Tag: guns

Officials wanted Florida school shooting suspect committed in 2016

libertarirynn:

Officials were so concerned about the mental stability of the student accused of last month’s Florida school massacre that they decided he should be forcibly committed.

But the recommendation was never acted upon.

A commitment under the law would have made it more difficult if not impossible for Nikolas Cruz to obtain a gun legally.

Read that last sentence again: A commitment under the law would have made it more difficult if not impossible for Nikolas Cruz to obtain a gun legally.


This shooting was not the result of a lack of gun comtrol. Existing gun control measures would have stopped him if the feds had done their jobs. And these feds are part of the same government you trust to protect you from further gun vilolence. 

Officials wanted Florida school shooting suspect committed in 2016

wherelibertydwells:

wolverinedoc68w:

lakeside-conservative:

Like everything else these days…

This is true. Same shit at my kids schools. I’ve told my kids to stand their ground and if a teacher lays a hand on them to force them outside we are filling a lawsuit.

If someone protests the protest by refusing to take part in the walkout, and they are punished … that means the real anti-establishment protesters standing up to authority are the ones staying inside  🤔

Source: lakeside-conservative

You’ve really made me rethink my position on gun control. I still think the NRA isn’t exactky making themselves look too hot, but besides that, I really am rethinking my position due to the evidence you’ve shown and your arguements. I do still lean on there being the need for better regulations, but I do begin to wonder if they’ll be enough.

takashi0:

nuttyrabbit:

Thank you anon.  Honestly I pretty much share your view of “we need more regulations but please don’t go overboard, and actually consider other factors” 

We should probably make sure the regulations we already have are being properly enforced before considering adding more, and judging by the past few shootings they’re not.

savageoppressme:

callmegoddess618:

nopostradio:

callmegoddess618:

mutant-aesthetic:

callmegoddess618:

mutant-aesthetic:

People say “You have no reason to own an AR-15!” but honestly, I have yet to hear a good reason as to why I SHOULDN’T own one.

Because if you’re that bad of a shot that you need an AR-15 to hit what you’re shooting at, you sure as shit don’t need to be shooting live ammo until you learn how to fucking aim.

…what?

Okay lowest common denominator it is then.

You do not need to be shooting any gun with live ammo if you cannot aim a gun well enough to hit your target without an AR-15. Literally the only thing an AR-15 is good for is shooting large amounts of bullets in a short time at a large amount of targets. You can’t use it for hunting because it would render the game absolutely inedible and therefore useless, plus it poses a huge danger to everything else in the area you’re not aiming at. You can’t use it for home defense unless you plan on ruining your house; you should use a handgun instead.

In short, if you can’t hit what you are shooting at without using an AR-15, you don’t need to be shooting anything at all because you’re a crap shot. You don’t need a gun for anything other than hunting and home defense. If you are delusional enough to believe that you can defeat the United States military which spends several billion a year….then you certainly don’t need a gun because you are not remotely mentally stable.

You…have no idea what an AR-15 is aside from “the scary gun”, do you? You seem to think it’s a hose that fires billions of football sized nuclear bombs, when it’s actually a .22 with delusions of grandeur, that fires one bullet per trigger pull. “Semi automatic” does not mean ‘even MORE automatic!!!!!’. It means, in fact, the precise opposite. It means it isn’t a muzzle loader, or a bolt or single action that has to be manually cocked between shots.

I know its an automatic rifle that can fire up to 400 bullets per minute. I also know that a .22 RIP round can do plenty of damage with just one bullet, and 400 of those fired into a crowded cafeteria at a school can cause a lot of dead bodies. I also happen to know it’s one of the most common guns used in mass shootings precisely because it is one of the only guns designed to injure and kill the maximum amount of targets in the shortest amount of time that your average person can get their hands on. I’ve also shot one, and I have a retired Marine corporal for a brother who flat out says anyone who says they “need” one is either planning on killing a lot of people, or flat out lying

Tfw @callmegoddess618 forgets what a SHOTGUN is

An AR 15 is a semi-automatic weapon. The definition for semi-autos is: “A gun that fires a bullet each time the trigger is pulled and performs the steps needed to fire again”. Aka a gun you don’t need to cock, but you still have to pull the trigger to fire each indv. round.

You can’t just hold down the trigger and have it fire continuously. Any gun that does that is automatic, and illegal for a civilian to own without an INSANE amount of money, security clearances, and taxes.

Any gun ever made was designed to kill. That’s what ANY WEAPON EVER MADE IS FOR.

Like ffs just admit that you know literally nothing about guns

biff-donderglutes:

lee-enfeel:

lenins-and-things:

thetincanhitman:

crazy-pages:

politicalprof:

An excellent point.

And no, having guns wouldn’t have stopped those tragedies either.

Also, the fucking Warsaw Ghetto Uprising. I know it’s not an American history event, but it’s a pretty fucking salient example of a heavily armed, militarized militia being crushed and marched off to camps. Like, the Jewish people fought back with heavy and light machine guns, crates of guns, grenades, and basically everything else which could be scraped together. It was a second amendment dream scenario, the kind of civilian firepower you don’t even see in US red states. Now I’d say guess how it turned out, but you don’t have to guess, here’s the causalities table. 

image

Guess which side is the Nazis. Fucking. Guess. 

Guns don’t prevent marginalized people from being rounded up and marched off to camps. Strong robust democratic systems with political representation of marginalized peoples do. 

Ah yes, the Jews of the Warsaw Ghetto should have just tried to get some democratic representation and protest peacefully. And then silently have gone to the work camps because it was the “will of democracy”. Get that liberalized, defeatist idea out here. You’re essentially say the Jews were wrong to defend themselves, disgusting

I will always support people having the means to defend themselves, no matter the long odds.

What @crazy-pages fails to mention is that it was roughly 1,000 Jewish resistance fighters versus three times their number in wehmacht and SS troops. The vast majority of those killed during the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising were civilians, considering the nazis burned the entire ghetto to the ground, building by building, with the residents still inside.

How about a much better example of armed resistance in the very same city, only a year later?

While the Polish side did suffer slightly higher casualties, German losses were still significant, and cost time and resources that were badly needed to maintain their front-line against the Soviets.

Armed resistance is rarely a Star Wars-esque success story. Fighting an insurgency against a conventional army is an uphill battle, and usually one where even if you win, you’re likely to have more casualties than the people you were fighting. But that doesn’t mean armed resistance is futile or pointless, and even if it were, for many it’s better to die fighting your oppressors, than starving to death in a concentration camp.

Even the most well-represented democratic systems are not immune to subversion by authoritarians. The Wiemar Republic should be a good enough example of this.

And not only that but the fighters of the Warsaw Ghetto weren’t able to have guns. If you look at the actual equipment used in the Ghetto Uprising it’s anemic and severely underwhelming. From Wikipedia:

“Marek Edelman,
who was the only surviving uprising commander from the left-wing ŻOB,
stated that the ŻOB had 220 fighters and each was armed with a handgun,
grenades, and Molotov cocktails. His organization had three rifles in each area, as well as two land mines and one submachine gun…“


“The right-wing faction ŻZW which was founded by former Polish officers,
was larger, more established and had closer ties with the Polish resistance, making it better equipped.[24][25] Zimmerman describes the arm supplies for the uprising as “limited but real”.[26]
Specifically, Jewish fighters of the ŻZW received from the Polish Home
Army: 2 heavy machine guns, 4 light machine guns, 21 submachine guns, 30
rifles, 50 pistols, and over 400 grenades for the uprising.[27]

“

It isn’t stated in that quote, but the ZZW, the better armed of the two groups, had 400 fighters and only 107 guns. And 50 of those were practically one step up from a knife against machine guns.

If anything, this only makes the case for civilians having access to military equipment to have even the slightest chance against state violence and in no way is some kind of “second amendment dream scenario.”

Honestly. Fuck you, @crazy-pages. You took an indescribably brave act of sacrifice by genuine heroes ready, willing, and surely expecting to die. You took this story of a disparity of power, one of biblical proportions, and turned it into the fault of desperate victims of violent oppression.

Fuck off.

Source: politicalprof

tybalt-you-saucy-boi:

hello-kitty-senpai:

becauseithrewgasandamatchonher:

hello-kitty-senpai:

association-of-free-people:

boringly-normal:

Haha, he cut up frogs and birds? Did he kill them on his own, or did he find them dead and then cut them up? I don’t care about the rest, I want to know about this particular thing

He was killing them and when asked why he was mutulating the specimens he’s quoted as saying he “wanted to see what’s inside”.

This is CLASSIC psychopathic behavior down to the purported reason for mutilation.

I’ve read quite a few books on psycho killers and this behavior is so often repeated across the individual narratives that it’s established as a clinical marker of descent towards homicidal behavior.

What’s interesting to me in comparison with other emerging killers is that he seemed to not give a fuck who witnessed what he was doing. With the bird he killed it, brought it in his house and threw it on the kitchen counter with others present. No one was correcting him or he was in such a sociopathic bubble that the sentiment of others had no bearing on his behavior.

Guys like Dahmer at least were sensitive enough to perform their animal mutulations in isolation and guarded secrecy sensing the norms they were violating and the resistance or suspicion they would generate in other people.

> mental capacity of a 12-14 year old
> emotionally unstable
> suicidal
> homicidal
> orphaned
> taken in by a stranger who wanted his money
> clear signs of psychopathy
> cops were told and didn;t do anything
> fbi was told and didn’t do anything
but we’re not supposed to talk about mental health or the failure of law enforcement to do something or the copycat nature of the crime or the fact that before he had access to guns, he was using knives.

We’re only allowed to talk about gun control, for some reason.

Y’all aren’t allowed to bring mental health into this fucking conversation because all you seem to do is bring mental health up regardless if it applies or not.

Y’all aren’t allowed to bring mental health into this fucking conversation because outside of WHITE mass shooters y’all never seem to wanna talk about it.

Y’all ARE NOT FUCKING ALLOWED to bring mental health into this fucking conversation because all you are doing is perpetuating the idea that people with mental health issues are violent and dangerous when the fact of the matter is mentally ill people are more likely to be the victim of fucking violence rather than the perpetrators.

1) I have bipolar Disorder, this is literally my lane

2) I bring it up EVERY time regardless of race, i don’t now nor have i ever given a fuck about race in the context of mental health

3) It absolutely applies here

4) you dont get to make the decision. You ain’t part of this.

Yeah because clearly this had nothing to do with mental health. Just because some people don’t know the difference between autism and schizophrenia or OCD and BPD doesn’t mean we shouldn’t talk about mental health in these situations.

If someone mistakenly believes that mentally ill = homocidal then just explain to them that it’s more like homocidal = mentally ill and mentally ill = a wide range of varying disorders with different symptoms. Avoiding the conversation entirely just adds to the confusion and misrepresentation, making it more difficult for people with mental illnesses to be understood properly.

Homicidal doesn’t even necessarily mean mentally ill and mentally ill people are likely to be victims of violence and all that (I’m reminded of that pot I reblogged relatively recently about how schizophrenic people are more likely to be a victim of violence rather than a perpetrator of violence) but like mental health is a big part of what drives people to kill and since this person was very clearly mentally ill I think it’s a massive part of this particular instance

And anyway mental healthcare, even though a lot of mentally ill people don’t kill and never have or never will be homicidal or even violent, still has a lot of flaws that need to be fixed

You can say that this “mental illness causes people to kill” argument is ableist (for sure is in some ways) but that doesn’t invalidate mental illness as part of the conversation.

There is no reason this guy should’ve been allowed to do this. He was clearly mentally ill or at least disturbed enough to be removed from society.

His access to guns is also part of the conversation but you can’t deny that mental illness was also part of it, because it was.

This should not lead to a “all mentally ill people are dangerous” thing but you can’t deny that mental illness does sometimes lead to violence.

Mental healthcare needs to be improved whether or not mental illness leads to violence anyway so I don’t really see it as a massive problem if this part of the Parkland conversation leads to tangible change for the better in the mental healthcare system. Probably won’t, but I sure can hope.

Source: i-hate-chick-fil-a