21 killed, 18 injured in shooting at elementary school in Uvalde, Texas

Having a psych evaluation should occur when you’re obtaining an object that has the capability to immediately take a life.
Voting is not on that scale, so it shouldn’t require it. You should only need to be a citizen to vote.
One could argue a vote is far more dangerous than any firearm but besides the point let's run with your theory here for a moment.

What other items that American's buy should subject them to a psych evaluation?

Knives?
Axes?
Cars?
Chemicals?
Handtools?
 
One could argue a vote is far more dangerous than any firearm but besides the point let's run with your theory here for a moment.

What other items that American's buy should subject them to a psych evaluation?

Knives?
Axes?
Cars?
Chemicals?
Handtools?
All of those objects have other uses than to take lives
 
All of those objects have other uses than to take lives
So do firearms.

Many use them as a hobby because it is fun.
Many use them to put food on the table.
Etc. etc.

So to be clear it's not about items that take lives. You just think it should apply to firearms. Now that we have that settled can you direct all of us who haven't attended law school to where it says a Constitutional right can only be exercised when your subjected to a psych eval?
 
So do firearms.

Many use them as a hobby because it is fun.
Many use them to put food on the table.
Etc. etc.

So to be clear it's not about items that take lives. You just think it should apply to firearms. Now that we have that settled can you direct all of us who haven't attended law school to where it says a Constitutional right can only be exercised when your subjected to a psych eval?
Putting food on the table is still taking lives. And “for fun” isn’t a reasonable argument whatsoever. I think we will see a large movement toward gun restrictions and I’m glad.
 
Putting food on the table is still taking lives. And “for fun” isn’t a reasonable argument whatsoever. I think we will see a large movement toward gun restrictions and I’m glad.
So killing a human is equivalent to a rabbit or deer? Interesting take.

If you wouldn't mind ducking my secon question... I'll post it again for you.
Now that we have that settled can you direct all of us who haven't attended law school to where it says a Constitutional right can only be exercised when your subjected to a psych eval?
 
Man your life must be sad
It is ... it's very sad ... here on a holiday weekend I have nothing better to do than to create a complex interaction with a supposed attorney which is highly unlikely. I say as such because your level of the English language, retorts and sentence building is that of a 7th grader. There is a teacher actively posting here on this thread who would agree with me.

What the hell since I am here what better way to keep myself busy than to mingle with a troll!
 
Oh, please. Do you really think we have not read this script before? This is the point where someone responds asking if kids were run over by a car, that we should ban cars. You respond that cars are not made to kill people while THE AR-15 is or some crap like that. Someone then asks about your guns, then you reply they also are not made to kill people. Then someone asks what you have, and you claim to have some $2700 O/U shotgun, a muzzleloader for deer, and a Pedersoli 22LR target gun. Thus your position is we should be only able to defend life and liberty with something that by coincidence happens to do the job. This argument then extends to knives, so we soon find ourselves with (literally) pointless kitchen knives as the maximum. Right? So I just saved us a lot of time. Short version - we disagree - weapons that are intended to harm people are exactly the weapons intended under the 2nd Amendment, specifically those that will dissuade the attacker from thinking they have overwhelming force, and thus dismantling the entire basis of attack.
All of those objects have other uses than to take lives
And there it is. Would you be so kind as to let us know which page of the script you're on, so we can save time?
 
Having a psych evaluation should occur when you’re obtaining an object that has the capability to immediately take a life.
Voting is not on that scale, so it shouldn’t require it. You should only need to be a citizen to vote.
An object that is made butter bread is regulated in the UK because it can take a life if used incorrectly.
 
An object that is made butter bread is regulated in the UK because it can take a life if used incorrectly.
I would imagine No.2 is one of the most deadly items sold in mass quantities worldwide. My Ticondoroga would be my first choice for PP. Consider it a bull barrel.
 
Shotty'd be better for fish in a barrel.

As, of course, would what was the weapon of choice in the (pre 9/11/2001) deadliest mass murder in New York City history:
One United States dollar's worth of gasoline.
$1 in 1990 = $2.21 in 2022

As I recall, it was a two liter soda bottle of gasoline, so roughly half a gallon; the inflation calculator tracks correctly.
 
From the archives:



It’s become a near-weekly occurrence. Somewhere in some state, the FBI will announce that they’ve foiled yet another terrorist plot and saved lives. However, as the data shows, the majority of these cases involve psychologically diminished patsies who’ve been entirely groomed, armed, and entrapped by FBI agents. Simply put, the FBI manufactures terror threats and then takes credit for stopping them.
Uvalde doesn't fit the profile of someone manipulated by agents or informers. There was no racial or religious or sexual component.

Buffalo does. The shooter was known in online circles that are so extreme that he was probably the only non-cop involved.
 
You don't stop for shit in an active shooter. It was drilled into us to avoid people trying to grab us for help, kids screaming 'help me', you keep going. This is why everyone, myself included, was looking for the 'why' they stopped. You don't stop until the threat is gone.

Edit: At most you try and gather intel from people able to talk. How many, last seen, quick then move on.
Even the official DHS "Run-Hide-Fight" video says that. Most schools and corporate workplaces use this for training, or some variant of it.

"The first responders on the scene are not there to evacuate, or tend to the injured. They are well trained, and are there to stop the shooter." (Offer not available in Uvalde, Texas.)


View: https://youtu.be/zcnA_Cq_Csk?t=277
 
Uvalde doesn't fit the profile of someone manipulated by agents or informers. There was no racial or religious or sexual component.

Buffalo does. The shooter was known in online circles that are so extreme that he was probably the only non-cop involved.

I will admit to not having researched this in depth - other than to look at some of the stuff that has come across in this thread. The kid obviously had "issues" , so from that perspective he fits a certain profile - that has been illustrated in the past to be something whomever it is in the government that cares and feeds these lunatics to get them to become school shooters ...... targets while trolling online for candidates.

There also seem to be some legitimate questions around shit like - where did he get $$ for the Daniel Defense rifle(s) that he used? Is that actually true? I don't know . I DO however know - that DD stuff isn't cheap. I'd buy one myself - but typically go for something lower priced because the price on DD stuff is pretty steep. So from that perspective I think WTF - where did some kid who works at Wendys get that kind of cash.

Over the years I've also acquired the attitude that - if you're going to roll out the Jump to Conclusions mat and come up with opinion about pretty much any school shooting that the media gets onboard with and has politicians pushing gun control within MINUTES after it happens - you can't go wrong with it being a false flag / FBI operation. Too many of these things just bring up all sorts of crazy shit that just shouldn't happen - if they were some random event.

And last but not least: It's well past time that the so-called conservatives in this country stop cucking themselves out by doing shit like saying " the government couldn't been involved in this - that's crazy!!" It SERVES YOUR BEST INTERESTS at this point to push the thought that the government fomented this shooting and push it HARD. Given the level of completely over the top tyrannical BS that has emanted from all levels of government over the last few years - I see no reason why giving them any benefit of the doubt at this point is really the sane thing to do.

So to summarize: who gives a shit if there was no government involvement. Your best course of action is to claim that there is - because even if there wasn't THIS TIME, there was a whole bunch of times before and there will be again. Claiming there is this time - is the best way to play it.
 
Back
Top Bottom