The 'Americans Getting Shot' Thread

[Norton]

Your peashooter isn't going to help.

Damn you're rignt. Bastards have us outgunned. We the people need more guns. Big anti tank guns. Some of them fancy anti aircraft guns and missiles. Tanks too. Big tanks with big guns n other stuff. They have nukes I hear. I'll have a couple of those as well. A bit of MAD will show em. Screw the libtards. If they ask why I need all these weapons, I'll tell em just for hunting silly wabbits.

Must protect ourselves in the event the fools we voted for attempt to turn our fine democracy into a dictatorship.

All enshrined right there in 2nd place in our sacred never to be screwed with constitution.

[panama hat]

All enshrined right there in 2nd place in our sacred never to be screwed with constitution.

Yup, written by racist slave-owners 250 years ago. Amazing how nothing changes

Two guns recovered from suspects were purchased legally, federal officials say

Meredith Davis, a spokeswoman for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, said officials had "successfully traced" the four guns recovered in connection with the San Bernardino shooting and determined that two of the weapons were purchased legally.

The guns were bought by an individual associated with the investigation, Davis said but declined to name the person.

"Agents continue to investigate leads concerning the two additional firearms," Davis said.

Police officials said that two suspects, Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik, were armed with two assault rifles and two semiautomatic handguns.

The assault rifles were a .223-caliber DPMS Model A15 and a Smith and Wesson M&P15. One of the handguns was manufactured by Llama, and the other by Smith and Wesson.

San Bernardino shooting - LA Times

[panama hat]

10 to 1 . . . . guess who won and guess who the apologists for police murder will be - again

The firing squad: Shocking moment at least TEN San Francisco cops use a volley of shots to kill lone black man armed with a knife

A black man was gunned down in the street by police after he was surrounded by officers in a San Francisco street.
Police Chief Gregory Suhr confirmed the man, who was holding a knife, was killed after the shooting in Bayview at around 5pm on Wednesday.
His description is said to have matched that of a suspected wanted for stabbing someone in a nearby street.


Read more: San Francisco police surround and gun down a black man in this video | Daily Mail Online

I didn't watch the video, but how sickening and ineffective can a police force be

[harrybarracuda]

Well done New York Post:



And frankly when I hear cnuts like Rand Paul say they're "offended" by it, I have a burning desire to smash their fucking faces in.

[harrybarracuda]

FFS can Fox sink any lower?

"If someone leaves your party called Sayed, and someone says 'Where's Sayed gone?', you know what, call the cops, that's where we are right now".

What a bunch of twats.

[MrG]

You have a lot of crazies in the US all of whom seem to be able to pick up a gun and kill with tedious regularity if they so choose.
Admission of the reality will lead to acceptance and then maybe, just maybe, your people might achieve progress.
Frankly, I think you are all a bit too, well, stupid.

It is stupid, but so is your "reasoning".
If you bothered to educate yourself on the subject you would find that roughly 85% of the population want gun control. About 70% of NRA members want gun control.
The reason nothing happens is because the government is corrupted by money from, among other places, the NRA.
Consider yourself slightly more educated on the subject than you were berfore your inane post.

Ahh, so the majority and your President want gun control but it doesn't happen because of a " corrupt conspiracy " which has bought Congress, the Senate, the White House and every fucking state assembly in the entire fucking US of A?

RightyO, I geddit now. Thanks for that.

Daft as brushes, the lot of you.

So your best answer is no answer, just fling more shit. And you try to present yourself here as "the smart nutter". Failed.

[MrG]

I would disagree - it's not money that's keeping the gummint from legislating strict gun ownership laws, it's the potential political backlash proponents of this tightening believe they will receive.

Again, a majority of Americans want some form of gun control. In congress, money talks, not necessarily popular opinion.

[MrG]

You can pass laws to mitigate the problem. And have an amnesty/buyback of assault-type weapons, which they did in Australia (and they have had no mass shooting since).

The only people that will keep them against the law are fucking right wing nutters and you can just go and take those fuckers out with a SWAT team, because they are the ones who will probably end up shooting up a school with them anyway.

Green you if I could.

[MrG]

For those of you that think Obama should be doing more than he is to pass legislation, here's how it works.

How Are Laws Made?

Laws begin as ideas. First, a representative sponsors a bill. The bill is then assigned to a committee for study. If released by the committee, the bill is put on a calendar to be voted on, debated or amended. If the bill passes by simple majority (218 of 435), the bill moves to the Senate. In the Senate, the bill is assigned to another committee and, if released, debated and voted on. Again, a simple majority (51 of 100) passes the bill. Finally, a conference committee made of House and Senate members works out any differences between the House and Senate versions of the bill. The resulting bill returns to the House and Senate for final approval. The Government Printing Office prints the revised bill in a process called enrolling. The President has 10 days to sign or veto the enrolled bill.

The Legislative Process · House.gov

[fishlocker]

[Cujo]

Well done New York Post:



And frankly when I hear cnuts like Rand Paul say they're "offended" by it, I have a burning desire to smash their fucking faces in.

After a mass shooting, politicians 'shamed' for offering prayers

Daily News Cover: God Isn't Fixing ThisImage copyrightTwitter
Amidst the news of a mass shooting in California, a lively debate erupted on Twitter over the power and utility of offering "prayers" in the wake of such an event.
It's political boilerplate to offer "thoughts and prayers" to the victims of violence, and the majority of Republican presidential candidates took this approach after a shooting in California left 14 people dead and more injured.

"Our prayers are with the victims, their families, and the first responders in San Bernardino who willingly go into harm's way to save others," wrote Ted Cruz.

Democrats Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders went a different route, and made statements about gun policy. "I refuse to accept this as normal. We must take action to stop gun violence now," wrote Clinton.

Bernie Sanders calls mass shootings Image copyrightTwitter

Before long, the difference in approach was picked up on social media - and rapidly politicised. What followed was a raging debate, in which Democrat-leaning voices criticised the appropriateness of offering prayers in the face of what many saw as a consequence of "political choice" - the decision not to pass gun reform laws in the US. At the most extreme end, it was dubbed "prayer-shaming".

"Your "thoughts" should be about steps to take to stop this carnage. Your "prayers" should be for forgiveness if you do nothing - again," tweeted Senator Chris Murphy, a Democrat. He represents the state of Connecticut, where 28 people, mostly children, were killed in the Sandy Hook shootings.

A plan for gun reform was put forth by President Barack Obama after that tragedy, but failed to pass Congress.
ThinkProgress reporter Igor Volsky retweeted politicians who offered "thoughts and prayers," adding to each tweet the campaign contributions they received from the National Rifle Association.

But there was a backlash, from those who said the attack on prayers were partisan and mean-spirited.
"The American Left on display today: The hashtag #BringBackOurGirls works. Tweeting 'Prayers offered' should be shamed and ridiculed," wrote conservative pundit Erick Erickson.

The Federalists' Sean Davis retweeted messages from President Obama offering thoughts and prayers after a shooting at the Navy Yard, in Washington DC, as well as the MH17 plane crash and the Charlie Hebdo shooting in Paris.


As the debate wore on, some tried to find room for both messages.
"To be clear: Offering prayers is not the problem. They can be a balm and a sign of good will. But politicians' actions are relevant too," wrote the science fiction writer John Scalzi.

"Guys. Don't mock the sincere offering of prayers. Mock legislative inaction or hypocrisy. But offering a prayer is not offering NOTHING," wrote Ana Marie Cox, a left-leaning pundit who is public about her faith.
She hosted a largely respectful debate about prayer on her Twitter feed for most of the night, which ended with an "official call for cute animal pix".

After a mass shooting, politicians 'shamed' for offering prayers - BBC News

[AntRobertson]

For those of you that think Obama should be doing more than he is to pass legislation, here's how it works.

How Are Laws Made?

Laws begin as ideas. First, a representative sponsors a bill. The bill is then assigned to a committee for study. If released by the committee, the bill is put on a calendar to be voted on, debated or amended. If the bill passes by simple majority (218 of 435), the bill moves to the Senate. In the Senate, the bill is assigned to another committee and, if released, debated and voted on. Again, a simple majority (51 of 100) passes the bill. Finally, a conference committee made of House and Senate members works out any differences between the House and Senate versions of the bill. The resulting bill returns to the House and Senate for final approval. The Government Printing Office prints the revised bill in a process called enrolling. The President has 10 days to sign or veto the enrolled bill.

The Legislative Process · House.gov

Reminds me of that saying about watching sausage being made.

[AntRobertson]

"Your "thoughts" should be about steps to take to stop this carnage. Your "prayers" should be for forgiveness if you do nothing - again," tweeted Senator Chris Murphy, a Democrat. He represents the state of Connecticut, where 28 people, mostly children, were killed in the Sandy Hook shootings.

Sounds like a guy I'd vote for.

[panama hat]

"Your "thoughts" should be about steps to take to stop this carnage. Your "prayers" should be for forgiveness if you do nothing - again," tweeted Senator Chris Murphy, a Democrat. He represents the state of Connecticut, where 28 people, mostly children, were killed in the Sandy Hook shootings.

Sounds like a guy I'd vote for.

Sounds like a guy who doesn't care about being re-elected.

Yup - a guy to vote for

[spliff]

Man?s hoard of nearly 5,000 guns shows ease of amassing arms in U.S. | Reuters

[Seekingasylum]

I have just read a report that the Ulster County Sheriff, not as in N.Ireland but somewhat north of New York, has advised people, " in the light of recent events in the US and in the world " who hold a licensed handgun to carry it at all times.

This is the culture one is dealing with here: a boneheaded, numbskull moron is advising folk to carry a handgun in order to protect themselves from some chance attack by an assailant armed with an assault rifle for which they also hold a licence.

Frankly, it's a clear indication that society in the US has broken down irretrievably and its law enforcement are powerless to do anything about it.

Nuttier than squirrel shit, the lot of them.

All the weapons held by the crazy couple in San bernardino were obtained legally and their answer is that all folk leaving their homes should be armed?

[rickschoppers]

Disarm the population.

Impossible.

Don't even try to convince PH snub, he has an 'innate' lack of understanding about all things gun related. He thinks you can just go out and disarm all Americans.

[Cujo]

Disarm the population.

Impossible.

Don't even try to convince PH snub, he has an 'innate' lack of understanding about all things gun related. He thinks you can just go out and disarm all Americans.

He obviously doesn't. He himself just stated that it would be impossible.

[Cujo]

Man?s hoard of nearly 5,000 guns shows ease of amassing arms in U.S. | Reuters

Lazy mofo.

Man’s hoard of nearly 5,000 guns shows ease of amassing arms in U.S.
PAGELAND, SOUTH CAROLINA | BY PETER EISLER

As sheriff’s investigators threaded past the battered cars, cast-off tires and rusted farm equipment cluttering Brent Nicholson’s front yard, there was no hint of the sinister stockpile hidden behind his windowless front door.

Inside, the guns were everywhere: rifles and shotguns piled in the living room, halls and bedrooms; handguns littering tables and countertops. Outside, when they rolled up the door on the pre-fab metal garage, more arms spilled out at their feet.

“This has completely changed our definition of an ass-load of guns,” said Chesterfield County Sheriff Jay Brooks. Six weeks after the discovery, officers are still cataloging the weapons, many of which have proved stolen, and the final tally is expected to be close to 5,000. “I don’t know if there’s ever been (a seizure) this big anywhere before,” Brooks says.

The question of how one man amassed such a stockpile of guns arises just as there is renewed American soul-searching over the widespread availability of firearms in the wake of a series of mass shootings.

Even in a country where more people own more guns than anywhere else in the world, Nicholson's cache is extraordinary. The U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives doesn't rank gun seizures by size, but a spokesman says Nicholson's hoard probably is among the largest ever.

Yet when and why Nicholson set out to amass such an arsenal remains a mystery. Investigators are trying to determine whether he was simply a gun-obsessed hoarder or a supply valve in the “Iron Pipeline” of illegal firearms flowing from the south to New Jersey, New York and other northern states.

Nicholson, jailed on multiple charges of possessing stolen property, has not entered a plea or retained an attorney, court records show. His wife, Sharon Nicholson, facing similar charges and free on bond, declined to discuss specifics of the case but stressed in a brief interview that her husband buys his guns legally.

The Nicholson case raises issues that are fueling an increasingly heated national dialogue on the modern-day implications of Americans’ constitutional right to bear arms, which puts no limits on the number of weapons citizens can own. The uncertainty over how he got his guns – and what he was doing with them – underscores disputes over private gun sales, gun registration and what the government should know about who owns firearms and how they change hands.

Now, the spate of mass shootings, capped by Wednesday's spree by a heavily armed couple who killed 14 at an office holiday party in San Bernardino, California, has pushed those issues to the fore in the presidential campaign. The massacre, which follows an attack that killed three last Friday at a Colorado Planned Parenthood clinic and an Oct. 1 rampage by a gunman who killed 10 at an Oregon college, prompted Hillary Clinton, leading candidate for the Democratic nomination, to renew her call to "stop gun violence now" with new firearm purchase restrictions. Conversely, those who top the polls for the Republican nomination, Donald Trump and Ben Carson, insist the answer to gun violence is to empower citizens to thwart such attacks by making it easier, not harder, to buy and carry weapons.

It wasn’t hard for Nicholson.

A FAMILY TRADITION

Just about everyone knows the Nicholsons in this struggling town of 2,700, where the textile industry’s regional decline has helped strand median household income at $26,500 a year, half the U.S. average, and burglary rates run well over national norms. Firearms are a cultural staple – hunting clubs and cabins dot the county – and people say Nicholson’s penchant for guns was a family affair.

“Everybody knew he’d buy guns; his father bought ‘em, his grandfather bought ‘em,” says Al Padgett, 68, who keeps a booth at a local flea market and says he’s known the family all his life. “He collected ‘em, hoarded ‘em, but I never knew him to sell a gun. Not one. He did everyone a favor keeping ‘em off the street.”

Brooks sees things differently. Nicholson had piles of allegedly stolen goods, including a zoo’s worth of taxidermy trophies, Brooks says, but his preference was guns and he provided a ready market for burglars who grabbed them from cabins and hunting camps. The sheriff still hasn’t determined precisely how many guns in Nicholson’s cache were stolen, noting that hundreds have had their serial numbers removed so they can’t be traced.

“Getting him locked up dries up the outlet for this stolen merchandise,” Brooks says.

Brooks suspects Nicholson may have been selling some of the guns. He had relatively few handguns – maybe a half-dozen large buckets full – and “that makes us believe he had a market for those and was moving them north,” Brooks says, noting that the matter remains under investigation.

South Carolina is a common starting point for firearms moving up the Iron Pipeline, a route for many of the 230,000 or so guns stolen nationwide each year. The South has more gun thefts than any other region, federal data show, and police in New York and other northern cities say they regularly tie those guns to crimes, though there is no data on how often.

Stemming the flow is a challenge, law enforcement officials say, because it’s not organized groups moving truckloads of weapons; it’s a loose web of individuals who sell guns more as an occasional sideline than a full-time endeavor.

A SHADOWY PATH

On Oct. 21, a sheriff’s deputy just over the state line in Union County, North Carolina, pulled Nicholson over for running a stop sign. Nicholson’s pick-up had bogus license plates – and the deputy noticed rifle barrels poking up from behind the seat when he approached the vehicle.

A search turned up 20 rifles, nine handguns and nearly 200 hydrocodone pills, arrest records show, and several of the guns were stolen. Nicholson was arrested for possessing stolen weapons, trafficking in opiates and vehicular violations.

Nicholson was still jailed 48 hours later when a deputy in Pageland stopped by his house with a subpoena in a family court matter. The deputy spotted equipment in the yard that had been reported stolen, and investigators returned with a search warrant. They’d spend the next six days removing guns, hundreds of cases of ammo, and other goods.

“He was going up to Union County to do something with those guns; we don’t know what,” Brooks says. “We’ve got information that he was moving some of these goods and … we’re looking at his activities to see if he was part of something more organized.”

Tracking Nicholson’s guns is a challenge because many states, including South Carolina, don’t regulate private gun purchases, which are unrestricted and require no background check. So person-to-person sales, including gun show transactions that don’t involve licensed dealers, are largely untraceable.

There also is no national gun registration mandate – only some state laws. So, unlike, say, cars, which can be tracked through registrations, guns often have no traceable ownership trail beyond their last sale by a licensed dealer.

It's an issue that also is complicating efforts to trace the origin of the two assault-style rifles and two handguns used in Wednesday's shooting spree in San Bernardino. The guns initially were bought legally: two by someone "associated with" the case and two by someone with no apparent link, according to ATF spokeswoman Meredith Davis. But it's still not clear how those guns got to the shooters.

President Barack Obama and the major Democratic presidential candidates support background checks for private firearms sales; Leading Republican candidates generally oppose additional gun controls, echoing the National Rifle Association’s position that they’re unnecessary constraints on gun owners’ 2nd Amendment right to bear arms.

None of the proposals being floated on either side of the political spectrum would limit the number of guns someone can own.

A HUNT FOR OWNERS

So far, investigators have identified owners of just a fraction of Nicholson’s guns. Even those that still have serial numbers can be traced only to the last time they passed through a licensed dealer. And since there’s no requirement that gun owners record those numbers, many who believe their guns were stolen and sold to Nicholson are unable to prove the weapons belong to them.

Sharon Nicholson, 52, said in a brief interview at the family’s liquor store that her husband typically bought his guns at stores, but Brooks says investigators have found no records of any purchases he may have made from licensed dealers.

Ultimately, the courts will decide what happens to Nicholson’s guns. Brooks suspects many will be destroyed, particularly those with no serial numbers, because their rightful owners can’t be identified.

Some locals scratch their heads over that possibility, arguing that it’s a waste of good weaponry. Nicholson may not have known if he was buying weapons that prove to be stolen, some say, and he should be allowed to keep any that do not.

“It doesn’t make sense,” says Otis Burch, 85, another local who knows the Nicholsons. “He’s a good man – he wasn’t selling those guns.

“I asked him just about a month ago if he’d sell me a deer rifle,” Burch adds, “and he said he didn’t have any.”


Read more at Reutershttp://www.reuters.com/article/2015/12/04/us-usa-guns-stockpile-insight-idUSKBN0TM2LU20151204#eAc4WqOPZmyDkKz1.99

[Storekeeper]

[rickschoppers]

Makes sense tax.

[bsnub]

I don't suppose it will occur to them that if in fact a Muslim terrorist cell were to decide to wreak havoc they can legally and easily obtain all the weapons they need right there

Oh so you are going to join with genticles and throw all 320 million Americans under the bus? I didnt know you were that stupid. Look the majority of Americans want gone control. It is the Republicans who will do whatever it takes to block it. They are the nut jobs. Today they voted down two bills put forth by Democrats one to expand background checks and the second to block gun sales to people who are on the Terrorist watch and no fly lists. Yes you heard it right they voted against a bill to keep terrorists from buying guns. They are insane and these are the people that Democrats are up against.

[bsnub]

Senate Republicans voted today to block a measure that would have prevented individuals on the terror watch list from legally buying guns in the United States.

Politico reported:

The first gun control measure proposed by Democrats was legislation from Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) that would deny people on a federal terrorism watch list the ability to purchase guns. The measure failed, 45-54. Sen. Heidi Heitkamp (D-N.D.) voted with Republicans to reject the measure, and Sen. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) crossed over to vote in favor of the gun restrictions.

The second vote revived legislation from April 2013, written in the aftermath of the shooting deaths of 20 elementary school children in Newtown, Conn., with bipartisan backing that would enact universal background checks. The four Republicans who backed the bill then — Kirk and Sens. Susan Collins of Maine, John McCain of Arizona and Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania, who co-authored the measure with Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) — also voted in favor of the Democrats’ plan on Thursday. Heitkamp also opposed the second gun-control measure, which was blocked on a 48-50 tally.

Senate Republicans have now laughably put themselves on record as supporting the right of suspected terrorists to legally buy guns in the United States.


After the vote, Democratic Leader Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) hammered Republicans for being more afraid of the NRA than terrorists:

The American people want us to act on gun violence. Sadly today Republicans have proven that they are more afraid of the National Rifle Association than of FBI terror suspects buying assault weapons and explosives like those used in the Paris attacks and recent shootings in the United States.

As mass shootings rise and more innocent Americans die, Republicans showed the world that they are too scared of the NRA to take proven, common-sense steps to reduce gun violence. By doing the NRA’s bidding, Republicans ensured that FBI terror suspects – individuals deemed too dangerous to board an airplane – can continue to buy assault weapons here in the U.S. Republicans will have no one but themselves to blame if FBI terror suspects get their hands on the type of firearms we saw unleash horrific acts of violence on innocent people in San Bernardino, Colorado Springs, Newtown, Fort Hood, Charleston, and Paris.

Reid was right. Republicans are so terrified of the NRA that they won’t do anything to prevent innocent Americans from being slaughtered in mass shootings. Senate Majority Leader Sen. Mitch McConnell made a huge mistake with the Obamacare repeal bill, and Democrats are going to make Republicans pay for their pro-terrorist votes next November.


Senate Republicans Vote To Allow Terrorists To Legally Buy Guns In The US

[Cujo]

^ Absolutely insane.

^^ I wasn't commenting on whose fault it is. Just that that's the way it is.

[AntRobertson]

Ahh, seems like some of my posts are being 'shot down' from this thread.

*Boom tish!*