Four dipshits murdered a girl

[Dudedude12345]

This has to stop



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ihdsCFSrKBQ

If that was somebody i knew they wouldn't have made it to court

[tacocorpv2]

These losers will have a fun time in prison. Probably as I type this there is another gruesome murder happening somewhere around... Sad world.

[Stavros]

This has to stop
If that was somebody i knew they wouldn't have made it to court

Are you saying that it was wrong of them to kill but it is ok if you do the same thing?

[Stavros]

These losers will have a fun time in prison. Probably as I type this there is another gruesome murder happening somewhere around... Sad world.

Turn on your tv or your radio and receive the reports from Las Vegas. These terrible events will continue to happen for as long as you give guns to people who should never have them. The USA has had numerous opportunities to do the courageous, sensible and obvious thing which is to restrict gun ownership but every time, no matter how horrendous the crime, you chicken out, and wait for another disturbed person to slaughter innocent people before deciding again to do nothing. Taking a life is the absolute removal of freedom, to preserve freedom, take away the guns.

[Dudedude12345]

There was no reason to kill her

[Aticus100]

Are you saying that it was wrong of them to kill but it is ok if you do the same thing?

While the merits or otherwise of capital punishment are a much bigger topic, the answer to your question is yes, it was the wrong for them to kill but may be right to kill them.

All killings are not the same. There is a difference between the senseless killing of an innocent victim and the retribution taken against a guilty murderer.

[Stavros]

While the merits or otherwise of capital punishment are a much bigger topic, the answer to your question is yes, it was the wrong for them to kill but may be right to kill them.
All killings are not the same. There is a difference between the senseless killing of an innocent victim and the retribution taken against a guilty murderer.

I can't agree with this, because murder is illegal, and it is only in cases based on self-defence pleas, or the obscenity of 'justifiable homicide' that murderers get off. In very few, if any, cases is murder justified, even in self-defence, as the option to wound is itself enough to end a confrontation and prevent the loss of life. Law enforcement in both the UK and the USA has been able to kill people even when they are unarmed, on a supposition rather than any factual observation of threat, and in all cases the alleged source of the threat could have been subdued and arrested, not killed. Once you start on the process of re-defining killing in order to justify it, you perform the trick that enables those killings to take place and exempt the killers from justice.

[whamm]

The USA has had numerous opportunities to do the courageous, sensible and obvious thing which is to restrict gun ownership but every time, no matter how horrendous the crime, you chicken out, and wait for another disturbed person to slaughter innocent people before deciding again to do nothing.

This isn't about chickening out. This is about an industry that has literally bought the acquiescence and cooperation of our state and federal legislators.

The gun industry profits hugely every time anyone says "gun control." Under Obama gun rights literally INCREASED (http://www.businessinsider.com/gun-laws-obama-has-signed-2012-12), yet the whole nation thinks Democrats want to take your guns away.

Well, I'm a Democrat and I also own several guns and hunt and shoot regularly. I also want sensible gun law reform, like most everyone I know (including a lot of my Republican family).

Apologies for the rant, but I'm so sick of living in a country that is controlled by corporate interests over the well being of its citizens.

Flame on!

[Stavros]

This isn't about chickening out. This is about an industry that has literally bought the acquiescence and cooperation of our state and federal legislators.
The gun industry profits hugely every time anyone says "gun control." Under Obama gun rights literally INCREASED (http://www.businessinsider.com/gun-laws-obama-has-signed-2012-12), yet the whole nation thinks Democrats want to take your guns away.
Well, I'm a Democrat and I also own several guns and hunt and shoot regularly. I also want sensible gun law reform, like most everyone I know (including a lot of my Republican family).
Apologies for the rant, but I'm so sick of living in a country that is controlled by corporate interests over the well being of its citizens.
Flame on!

I appreciate your post and its content. What I would suggest on the basis of reports on the BBC this evening, is that if Congress, when it votes on this issue again this week yet again kicks the can down the road, the change may come in State legislatures. Indeed, Nevada which has some of the most lenient laws on gun ownership, last year approved a measure to implement background checks, but it has not been implemented because it requires a third party, namely the FBI, to verify claims, yet the FBI says it cannot be ordered by Nevada to do this and doesn't have the resources to do it anyway. Whether this would have prevented the murderer from acquiring an arsenal I don't know as he doesn't seem to have any prior record.

But here is another thing: if States can step in where the Federal Government fears not to tread, maybe it is time to discuss why gun ownership should be legal and what it should look like. 19 rifles, some (all?) automatic were found in the shooter's room in the Mandalay Bay Casino Hotel with thousands of rounds of ammunition. What individual needs 19 weapons? How could he purchase so many? It is the lack of questioning why which might spark some deeper thoughts on why people feel they should own weapons. It is, at root, a cultural issue as well as a legal issue, something we don't really get in the UK where gun ownership is rare.

One has to hope this will begin to change attitudes, even as people despair that it will.

http://www.rgj.com/story/news/politics/2016/12/28/nevadas-expansion-gun-checks-blocked/95924384/

[Dudedude12345]

What does this have to do with the topic?

[Stavros]

What does this have to do with the topic?

A response to Post #2 above.

[BatMasterson]

People can kiss my ass where the taking away of guns is concerned. Criminals will always get their hands on a gun and it's the criminals who do these things. If you've given up yours in your country, wherever you are, good for you. Stop suggesting what the US should do and mind your own yard, I say. Make criminals accountable for their crimes, don't punish everyone else in society for them.

String these bastards up for what they did.

[trish]

I'm from the good ol' U.S.of A. so I can say it: THE U.S. SHOULD STRICTLY REGULATE GUN OWNERSHIP. AT THE VERY LEAST REINSTATE THE ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN. (If kissing BatMasterson's ass is all it will take get it done, I'd do it.)

Back to the issue: On the face of it this looks like a hate crime and it grieves and angers me. I want to see due process done. I want it to be determined in a court of law whether these suspects are guilty and if they are I want to see them duly punished. Right now I want to know why the murdered isn't being regarded as a hate crime.

[Aticus100]

People can kiss my ass where the taking away of guns is concerned. Criminals will always get their hands on a gun and it's the criminals who do these things. If you've given up yours in your country, wherever you are, good for you. Stop suggesting what the US should do and mind your own yard, I say. Make criminals accountable for their crimes, don't punish everyone else in society for them.

String these bastards up for what they did.

Cos after all, your need to feel like Rambo is far more important than someone else’s right to live.

“Crimanls Will always get there hands on guns” is an incredibly lame argument.
Yes, there is that potential but if you restrict the supply of guns then, eventualy, you restrict the availability. And if there are less guns available to people, you will have less mass shootings. This stuff is not rocket science.

[tacocorpv2]

Cos after all, your need to feel like Rambo is far more important than someone else’s right to live.

“Crimanls Will always get there hands on guns” is an incredibly lame argument.
Yes, there is that potential but if you restrict the supply of guns then, eventualy, you restrict the availability. And if there are less guns available to people, you will have less mass shootings. This stuff is not rocket science.

Just look at what's been happening in Europe, the terrorists use trucks and just ram them in heavily crowded areas. The one in Nice even had a comparable death/injury count with LV. Should they also ban trucks? I mean.. a crazy piece of shit such as this Paddock will find a way to cause serious harm regardless.

[Jericho]

a crazy piece of shit such as this Paddock will find a way to cause serious harm regardless.

So lets sit on our arses and do nothing...Again. :shrug

[broncofan]

Just look at what's been happening in Europe, the terrorists use trucks and just ram them in heavily crowded areas. .
Cars can run people over in tight spaces, but they actually have a purpose that an AR-15 doesn't. The kind of weapons the guy used only have the capability of killing lots of people very efficiently. Additionally we regulate who has the privilege to drive, what qualifications they need to drive, we make people re-register their cars every time they cross a state line and our government revokes the privilege when people are reckless even if they haven't harmed anyone. Gun ownership is not regulated anywhere near as stringently.

Finally, it's not a fair argument to attack every legislative attempt to remedy a problem by pointing to individual cases it would not prevent. Can you imagine if someone argued that banning certain contaminants in food is inadvisable because it would not prevent all cases of food poisoning; or that lead in toys should not be prohibited because kids can still injure themselves by misusing the toys? The purpose of gun control legislation is to make guns harder to get for people who are at risk to use them in impulse killings. This has a broad effect in percentage terms, but it would not prevent every violent act...

[Aticus100]

Just look at what's been happening in Europe, the terrorists use trucks and just ram them in heavily crowded areas. The one in Nice even had a comparable death/injury count with LV. Should they also ban trucks? I mean.. a crazy piece of shit such as this Paddock will find a way to cause serious harm regardless.

Without wishing to sound confrontational or disrespectful, that argument is nonsense.
“Someone used a truck as a weapon, why aren’t we banning trucks”
Well, cos we need trucks to move stuff.
“Someone used a housebrick to kill someone, why aren’t we banning all housbricks?”
Well, cos we need housbricks to build houses.
“Someone used an assault rifle to murder 59 party goers, why aren’t we banning assault rifles”?
Well, cos we use assault rifles to.........oh yeah, kill people.
An assault rifle an every day object put to miss use, it’s an item being put very effectively to it’s only intended purpose.
I like guns. I used to own some. I’d love a big fucking gun. But I dont need one. And nor does any other regular citizen.

[Dudedude12345]

Completely off topic again

[Aticus100]

Completely off topic again

It’s a conversation fella, that’s how they work.

[Laphroaig]

Completely off topic again

As far as I can see your "topic" was "Four dipshits murdered a girl......this should stop."

Ok then, back on topic.

Agreed. Anyone disagree with that? No, though not.

Carry on with the other conversations everyone.

[Dudedude12345]

As far as I can see your "topic" was "Four dipshits murdered a girl......this should stop."

Ok then, back on topic.

Agreed. Anyone disagree with that? No, though not.

Carry on with the other conversations everyone.

The topic is on the title, whats should be discussed is the murder of a transgender teen. It became a gun debate when somebody made a dumbass statement about Vegas that triggered gun nuts. I meant these transgender murders has to stop because if they cant accept that other people exist. Life isn't about you

[James neville]

Mental, I'm going to discuss gun control and civil liberties on what is basically a transgender porn and escort site...

A suggestion over here in the UK is along the lines of what we have already. If you own a firearm you have to take out third party insurance. This kicks in when you shoot someone or if your firearm is used to shoot someone else (you for example) so all medical and in the worst case scenario, funeral costs, are covered or contributed to. Its utterly mad that you have a right to own guns but not a right to free medical care. Totally nuts.

Yours, a UK based gun owner (and insurance holder!)

[Aticus100]

Life isn't about you

Without wishing to be pedantic, yes, it literally is about me.

[tacocorpv2]

The topic is on the title, whats should be discussed is the murder of a transgender teen. It became a gun debate when somebody made a dumbass statement about Vegas that triggered gun nuts. I meant these transgender murders has to stop because if they cant accept that other people exist. Life isn't about you

Well the problem here is that I can't really do anything about this matter, because me (nor the people that are in my circles) would ever hurt a woman, ts or otherwise. As for these others I can't really answer for, I mean not only that, the world is full of rapists, murderers of random people, burglars, people that should be in mental asylums and so on. To be honest, I rather avoid watching the news because it's too much negative.

[Telvin]

Well the problem here is that I can't really do anything about this matter, because me (nor the people that are in my circles) would ever hurt a woman, ts or otherwise. As for these others I can't really answer for, I mean not only that, the world is full of rapists, murderers of random people, burglars, people that should be in mental asylums and so on. To be honest, I rather avoid watching the news because it's too much negative.

You cannot even say that. I thought the same thing, no one in my circle of friends or family would be a pedophile, at least not until my cousin was charged (and convicted) with sexually assaulting his two boys. You cannot speak definitively about anyone else in this world but yourself. If there was anything I learned in my life (and career) is that anyone, and I mean anyone, is capable of doing the unthinkable given the right set of circumstances.

[sassygirl]

Driving is a privilege owning a gun is a right. The AR-15 isn't evil people are. Lots of people defend themselves and their families against evil with AR -15's . It's a dangerous world. One must protect themselves.im sure anybody in Orlando wished at the least for somebody with a gun.
There will always be evil in the world the latest mad man could have easily loaded a truck with explosives and killed thousands.

[Dudedude12345]

Driving is a privilege owning a gun is a right. The AR-15 isn't evil people are. Lots of people defend themselves and their families against evil with AR -15's . It's a dangerous world. One must protect themselves.im sure anybody in Orlando wished at the least for somebody with a gun.
There will always be evil in the world the latest mad man could have easily loaded a truck with explosives and killed thousands.

Cry me a river, some of the people in Vegas were armed (including the performers) and none of them did shit. One of the performers said that his bands crew were licensed and stocked firearms in their bus yet they hid just like those who were unarmed. Spare me the NRA BS and im ending this whole gun debate on this thread

[filghy2]

The logical contortions of the gun nuts would be hilarious if this wasn't so serious. The same right-wingers who are normally strong law and order types turn around and argue that evil is not something that can be regulated. The same 'logic' would imply that we should not outlaw bombs, because 'bombs are not evil people are', and if they didn't use bombs they would find some other way to kill.

The facts are that the rate of gun ownership in the US (relative to population) is 4 times higher than in any other advanced country, and the rate of gun homicides is also at least 4 times higher. Compared to most countries the disproportion is even larger. Is that just a coincidence, or does it tell you that more guns makes things more dangerous not safer? The level of danger is not something that cannot be changed - it is a result of laws and attitudes.

[tacocorpv2]

Cry me a river, some of the people in Vegas were armed (including the performers) and none of them did shit. One of the performers said that his bands crew were licensed and stocked firearms in their bus yet they hid just like those who were unarmed. Spare me the NRA BS and im ending this whole gun debate on this thread

To be fair a handgun wouldn't be of any use in that situation and could even do more harm than good, ~400 yards and 32nd floor (so ''uphill''),you do the math.

As for Telvin, I guess you're right, one can be 100% sure only about him/her self. Well, if everyone was like me, there would be no reason for anyone to carry a gun. All the big factories would go out of the business :D
But yea, I am not sure we can change this kind of thing from happening ( I mean the murders)

[Aticus100]

There will always be evil in the world the latest mad man could have easily loaded a truck with explosives and killed thousands.[/QUOTE]
No. Obviously he could not have easily loaded a truck with explosives and killed thousands or that is what he would have done!

The point is that making really big and effective bombs is not easy and attracts attention while buying 40 guns and all the ammo you can carry is no more difficult than going grocery shopping.

The point is that if you make guns hard to get hold of then evil people will have to have to do something else more difficult or less effective.

[Laphroaig]

Cry me a river, some of the people in Vegas were armed (including the performers) and none of them did shit. One of the performers said that his bands crew were licensed and stocked firearms in their bus yet they hid just like those who were unarmed. Spare me the NRA BS and im ending this whole gun debate on this thread

I do love the way you're getting so worked up over the fact that the thread has gone off topic yet apparently you have nothing to add to the discussion yourself, apart from:


This has to stop

If that was somebody i knew they wouldn't have made it to court

:dead::dead:

You might have started the thread, but you don't own it. Threads have a life of their own and as it's clear you have zero skills at leading a discussion or steering one back on track, just be grateful that it's actually attracting replies and hasn't fallen into oblivion, like thousands before it...:shrug

[Laphroaig]

Driving is a privilege owning a gun is a right. The AR-15 isn't evil people are. Lots of people defend themselves and their families against evil with AR -15's . It's a dangerous world. One must protect themselves.im sure anybody in Orlando wished at the least for somebody with a gun.
There will always be evil in the world the latest mad man could have easily loaded a truck with explosives and killed thousands.
Out of curiosity, can anyone find me an example of where an AR-15, automatic rifle, has been used, by a civilian, in self defence, or is the highlighted quote above more mythical NRA propaganda bullshit?