referring to?

cause i can think of a few through history that i really like and some of them are WAY more than 100's

[goldfly]

I haven't stated a position here.

I mean, if I have, feel free to point it out. Otherwise, let's try to keep on topic.

I'm probing your stated position; the one you've gone back and forth on three times now.

You want to legislate people shooting at cut outs that depict humans.

Like this:



Oh, but no, you don't mean that. Oh, yes, obviously that doesn't actually depict a human (except, of course, it does).

Just obviously bad people. Like Hitler.

So who defines whose paper pictures we can shoot at and whose paper pictures we can't shoot at?

This is what we call as slippery slope.

What you've posited is naïve and simple-minded.

You should probably give it some more thought.

nope, that's not what i meant at all

if you want to imagine that stupid target is a teenager that survived a mass shooting, have at it. (this might poke holes in some idiots go to take that i'm here to legislate thought but whatever).

it doesn't depict an actual human.

you're slope still isn't slippery to me btw

[sturg33]

Did the kid have a target of another kid?

That's what you said.