Cactus,
I realize we don’t have actual written standards for taking mod actions against people for bad posting, but you’re making a really strong case for either getting some whipped up post haste, or maybe just asking for forgiveness instead of permission. At the very least, tone it down.
Lol at the NRA thinking they can take on Walmart
Yeah Chiefsplanet is kinda torn. They definitely aren’t all in against Walmart like they were against Dicks.
Crenshaw offering people the use of his gun is the premise for that porno where he plays a hit man.
Feels like a great opportunity to troll them with leftist anti-Walmart propaganda.
Don’t be obtuse:
All done with vehicles, not guns. And there are other ways for deranged people mass kill if they want to
What? Because you don’t agree? I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. Ban me if you can’t handle independent or different opinions than yours. I’ve already cut down my posting a ton
It is a culture of violence in this country, which police are a huge part of and often the instigators of
Assuming you’re right and if I were to agree with this, then why isn’t it being discussed at all? Police aren’t just going to all of a sudden get rid of their violence just because civilians are disarmed. The ONLY reason I entered this thread was to point out that violence and shootings at the hands of police aren’t even talked about in the same breath as gun control and I think it should be. I don’t care how you do it, police violence has to stop!
You have no evidence to back this up. I guarantee you that if police weren’t so goddamned militarized and had to actually think twice before shooting an unarmed person because they were out gunned, you’d see less needless shootings and harassment of unarmed and innocent people
Not because he doesn’t agree, because you are a shit poster regardless of your beliefs. Go back to not posting please.
Holywtfbbqbatman is this thread AIDS. Because of Cactus. Cactus has AIDS imo.
You nor anyone else has made any case against my views on militarized police and guns. You just don’t like that I’m pro gun and anyone who disagrees with the group think on here gets ostracized. I could agree with you on 99% of issues, but if I disagree on one, you make up shit and try to pin all kinds of labels on me (or whoever else might disagree). It’s a huge problem and why we’re in this mess with Trump. You guys are all MSM establishment sheep. Real progressive candidates like Sanders or even those with radical ideas like Yang don’t have a snowball’s chance because of people like those who frequent this forum just to hear their thoughts echo about and ingrain their views
I know it’s possible to kill people without guns. It’s just not nearly as easy to kill the same numbers of people, plus you can’t do much indoor or all-terrain killing with a vehicle. You can’t seriously think we wouldn’t be safer in the absence of guns, especially “assault” rifles.
Just because people with a will to kill can find a way doesn’t mean we should make it as easy as possible for them to rack up the frags anywhere anytime.
Notice that you’ve mentioned 4 vehicular killing sprees in the span of a few years across multiple countries. In the US alone, it takes like a month to match that with guns, and that’s not counting all the daily gun violence that doesn’t make the national news.
Right. Because I’m an atheist, equal rights, anti profit judicial system, progressive, Sanders supporter who just happens to disagree on the topic of guns and don’t slip into your group think. Oh, the humanity!
Yeah, he won because he didn’t label anybody who disagreed with him, great take.
Literally the next sentence after you said being mean to people is why Trump won, fucking incredible.
Ah, the favorite lie of scoundrels, that you are singled out strictly for disagreement, without mentioning what the disagreement is over, or any other relevant context so that you can pretend to be a victim rather than engaging in any sort of introspection or improvement.
You and I would be safer. But minorities wouldn’t be any safer from the police though
Here’s a thought totally out of left field that might be totally dumb, but…
Why don’t we see needless police violence in outlying rural areas with small police departments? One reason could be because they’re mostly white people. But another, could be because those police departments are literally outgunned in those towns. Why don’t any cops try shooting or choking out Billy Bob’s kid in front of a crowd at the local store? And if they did, I’d like to see what would’ve happened after the cop gets off after the trial in some small town
I’m not advocating violent riots, but the cops in the Brown and Castile trials might been held accountable if police couldn’t act with total impunity because they are militarized to the point they could take could on any size crowd of angry protesters fighting for justice. What I’m saying is the government should fear the people. Not the other way around
I think eliminating guns from society is an improvement. I’ve agreed about that over and over. You just don’t like that I feel the same for police as civilians, or that I put the aggregate of needless police shootings on a similar plain as mass civilian shootings
The injustices suffered at the hands of the police are every bit as important to me as mass shootings
Also, here’s why that’s important… You and I are much more likely to be victims of a mass shooting and you are much more afraid of that. I look at that as cowardly, because you know you are much less likely to become a victim of police violence or injustice
What’s the point of starting our own forum if we aren’t going to insta-nuke this guy?
You have to read the linked article in the tweet, which makes it even richer.
The headline is: WOMAN SHOOTS MAN WHO REACHED INTO CAR AND TRIED TO STEAL PURSE IN SW HOUSTON: POLICE
So she opened fire multiple times in a residential area because somebody was going to steal her purse. She hit and could easily have killed one of the robbers. And this is the argument in favor of the second amendment. Amazing.