Welcome To aBlackWeb

Register

Active shooter at Texas Robb Elementary school with 19 kids and 2 Adults dead, 18 year old shooter killed

The Lonious Monk said:
That's true, and that should be done.

However, it's a fact that the discussion will always come up about what level of armament should really be allowed. Right now, the Uvalde police are basically using the fact that dude had an AR as their excuse for not going in. They felt underarmed and didn't want to take the risk. Now, to be clear, they are some bitches for that, and all of them should be fired. That said, police are tasked with protecting the public. Should there ever be a time when a private citizen can be more well armed than the people that are supposed to protect the public from threats.

Shit is crazy. The Army is in the process of getting a new rifle that's much more capable than what they currently use. The civilian version of the weapon will be up for sale before the Army gets theirs. In other words, in this country, we have a system where the military pays for the development of weapons, and the weapon makers contract in a way that allows them to dumb down those weapons a little and put them in the hands of the general public BEFORE the military even gets them. Doesn't that strike you as a little crazy.
Click to expand...

That "under armed" argument is some bullshit. They have guns and are supposed to be trained on how to use them effectively. Plus they should have all been wearing body armor to help reduce casualties. They were pussy and that's all there is to it. I've made this point earlier, but hunting rifles and the bullets they use are far more powerful than the shit an AR uses. As long as hunters need such calibers for big game, cops will always be "under armed" 'cause all it would take is to pull out your hunting rifle and you're lifting them dudes off their feet or pullin out the big frame revolver to punch a hole in several of them standing in a line.


The Sig the military selected as their new weapon was released to the public BEFORE the DOD had even made a decision about which platform they were going to go with. That's why civilians could get a variant of it before the military. In other words: Sig developed a new weapon, sent the design and copies over to the DoD in the hopes that it would get selected but while waiting they're gonna recoup on that by making a variant for civilian use and selling that while waiting on the government to make a decision.
 
TheNightKing said:
At this point we need a knee-jerk way because lives are at stake. Nothing else has worked, period. But y’all still don’t even want to try anything to do with restrictions on guns.

Either way, it is what it is. There can be no middle ground I guess.
Click to expand...

Bruh... Lives been "at stake". How many folks lost their lives to stray shots just walking down the block??? Handguns are still the #1 killer by far when it comes to gun violence in this country. Where's the knee-jerk reaction to all of the murders that happened across the country just last week??? These same handguns are also the same ones used in the vast majority of mass shootings but you want to ban the gun least often used??? Y'all might as well try to ban shotguns too 'cause they were used almost as frequently as "assault rifles" in mass shootings but I don't see calls for that.

If you really cared about "lives being at stake", start with handguns. But y'all ain't trying to have that convo.
 
konceptjones said:
Bruh... Lives been "at stake". How many folks lost their lives to stray shots just walking down the block??? Handguns are still the #1 killer by far when it comes to gun violence in this country. Where's the knee-jerk reaction to all of the murders that happened across the country just last week??? These same handguns are also the same ones used in the vast majority of mass shootings but you want to ban the gun least often used??? Y'all might as well try to ban shotguns too 'cause they were used almost as frequently as "assault rifles" in mass shootings but I don't see calls for that.

If you really cared about "lives being at stake", start with handguns. But y'all ain't trying to have that convo.
Click to expand...
By your argument then, ban all guns.
 
konceptjones said:
We do, but not in the knee-jerk way y'all want. The most sensible thing is to stop people deemed to be mentally ill from getting their hands on a gun because they're the people committing these shootings.
Click to expand...

But the thing what you do when they don’t have a history of mental illness if they not diagnosed how can you know? And what level of mental illness is ok to own a gun and what ain’t.
 
HellCzar said:
But the thing what you do when they don’t have a history of mental illness if they not diagnosed how can you know? And what level of mental illness is ok to own a gun and what ain’t.
Click to expand...

That's for the professionals to sort out with the lawmakers. NY has a law on the books already, that's a starting point.

Thing is, the majority of mass shooters had documented mental issues so we do have a blueprint to follow. The data has been compiled several times over, even with some pointing to a number of them being on antidepressant/psychotic drugs (you know... the drugs with the commercials that say "thoughts of suicide" are a possible side effect). We have the info, it just needs to be put to use.
 
Blah blah we support our police we have to do better man something something malarkey

I know what its like to lose..yadda yadda
And an authoritative/defiant we have to FUND THE POLICE

BOOK IT
 
Last edited:
Anything short of an executive order on gun control is a waste of time.

I’ve been hearing speaking points about how gun violence has now surpassed car accidents as the number one cause of death among kids now. Would be crazy if they used some sort of loophole to have the CDC institute some sort of gun control in the interest of public health.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top