I don't want to post this without comment but it seems to completely undermine his own proposal. I basically never accept the notion that he's doing something strategic but if you wanted to create a scenario where a republican proposes gun control and democrats had to oppose it this would be a pretty good approach. say you want background checks just like them but make it blatantly obvious that you'd use it to punish political rivals.
If filthy language and losing control were the legal standard for not having access to weapons, Trump wouldn’t have the nuclear codes and I’d feel a lot safer
Man his friend is a piece of shit, like you didn't kill people but you hid the shit he used dude, and why the fuck and knew he was mentally disturbed as fuck.
Police seem divided on if he intentionally killed his sister. I thought she was a target for sure. This one seems like it could have been prevented somehow.
Best information we have is that you are misgendering his brother, FYI
EDIT: As is CNN
? I'm confused
Editing this to be sure I'm not jamming my foot down my mouth as hard as possible, and just recommending future readers check this article out instead to clarify the victim's identity.
Trump will do what the people on TV tell him to do. I will 100% guarantee that around 9:37 Fox aired a thing about Cuomo's encounter with an asshole last night.
Specifically, someone called Cuomo Freido. (Yes, this is a thing that happened, and I can get why it angered him the way it did.)
I don't want to post this without comment but it seems to completely undermine his own proposal. I basically never accept the notion that he's doing something strategic but if you wanted to create a scenario where a republican proposes gun control and democrats had to oppose it this would be a pretty good approach. say you want background checks just like them but make it blatantly obvious that you'd use it to punish political rivals.
Did Cuomo say he could walk down a street shooting people and not lose any supporters or something?
Nah, somebody came up to him and called him Fredo because he's Andrew Cuomo's less successful brother (Fredo was Michael Corleone's idiot brother). Chris took that as a slur against Italians and got very mad. It went viral on the right because MEDIA MAN GOT ANGRY HUR HUR
enlightenedbum on
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
Man his friend is a piece of shit, like you didn't kill people but you hid the shit he used dude, and why the fuck and knew he was mentally disturbed as fuck.
Police seem divided on if he intentionally killed his sister. I thought she was a target for sure. This one seems like it could have been prevented somehow.
Best information we have is that you are misgendering his brother, FYI
EDIT: As is CNN
? I'm confused
Reports came out that the victim was a not-fully-out trans person who identified as male, and had only come out to some of their close friends
As such it's more appropriate to call them by their preferred pronouns of he/him
A lot of the major media outlets haven't followed this unfortunately
Teen Vogue is, as usual, one of the best reporting on the subject
This is the first I've heard of it. So the suspects sister was transitioning to a male and was dating a male. I hadn't heard this, makes it seem like his brother could have been a target.
I mean if Trump wants to open the "says idiotic things while mad" as a red flag for preventing people to owning guns pretty much his whole twitter fan base would lose their guns.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
Reuters reporting that El Paso has seen an upsurge in hispanics purchasing handguns and taking firearms classes now that they feel they're targets for mass shootings.
As well, the governor seems to agree that the solution to guns is more guns.
Gun control is definitely not on the horizon for Texas, where Governor Greg Abbot recently signed into law nine bills, backed by the National Rifle Association, that will loosen up gun regulations starting on Sept. 1.
One of the new laws lifts a ban on carrying firearms in places of worship. That ban came after a gunman fatally shot 26 people at a church in Sutherland Springs. Another stops landlords from prohibiting firearms on their rental properties.
So much for property rights.
It's got a right to be shot at. Just like everyone else.
For the record, since everybody has commented on removing the ban on firearms in places of worship, the law cleaned up previous language.
30.06/30.07 signage prohibiting legal concealed/open carry still apply to legal carriers. So if a church did not allow firearms to be carried, they could still have legal recourse to prevent that. The old law was written in such a way that even though it wasn’t expressly forbidden for legal carriers, it was also not clear that it was permitted to carry. There was a lot of confusion on that. This allows for the carry of firearms in a place of worship if the required signage isn’t posted.
diablo III - beardsnbeer#1508 Mechwarrior Online - Rusty Bock
Man his friend is a piece of shit, like you didn't kill people but you hid the shit he used dude, and why the fuck and knew he was mentally disturbed as fuck.
This is why stricter, stronger control measures are needed. Because people will buy for those who can't buy for themselves. All the regulation in the world won't matter if you get people willing to buy and give guns and mods to others.
Reuters reporting that El Paso has seen an upsurge in hispanics purchasing handguns and taking firearms classes now that they feel they're targets for mass shootings.
As well, the governor seems to agree that the solution to guns is more guns.
Gun control is definitely not on the horizon for Texas, where Governor Greg Abbot recently signed into law nine bills, backed by the National Rifle Association, that will loosen up gun regulations starting on Sept. 1.
One of the new laws lifts a ban on carrying firearms in places of worship. That ban came after a gunman fatally shot 26 people at a church in Sutherland Springs. Another stops landlords from prohibiting firearms on their rental properties.
So much for property rights.
It's got a right to be shot at. Just like everyone else.
For the record, since everybody has commented on removing the ban on firearms in places of worship, the law cleaned up previous language.
30.06/30.07 signage prohibiting legal concealed/open carry still apply to legal carriers. So if a church did not allow firearms to be carried, they could still have legal recourse to prevent that. The old law was written in such a way that even though it wasn’t expressly forbidden for legal carriers, it was also not clear that it was permitted to carry. There was a lot of confusion on that. This allows for the carry of firearms in a place of worship if the required signage isn’t posted.
I was thinking more along the lines of apartments.
0
Lord Palingtonhe.him.hisHistory-loving pal!Registered Userregular
Reuters reporting that El Paso has seen an upsurge in hispanics purchasing handguns and taking firearms classes now that they feel they're targets for mass shootings.
As well, the governor seems to agree that the solution to guns is more guns.
Gun control is definitely not on the horizon for Texas, where Governor Greg Abbot recently signed into law nine bills, backed by the National Rifle Association, that will loosen up gun regulations starting on Sept. 1.
One of the new laws lifts a ban on carrying firearms in places of worship. That ban came after a gunman fatally shot 26 people at a church in Sutherland Springs. Another stops landlords from prohibiting firearms on their rental properties.
So much for property rights.
It's got a right to be shot at. Just like everyone else.
For the record, since everybody has commented on removing the ban on firearms in places of worship, the law cleaned up previous language.
30.06/30.07 signage prohibiting legal concealed/open carry still apply to legal carriers. So if a church did not allow firearms to be carried, they could still have legal recourse to prevent that. The old law was written in such a way that even though it wasn’t expressly forbidden for legal carriers, it was also not clear that it was permitted to carry. There was a lot of confusion on that. This allows for the carry of firearms in a place of worship if the required signage isn’t posted.
Good to know my church won't need to update our (super large and conspicuous) signs.
Man his friend is a piece of shit, like you didn't kill people but you hid the shit he used dude, and why the fuck and knew he was mentally disturbed as fuck.
Police seem divided on if he intentionally killed his sister. I thought she was a target for sure. This one seems like it could have been prevented somehow.
Best information we have is that you are misgendering his brother, FYI
EDIT: As is CNN
? I'm confused
Reports came out that the victim was a not-fully-out trans person who identified as male, and had only come out to some of their close friends
As such it's more appropriate to call them by their preferred pronouns of he/him
A lot of the major media outlets haven't followed this unfortunately
Teen Vogue is, as usual, one of the best reporting on the subject
This is the first I've heard of it. So the suspects sister was transitioning to a male and was dating a male. I hadn't heard this, makes it seem like his brother could have been a target.
Folks, please do better about this, he isn't the suspect's sister, and he isn't "a person who identified as male and prefered he/him"; he's a guy
Man his friend is a piece of shit, like you didn't kill people but you hid the shit he used dude, and why the fuck and knew he was mentally disturbed as fuck.
Police seem divided on if he intentionally killed his sister. I thought she was a target for sure. This one seems like it could have been prevented somehow.
Best information we have is that you are misgendering his brother, FYI
EDIT: As is CNN
? I'm confused
Reports came out that the victim was a not-fully-out trans person who identified as male, and had only come out to some of their close friends
As such it's more appropriate to call them by their preferred pronouns of he/him
A lot of the major media outlets haven't followed this unfortunately
Teen Vogue is, as usual, one of the best reporting on the subject
This is the first I've heard of it. So the suspects sister was transitioning to a male and was dating a male. I hadn't heard this, makes it seem like his brother could have been a target.
Folks, please do better about this, he isn't the suspect's sister, and he isn't "a person who identified as male and prefered he/him"; he's a guy
I said brother at the end. I wanted to make sure I had it straight. That it wasn't something else I was confusing it with. It was the person who was identified as the sister , who actually had transitions ,and was dating a male. Maybe he did kill his brother .
How is any of that innapropriate phrasing when I'm just trying to make sure I have my facts straight ? Feels like I'm being jumped on when I was just asking a simple question. Maybe this is a touchy subject for you.
Man his friend is a piece of shit, like you didn't kill people but you hid the shit he used dude, and why the fuck and knew he was mentally disturbed as fuck.
Police seem divided on if he intentionally killed his sister. I thought she was a target for sure. This one seems like it could have been prevented somehow.
Best information we have is that you are misgendering his brother, FYI
EDIT: As is CNN
? I'm confused
Reports came out that the victim was a not-fully-out trans person who identified as male, and had only come out to some of their close friends
As such it's more appropriate to call them by their preferred pronouns of he/him
A lot of the major media outlets haven't followed this unfortunately
Teen Vogue is, as usual, one of the best reporting on the subject
This is the first I've heard of it. So the suspects sister was transitioning to a male and was dating a male. I hadn't heard this, makes it seem like his brother could have been a target.
Folks, please do better about this, he isn't the suspect's sister, and he isn't "a person who identified as male and prefered he/him"; he's a guy
How is any of that innapropriate phrasing when I'm just trying to make sure I have my facts straight ? Feels like I'm being jumped on when I was just asking a simple question. Maybe this is a touchy subject for you.
Well, it's a touchy subject for a lot of people. But I also thought you were being jumped on rather quickly for trying to get your pronouns straight. The media was not reporting this, so how were we to know?
+19
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
As far as we know, brother had not come out to Dayton shooter, so was not targeted because of that.
Man his friend is a piece of shit, like you didn't kill people but you hid the shit he used dude, and why the fuck and knew he was mentally disturbed as fuck.
Police seem divided on if he intentionally killed his sister. I thought she was a target for sure. This one seems like it could have been prevented somehow.
Best information we have is that you are misgendering his brother, FYI
EDIT: As is CNN
? I'm confused
Reports came out that the victim was a not-fully-out trans person who identified as male, and had only come out to some of their close friends
As such it's more appropriate to call them by their preferred pronouns of he/him
A lot of the major media outlets haven't followed this unfortunately
Teen Vogue is, as usual, one of the best reporting on the subject
This is the first I've heard of it. So the suspects sister was transitioning to a male and was dating a male. I hadn't heard this, makes it seem like his brother could have been a target.
Folks, please do better about this, he isn't the suspect's sister, and he isn't "a person who identified as male and prefered he/him"; he's a guy
I said brother at the end. I wanted to make sure I had it straight. That it wasn't something else I was confusing it with. It was the person who was identified as the sister , who actually had transitions ,and was dating a male. Maybe he did kill his brother .
How is any of that innapropriate phrasing when I'm just trying to make sure I have my facts straight ? Feels like I'm being jumped on when I was just asking a simple question. Maybe this is a touchy subject for you.
In my experience the typical preference is not to refer to sex assigned at birth at all. Media reporting on this has made it pretty difficult to figure out since the news didn't break so much as trickle out when no one was looking.
It is basically impossible to tell the part it played in the shooting though. The shooter's brother wasn't out to his family from what we know. That doesn't preclude the shooter learning about it by accident the day of or suspecting something. Secrets have a way of coming out on their own at times. Someone close to the brother would need to come forward with what they thought to settle it to any real extent, and from what I can tell they are all happier not being identified as part of the story.
Man his friend is a piece of shit, like you didn't kill people but you hid the shit he used dude, and why the fuck and knew he was mentally disturbed as fuck.
Police seem divided on if he intentionally killed his sister. I thought she was a target for sure. This one seems like it could have been prevented somehow.
Best information we have is that you are misgendering his brother, FYI
EDIT: As is CNN
? I'm confused
Reports came out that the victim was a not-fully-out trans person who identified as male, and had only come out to some of their close friends
As such it's more appropriate to call them by their preferred pronouns of he/him
A lot of the major media outlets haven't followed this unfortunately
Teen Vogue is, as usual, one of the best reporting on the subject
This is the first I've heard of it. So the suspects sister was transitioning to a male and was dating a male. I hadn't heard this, makes it seem like his brother could have been a target.
Folks, please do better about this, he isn't the suspect's sister, and he isn't "a person who identified as male and prefered he/him"; he's a guy
I said brother at the end. I wanted to make sure I had it straight. That it wasn't something else I was confusing it with. It was the person who was identified as the sister , who actually had transitions ,and was dating a male. Maybe he did kill his brother .
How is any of that innapropriate phrasing when I'm just trying to make sure I have my facts straight ? Feels like I'm being jumped on when I was just asking a simple question. Maybe this is a touchy subject for you.
In my experience the typical preference is not to refer to sex assigned at birth at all. Media reporting on this has made it pretty difficult to figure out since the news didn't break so much as trickle out when no one was looking.
It is basically impossible to tell the part it played in the shooting though. The shooter's brother wasn't out to his family from what we know. That doesn't preclude the shooter learning about it by accident the day of or suspecting something. Secrets have a way of coming out on their own at times. Someone close to the brother would need to come forward with what they thought to settle it to any real extent, and from what I can tell they are all happier not being identified as part of the story.
Dayton PD sound like they believe it was planned and something he had fantasized about for a while. They remain conflicted on targeting and motive.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
Man his friend is a piece of shit, like you didn't kill people but you hid the shit he used dude, and why the fuck and knew he was mentally disturbed as fuck.
Police seem divided on if he intentionally killed his sister. I thought she was a target for sure. This one seems like it could have been prevented somehow.
Best information we have is that you are misgendering his brother, FYI
EDIT: As is CNN
? I'm confused
Reports came out that the victim was a not-fully-out trans person who identified as male, and had only come out to some of their close friends
As such it's more appropriate to call them by their preferred pronouns of he/him
A lot of the major media outlets haven't followed this unfortunately
Teen Vogue is, as usual, one of the best reporting on the subject
This is the first I've heard of it. So the suspects sister was transitioning to a male and was dating a male. I hadn't heard this, makes it seem like his brother could have been a target.
Folks, please do better about this, he isn't the suspect's sister, and he isn't "a person who identified as male and prefered he/him"; he's a guy
I said brother at the end. I wanted to make sure I had it straight. That it wasn't something else I was confusing it with. It was the person who was identified as the sister , who actually had transitions ,and was dating a male. Maybe he did kill his brother .
How is any of that innapropriate phrasing when I'm just trying to make sure I have my facts straight ? Feels like I'm being jumped on when I was just asking a simple question. Maybe this is a touchy subject for you.
In my experience the typical preference is not to refer to sex assigned at birth at all. Media reporting on this has made it pretty difficult to figure out since the news didn't break so much as trickle out when no one was looking.
It is basically impossible to tell the part it played in the shooting though. The shooter's brother wasn't out to his family from what we know. That doesn't preclude the shooter learning about it by accident the day of or suspecting something. Secrets have a way of coming out on their own at times. Someone close to the brother would need to come forward with what they thought to settle it to any real extent, and from what I can tell they are all happier not being identified as part of the story.
Dayton PD sound like they believe it was planned and something he had fantasized about for a while. They remain conflicted on targeting and motive.
Some mass shooters seem to do it largely for the hell of it, like the Vegas shooter.
If he was still not out to the general public, wouldn't it be an invasion of his privacy to use male pronouns when discussing him publicly? Sure, it's already public knowledge now, but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't think before deciding to signal boost it. Have his family or close friends approved the release of this information, at least?
In terms of trying to make these tragedies rarer, without directly facing the massive gun corporate lobbies and right to bear arms, do you guys analyze other countries' methods and crime stats? Eg. The Czech Republic has extremely low gun crime rates, while also having a significant gun culture. There are some similarities in the gun culture as well in that the legal right to own them is considered an important freedom (because obviously the Nazis and then later the Soviets didn't allow people to have them).
I don't know why the crime rates are so very different, but it seems US could use more red tape?
To get a licence, you need to apply to the police and your name goes on the gun owner central database with your background check, and you have to do a theoretical and practical exam (safe handling, knowledge of relevant law, first aid, accuracy). And pay some fees of course.
People who go through that process very rarely commit crimes with their guns and the small number of gun crimes in the country mainly come from illegally obtained weapons, which is probably pretty difficult for random aggrieved/ unstable guy without criminal contacts.
+2
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
In terms of trying to make these tragedies rarer, without directly facing the massive gun corporate lobbies and right to bear arms, do you guys analyze other countries' methods and crime stats? Eg. The Czech Republic has extremely low gun crime rates, while also having a significant gun culture. There are some similarities in the gun culture as well in that the legal right to own them is considered an important freedom (because obviously the Nazis and then later the Soviets didn't allow people to have them).
I don't know why the crime rates are so very different, but it seems US could use more red tape?
To get a licence, you need to apply to the police and your name goes on the gun owner central database with your background check, and you have to do a theoretical and practical exam (safe handling, knowledge of relevant law, first aid, accuracy). And pay some fees of course.
People who go through that process very rarely commit crimes with their guns and the small number of gun crimes in the country mainly come from illegally obtained weapons, which is probably pretty difficult for random aggrieved/ unstable guy without criminal contacts.
That's part of the complete intransigence. All of it is. NRA would go all out on that in seconds.
Problem is not really that US considers gun ownership a right.
But that it is not considered a responsibility.
It's a toy, a nifty thing to have, possibly a security blanket that more often than not does the opposite of intended result.
And there is next to no requirement, or enforcement, for safe handling and storage as far as i can tell.
In terms of trying to make these tragedies rarer, without directly facing the massive gun corporate lobbies and right to bear arms, do you guys analyze other countries' methods and crime stats? Eg. The Czech Republic has extremely low gun crime rates, while also having a significant gun culture. There are some similarities in the gun culture as well in that the legal right to own them is considered an important freedom (because obviously the Nazis and then later the Soviets didn't allow people to have them).
I don't know why the crime rates are so very different, but it seems US could use more red tape?
To get a licence, you need to apply to the police and your name goes on the gun owner central database with your background check, and you have to do a theoretical and practical exam (safe handling, knowledge of relevant law, first aid, accuracy). And pay some fees of course.
People who go through that process very rarely commit crimes with their guns and the small number of gun crimes in the country mainly come from illegally obtained weapons, which is probably pretty difficult for random aggrieved/ unstable guy without criminal contacts.
Yes, what you are describing is what the USA calls "gun control."
Man his friend is a piece of shit, like you didn't kill people but you hid the shit he used dude, and why the fuck and knew he was mentally disturbed as fuck.
Police seem divided on if he intentionally killed his sister. I thought she was a target for sure. This one seems like it could have been prevented somehow.
Best information we have is that you are misgendering his brother, FYI
EDIT: As is CNN
? I'm confused
Reports came out that the victim was a not-fully-out trans person who identified as male, and had only come out to some of their close friends
As such it's more appropriate to call them by their preferred pronouns of he/him
A lot of the major media outlets haven't followed this unfortunately
Teen Vogue is, as usual, one of the best reporting on the subject
This is the first I've heard of it. So the suspects sister was transitioning to a male and was dating a male. I hadn't heard this, makes it seem like his brother could have been a target.
Folks, please do better about this, he isn't the suspect's sister, and he isn't "a person who identified as male and prefered he/him"; he's a guy
Sorry if my post was written poorly, I was trying to be careful in describing his identity since I hadn't seen a clear statement of his pronouns, and clearly failed in the process. Sincere apologies for the mistake and if you were hurt in the process of me doing bad at this.
In terms of trying to make these tragedies rarer, without directly facing the massive gun corporate lobbies and right to bear arms, do you guys analyze other countries' methods and crime stats? Eg. The Czech Republic has extremely low gun crime rates, while also having a significant gun culture. There are some similarities in the gun culture as well in that the legal right to own them is considered an important freedom (because obviously the Nazis and then later the Soviets didn't allow people to have them).
I don't know why the crime rates are so very different, but it seems US could use more red tape?
To get a licence, you need to apply to the police and your name goes on the gun owner central database with your background check, and you have to do a theoretical and practical exam (safe handling, knowledge of relevant law, first aid, accuracy). And pay some fees of course.
People who go through that process very rarely commit crimes with their guns and the small number of gun crimes in the country mainly come from illegally obtained weapons, which is probably pretty difficult for random aggrieved/ unstable guy without criminal contacts.
I'd also note that for whatever gun culture there is, it pales in comparison to the USA. Per the wiki, there are more guns than people in the States (120.5 per 100 people). The next closest country is the Falkland Islands at 62.1. The Czech Republic comes in at 12.5, which is the highest in Eastern Europe, but not exactly some crazy number when compared to the entire continent.
Shut up, Mr. Burton! You were not brought upon this world to get it!
In terms of trying to make these tragedies rarer, without directly facing the massive gun corporate lobbies and right to bear arms, do you guys analyze other countries' methods and crime stats? Eg. The Czech Republic has extremely low gun crime rates, while also having a significant gun culture. There are some similarities in the gun culture as well in that the legal right to own them is considered an important freedom (because obviously the Nazis and then later the Soviets didn't allow people to have them).
I don't know why the crime rates are so very different, but it seems US could use more red tape?
To get a licence, you need to apply to the police and your name goes on the gun owner central database with your background check, and you have to do a theoretical and practical exam (safe handling, knowledge of relevant law, first aid, accuracy). And pay some fees of course.
People who go through that process very rarely commit crimes with their guns and the small number of gun crimes in the country mainly come from illegally obtained weapons, which is probably pretty difficult for random aggrieved/ unstable guy without criminal contacts.
A database of guns, gun owners, or gun sales is literally banned by law in the USA.
To perform a search, ATF investigators must find the specific index number of a former dealer, then search records chronologically for records of the exact gun they seek. They may review thousands of images in a search before they find the weapon they are looking for. That’s because dealer records are required to be “non-searchable” under federal law. Keyword searches, or sorting by date or any other field, are strictly prohibited.
The 1968 Gun Control Act gave the ATF authority to regulate federally licensed gun dealers. In 1978, the ATF tried to make dealers report most sales each quarter. The National Rifle Association and other groups denounced the plan, and lobbied to kill the reporting requirement. Congress did as the gun lobby requested, blocking the quarterly report proposal and reducing the ATF’s budget by $5 million: the amount the agency had sought to update its computer capacity.
“From that point on, if you even said ‘computer’ at ATF headquarters, everybody ran and hid in a closet,” says William Vizzard, a former ATF special agent and emeritus professor of criminal justice at California State University, Sacramento.
The war on searchable technology continued. In 1986, Congress enacted the Firearms Protection Act, which bans the ATF from creating a registry of guns, gun owners or gun sales.
Congress also put a rider barring the agency from “consolidation or centralization” of gun dealers’ records in every spending bill affecting the agency from 1979 through 2011, then made the prohibition permanent, under law.
Edit: The best comparison I can think of is how there is a difference between a place where cars are common and almost required and a place where cars are practically worshiped and criticism of anything about them is heresy. It is fairly easy to put various safety restrictions on getting a car in the former while it is almost unthinkable in the latter.
I dunno, a registry has received significant push-back in the past.
I'm fairly sure we had a thread about it when a NY newspaper (I think it was NY) published the names out of a state (?) registry that, AFAIK, was public data. I think it happened maybe shortly after Sandy Hook. Gun rights folks flipped their ever-loving shit.
i'm pretty sure i remember people arguing against a gun registry.
Usually on the basis of it not working, being too expensive, can't be done, etc...
The argument that America is especially awful so can't physically do a thing many other countries do is always weird.
The argument against is that america is terrible with registries of things and the fear that such a registry would lead to confiscation. Because when I registered my car I was terrified Al Gore would come take it immediately.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
i'm pretty sure i remember people arguing against a gun registry.
Usually on the basis of it not working, being too expensive, can't be done, etc...
The argument that America is especially awful so can't physically do a thing many other countries do is always weird.
The argument against is that america is terrible with registries of things and the fear that such a registry would lead to confiscation. Because when I registered my car I was terrified Al Gore would come take it immediately.
Or how voter registration lists, which includes residential addresses of voters and if they voted in an election, are frequently public in the USA.
Posts
If filthy language and losing control were the legal standard for not having access to weapons, Trump wouldn’t have the nuclear codes and I’d feel a lot safer
Editing this to be sure I'm not jamming my foot down my mouth as hard as possible, and just recommending future readers check this article out instead to clarify the victim's identity.
https://www.teenvogue.com/story/jordan-cofer-trans-victim-dayton-mass-shooting
3DS Friend Code: 0216-0898-6512
Switch Friend Code: SW-7437-1538-7786
Specifically, someone called Cuomo Freido. (Yes, this is a thing that happened, and I can get why it angered him the way it did.)
The first half a dozen replies to that tweet is McAfee giving away bitcoins and "people" claiming to have received them.
You guys are is some weird hell dimension.
It’s not a very important country most of the time
http://steamcommunity.com/id/mortious
Nah, somebody came up to him and called him Fredo because he's Andrew Cuomo's less successful brother (Fredo was Michael Corleone's idiot brother). Chris took that as a slur against Italians and got very mad. It went viral on the right because MEDIA MAN GOT ANGRY HUR HUR
This is the first I've heard of it. So the suspects sister was transitioning to a male and was dating a male. I hadn't heard this, makes it seem like his brother could have been a target.
pleasepaypreacher.net
For the record, since everybody has commented on removing the ban on firearms in places of worship, the law cleaned up previous language.
30.06/30.07 signage prohibiting legal concealed/open carry still apply to legal carriers. So if a church did not allow firearms to be carried, they could still have legal recourse to prevent that. The old law was written in such a way that even though it wasn’t expressly forbidden for legal carriers, it was also not clear that it was permitted to carry. There was a lot of confusion on that. This allows for the carry of firearms in a place of worship if the required signage isn’t posted.
This is why stricter, stronger control measures are needed. Because people will buy for those who can't buy for themselves. All the regulation in the world won't matter if you get people willing to buy and give guns and mods to others.
I can has cheezburger, yes?
I was thinking more along the lines of apartments.
Good to know my church won't need to update our (super large and conspicuous) signs.
Folks, please do better about this, he isn't the suspect's sister, and he isn't "a person who identified as male and prefered he/him"; he's a guy
I said brother at the end. I wanted to make sure I had it straight. That it wasn't something else I was confusing it with. It was the person who was identified as the sister , who actually had transitions ,and was dating a male. Maybe he did kill his brother .
How is any of that innapropriate phrasing when I'm just trying to make sure I have my facts straight ? Feels like I'm being jumped on when I was just asking a simple question. Maybe this is a touchy subject for you.
Well, it's a touchy subject for a lot of people. But I also thought you were being jumped on rather quickly for trying to get your pronouns straight. The media was not reporting this, so how were we to know?
My wife’s response was we can’t go because she’s afraid such an event with David Hogg especially is unsafe
In my experience the typical preference is not to refer to sex assigned at birth at all. Media reporting on this has made it pretty difficult to figure out since the news didn't break so much as trickle out when no one was looking.
It is basically impossible to tell the part it played in the shooting though. The shooter's brother wasn't out to his family from what we know. That doesn't preclude the shooter learning about it by accident the day of or suspecting something. Secrets have a way of coming out on their own at times. Someone close to the brother would need to come forward with what they thought to settle it to any real extent, and from what I can tell they are all happier not being identified as part of the story.
Dayton PD sound like they believe it was planned and something he had fantasized about for a while. They remain conflicted on targeting and motive.
Some mass shooters seem to do it largely for the hell of it, like the Vegas shooter.
If he was still not out to the general public, wouldn't it be an invasion of his privacy to use male pronouns when discussing him publicly? Sure, it's already public knowledge now, but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't think before deciding to signal boost it. Have his family or close friends approved the release of this information, at least?
It does seem pretty solid in this case, yeah.
I don't know why the crime rates are so very different, but it seems US could use more red tape?
To get a licence, you need to apply to the police and your name goes on the gun owner central database with your background check, and you have to do a theoretical and practical exam (safe handling, knowledge of relevant law, first aid, accuracy). And pay some fees of course.
People who go through that process very rarely commit crimes with their guns and the small number of gun crimes in the country mainly come from illegally obtained weapons, which is probably pretty difficult for random aggrieved/ unstable guy without criminal contacts.
That's part of the complete intransigence. All of it is. NRA would go all out on that in seconds.
But that it is not considered a responsibility.
It's a toy, a nifty thing to have, possibly a security blanket that more often than not does the opposite of intended result.
And there is next to no requirement, or enforcement, for safe handling and storage as far as i can tell.
Yes, what you are describing is what the USA calls "gun control."
Sorry if my post was written poorly, I was trying to be careful in describing his identity since I hadn't seen a clear statement of his pronouns, and clearly failed in the process. Sincere apologies for the mistake and if you were hurt in the process of me doing bad at this.
3DS Friend Code: 0216-0898-6512
Switch Friend Code: SW-7437-1538-7786
I'd also note that for whatever gun culture there is, it pales in comparison to the USA. Per the wiki, there are more guns than people in the States (120.5 per 100 people). The next closest country is the Falkland Islands at 62.1. The Czech Republic comes in at 12.5, which is the highest in Eastern Europe, but not exactly some crazy number when compared to the entire continent.
A database of guns, gun owners, or gun sales is literally banned by law in the USA.
https://www.thetrace.org/2016/08/atf-non-searchable-databases/
Edit: The best comparison I can think of is how there is a difference between a place where cars are common and almost required and a place where cars are practically worshiped and criticism of anything about them is heresy. It is fairly easy to put various safety restrictions on getting a car in the former while it is almost unthinkable in the latter.
Law and Order ≠ Justice
ACNH Island Isla Cero: DA-3082-2045-4142
Captain of the SES Comptroller of the State
I'm fairly sure we had a thread about it when a NY newspaper (I think it was NY) published the names out of a state (?) registry that, AFAIK, was public data. I think it happened maybe shortly after Sandy Hook. Gun rights folks flipped their ever-loving shit.
They don't have to be because again its literally against the law. It's like I don't have to be rabidly anti vampire since vampires don't exist.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Usually on the basis of it not working, being too expensive, can't be done, etc...
The argument that America is especially awful so can't physically do a thing many other countries do is always weird.
The argument against is that america is terrible with registries of things and the fear that such a registry would lead to confiscation. Because when I registered my car I was terrified Al Gore would come take it immediately.
pleasepaypreacher.net
It's the flipside of American Exceptionalism, weaponized by the status quo.
Or how voter registration lists, which includes residential addresses of voters and if they voted in an election, are frequently public in the USA.