Four dead in shooting at newspaper building in Maryland, suspect in custody
- Thread starter SB85
- Start date
Sour Wreck
Well-Known Member
apparently the finger print and facial recognition thing was fake news.
Andrewk420
Well-Known Member
It sounds like it was a local yokel with a grudge against a local paper.
It'll get excused and brushed under the rug because he's a white guy.
In all honesty, I hope we never know this guy's name or face.
It'll get excused and brushed under the rug because he's a white guy.
In all honesty, I hope we never know this guy's name or face.
Lord Kanti
Well-Known Member
"Ramos"
Keep crying about his genetics. The guy got slandered by the paper, took them to court, lost, then took justice into his own hands as he saw fit; but let's blame Trump.
Unclebaldrick
Well-Known Member
Andrewk420
Well-Known Member
You seem to be too racist to even have a coherent thought.
Roger A. Shrubber
Well-Known Member
trump will pardon him and give him a medal for fighting "fake news"
Lord Kanti
Well-Known Member
You're the one that brought up race. Keep projecting.
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
^^^Triggered when somebody says "white man".
What he said is fact.
By the right wing's own idiom, a person who does this is:
Jihadi Terrorist if they follow Islam. Also, police are holding the spouse because they should have reported the crime ahead of its commission.
Angry if they are black. Also, the police officer that shot them are suspended with pay pending an investigation to prove their innocence.
Troubled if they are white. Thoughts and prayers. Also the press is to blame and anybody who speaks against gun violence is a paid actor.
Last edited:
Ramos sounds like a name from Spain to me.
Andrewk420
Well-Known Member
I brought up a fact of the case. And would you lookey there: T&P and back to bitching about how immigrants from the south are our greatest threat.
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
Some restrictions on shotguns in the 2018 Assault Weapons Ban (that won't go anywhere in today's congress).
• Shotguns would be banned from having a detachable magazine and a fixed magazine would not be allowed to have more than five rounds. The same features banned for pistols and rifles would also be banned on shotguns.
The 2018 AWB isn't going to stop all mass shootings, but then again, in reality of today's government it isn't going anywhere and is mostly symbolic at this time.
While I'd prefer a ban on the kinds of weapons that enable dozens to be shot in short time and THEN do research into how to cut gun death rates to that of other developed nations, I can wait for research and recommendations from experts if people are serious about getting the bill right the first time.
The goal is to reduce rates of gun deaths and violence, not to ban weapons. Some weapons are so deadly that controlling and restricting who has rights to purchase them will necessarily have to be part of the overall response. I also think that bans are likely to be the smaller part of the effort.
Andrewk420
Well-Known Member
No legislation is going anywhere that includes any bans on shotguns or non-semi auto rifles. It's not about agreeing or disagreeing, it's just a matter of fact of a compromise that's going to have to happen.
I own plenty of weapons and I'm not an NRA member or a Trump/GOP supporter. But, it would still be a cold day in hell before a G-man showed up and I handed over any guns.
The point of saying that is there are plenty of decent people who are wary of that level of authoritarianism, no matter what it's in the name of.
If I were king God and could make anything happen, I'd make guns disappear from the world. But as long as there's armored Ford explorers with bullet proof windows and a jack boot thug armed with automatic weapons, shotgun, and multiple pistols rolling through neighborhoods, it's a tough sell.
I own plenty of weapons and I'm not an NRA member or a Trump/GOP supporter. But, it would still be a cold day in hell before a G-man showed up and I handed over any guns.
The point of saying that is there are plenty of decent people who are wary of that level of authoritarianism, no matter what it's in the name of.
If I were king God and could make anything happen, I'd make guns disappear from the world. But as long as there's armored Ford explorers with bullet proof windows and a jack boot thug armed with automatic weapons, shotgun, and multiple pistols rolling through neighborhoods, it's a tough sell.
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
Why do you guys keep repeating the "take away guns" bit? The only people saying that with any sense of seriousness is the NRA and other anti-regulations lobbyists as a scare tactic.
The goal is to reduce rates of gun deaths and violence, not to ban weapons.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
He didn’t get slandered though, hence why he lost his case retard
This violent bloodthirsty white cited trump just days before his terrorist rampage
Idiot
Sir Napsalot
Well-Known Member
My old Stevens bolt-action 20ga. had a detachable 3-round magazine
Might as well ban quivers that hold more than 3 arrows
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
So as a result we should continue to sell semi-automatic rifles that fire as fast as you can pull the trigger with 30 clip magazines?
What does your beloved rational and reasonable 20 ga. with three-round fixed chamber hunting shotgun have to do with this?
Andrewk420
Well-Known Member
Because like a lot of ideas, you have to think about how it actually looks in application.
You brought the gun bill that was introduced to the conversation, including the part about banning certain shotguns.
Edit: I should make it clear that I own a shotgun with a detachable magazine that holds 6+1 and would be banned under that law, so that's where I'm coming at it from.
Last edited:
Sir Napsalot
Well-Known Member
Of course not- I think you're missing the point here
It would be banned by dint of it's having a removable 3-round magazine, while a semi-automatic shotgun with a 5-round tubular magazine would not. This is what happens when people who don't know shit about guns try to craft gun legislation, that's all I'm saying.
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
The gun bill restricts the sale of certain shotguns, rifle and hand guns to the general public. Nothing in the 2018 assault weapons ban is actually about taking guns away already owned by peaceful people.
Again, the bill is symbolic. I't not going to pass. Yes, if it did pass, sales going forward will be restricted, yes, better background checks, yes, some additional people will be added to the "can't purchase" list. Draconian take ban ownership of guns is not on this symbolic bill.
The "take gunz away" bit is not part of the discussion except by fear mongers.