Today's shooting in America thread

Alan Harper's Tash said:
I kind of remember Waco, but not Ruby Ridge. I was just about going to high school when they happened.

They were because of court orders weren’t they?
Click to expand...
US Marshall’s trying to execute a bench warrant realized they were heading into an armed conflict due to history, location, and those protecting Randy Weaver.

There was an armed conflict in the woods, where a Marshall was killed, along with members of the Weaver family, leading to an armed standoff.

Once over, Weaver was sentenced to prison, but the family won a civil suit. They won an out-of-court settlement of $3.1 million. After numerous appeals, Harris was awarded a $380,000 settlement in September 2000.
 
ChicagoBlue said:
US Marshall’s trying to execute a bench warrant realized they were heading into an armed conflict due to history, location, and those protecting Randy Weaver.

There was an armed conflict in the woods, where a Marshall was killed, along with members of the Weaver family, leading to an armed standoff.

Once over, Weaver was sentenced to prison, but the family won a civil suit. They won an out-of-court settlement of $3.1 million. After numerous appeals, Harris was awarded a $380,000 settlement in September 2000.
Click to expand...
Sounds like it would have been easier without guns.

;-)
 
Trevor Morley's Tache said:
Excuses for not tackling the wider issues surrounding gun ownership. The guy who just killed all those people in Buffalo had a LEGALLY owned assault style weapon. Not one single civilian has a legitimate reason for owning one of those weapons aside from simply wanting to own one.
Click to expand...
I agree, there's no need for anybody to own an assault style weapon. I'm quite happy that they are banned here.
 
ChicagoBlue said:
You don’t understand what you are saying, let alone what you are reading. In America, they have ACTUAL AMERICAN JUDGES who interpret laws for us, as opposed to Brits who like to post on a soccer Forum over breakfast.

Crazy system, I know, but what can I say?!

And, much as you believe 2A doesn’t apply, many conservatives believe it is more relevant today than ever. Go figure!
Click to expand...
I blame that bastard Washington. Bigger grifter than Trump.
 
twosips said:
It's only purpose is to kill things, yes. What else do you do with it? Open a tin of beans?
Click to expand...
Its sole purpose to injure or threaten to injure a target.

It has effectively no other purpose. What other good can one say that about?

Explosives? Blade weapons? I can think of several practical purposes for these items, industrial and consumer-based.

For guns, the social good from days of yore was as tools that could be used to hunt for food. But we have an entire commercial supply chain to solve that problem.

Is self-protection a social good? Yes. But in this case the good is achieved by, again, injury or a threat to injure -- unlike, say, body armo(u)r, or insurance.

As I've written many times before, I have no problem with stricter interpretations on 2A to allow for regular citizen ownership of guns. I agree we have a process for changing amendments. I agree it is well-nigh impossible to change.

But as they provide effectively zero social utility beyond harm or a threat to harm, the manufacture, sale and possession of them should be THE most highly-regulated value chain in consumer goods by a landslide.

And it isn't even remotely close.

And the gun industry and the "law-abiding" gunowners suckered in by the lobby will do whatever they can to insure that such regulations are loosened, not strengthened.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top