>extreme vetting wouldnt have prevented the wife beating shooter from buying a gun
>extreme vetting would have prevented the dude who shoot the wife beating shooter from buying a gun
I support gun rights, I believe that the right to bear arms precedes the government ie its a natural right youre born with. But this Presidents response to the ladies vetting question was the dumbest thing Ive heard anyone say. I hope you guys dont make the same argument.
Other urls found in this thread:
en.m.wikipedia.org
milspecmonkey.com
marxists.org
foxnews.com
nytimes.com
twitter.com
That lady did not give 2 shit's that a 1 year old got murdered. She just knows she can use it to score political points.
Trump did not care a fig that a 3 year old and 3 month old lost their mother in that NYC truck attack when he used it to call for dissolving the diversity visa program.
Fuck anybody who uses other people's death for quick political gain. You want to pass a law, you wait until everyone is thinking clearly.
I have to agree with you OP
these mass shootings need to stop and there's only one clear answer. we need to ban all guns.
and we're not going to have a clear dialogue about it while all these polshits drumpftards keep spamming "MUH SHALL NOT BE INFRIDGED" bullshit
we're all progressives here. there's no need to even argue about it, guns just aren't worth the price anymore.
He_just_threw_the_whole_pole.xcf
And the box of night crawlers.
way to tow the line for the anti-gun libtards
as usual this is completely ignoring the fact that there are causes to these problems and guns are not what makes people go apeshit
we need to fix society
Why do americans think america has a gun problem and not a societal problem? My country has gun laws, any civilian age 25 up (which is pretty fuckin high) can own semi auto pistols, shotguns and rifles. We have the right to bare arms and the law regarding gun ownership has hardly changed if ever. You know how many mass shootings occured? Literally 0 in history and even though we have a high crime rate no one even thinks to look at our gun laws they just tend to blame the police or corruption. Everyone acknowledges that the guns criminals use anyway are illegal ones.
Also why do people in the US think banning all guns would solve the mass murder problem? Like theres other even easier ways to kill buttloads of people like homemade bombs or maybe just doing it european style and run over people with a car. If anything banning all guns would just make people be more creative, havent seen a mass flamethrower attack
>extreme vetting remains a good crowd-pleaser
>I support gun rights
Funny how every gun-grabber says this
Fuck off now, Trump's response to that disgusting striver was fucking on point. He is /OURGOY/ 100%
>Also why do people in the US think banning all guns would solve the mass murder problem?
because they are all actual communists
how would "extreme vetting" have prevented the shooting? "Extreme vetting" by WHO?
The issue is complex and revolves around American's generally being more violent than other countries in the Anglosphere. And before you ask, yes, even the white people.
I don't know, the same reason most of Europe thinks the same thing? how many nogs, mara salvatrucha members and SSRI-popping mental cases do you have on your narrow streets?
Because Americans bend over backwards, I mean they will say and legislate the stupidest fucking things imaginable, to pretend that naggers aren't the ones causing all of the violent crime in their society
Not a fan of Trump but he fucking wrecked that smug bitch.
Also
>I support the 2nd amendment!
>but...
Kill yourself
sage and reported
right,that's already a law....what "new law" would have stopped the shooting?
If you take blacks out of the equation we have the violent crime rate of belgium
Why do libshits insist on appealing to some higher state of humanity as if it's not complete utopian horseshit?
>in sweden it is illegal to be a criminal
take out blacks and use murder/crime rate would be very close to other white countries...maybe a smidgen higher
You know what would have possibly prevented this shooting? The air force doing it's fucking job. Over two dozen people are dead because of how damn lazy they are. People call them the chair force for a reason.
WE DON'T NEED TO KEEP SCISSORS FROM THE MENTAL PATIENT
WE NEED TO FIX THE MENTAL PATIENT
lol good luck
do you work for Remington as a shill or do you just not want the massacres to stop or what?
Because Americans have a special kind of thinking that makes us extremely binary on issues. Either guns are ok to have in a society or BAN ALL GUNS. The idiocy of America is really well demonstrated on places like Reddit, where everyone jerks around banning guns and comparing America to other first world countries- but don't you dare mention that other countries don't half half the structural problems we have.
this isn't Sup Forums
You forgot your shark, kike.
I get tumid knowing that fucking around with guns triggers soyboy snowflake faggots
>extreme vetting wouldnt have prevented the wife beating shooter from buying a gun
This is true though. Because nobody bothered to enter the information they were required to enter into a database.
We don't need extreme vetting, we need extreme Data Entry procedures for our governmental entities.
(You)
Go away Feinstein, his point is 100% legitimate.
Because Americans are a violent bunch and a bunch of them try to pretend otherwise, at least until the mask slips (see Democrats after the 2016 election and the recent church shooter).
>sioux city
my fellow of african decent
Extreme vetting meaning if NICS had done their job
We don't need more vetting, we need the vetting that is already in place to work and we need NICS and the Military to do their fucking jobs.
The shooter had a conviction for misdemeanor domestic violence which would have prevented him from buying the rifle he used to kill 26 people if the fucking JAGS in the Air Force had done their jobs properly and filed their shit with civilian authorities like they are supposed to.
You are very much retarded and so are most people on this board. He Would just have bought it privately. Stop making shit arguments with such obvious counterpoints like the one I just gave.
Because it's not about what's best for society, it's about pushing a political agenda. And that political agenda is that the common citizen can't be trusted with firearms.
What kind of backpack is that?
name 1(one) communist in american politics who has any sway of power
>but don't you dare mention that other countries don't half half the structural problems we have.
They're going to after the past years of MIGRANTS WELCOME
Hell, they're already starting to see its effects in action
Possibly, but we don't know that for a fact. We don't know anything about the weapon he "may" have used in a different situation.
What we do know for a fact is that the weapon he used to kill 26 people should not have been sold to him, and that some clerk in the air force is responsible for that.
>you have to be a card carrying communist to be a communist
>He Would just have bought it privately.
He could have. But he didn't. If everyone was doing their fucking job he would have walked into the gun store, been denied, and then been arrested and prosecuted for lying on his 4473.
Bernie Sanders.
>implying I said that
I didn't think you'd be able to answer that one
the question was asked in the context of trump call for changing the law after the nyc thing...nothing needed to be changed here...except people doing their jobs correctly
Hence why I said possibly. Yes he could have seen about buying it privately, but he didn't. So I assume that since you bring up a private sale you'd then talk about the "gun show loophole" and how we should implement a UBC. What would be a good way to implement a UBC?
the communists here don't say that they're communists. you're asking an unanswerable question.
yes,he would have got into his time machine and went back before he committed a crime that disqualified him from own a gun,you are beyond retarded
objectively wrong
>inb4 b-but muh socialism is communism!
you have to be over 18 to post here
If he was denied he would have just gone to armslist and picked up a used ar for 400$ Off of armslist.
Yeah he would have just been denied and he wasn't dishonorably discharged, it was a bad conduct discharge and that's not on the 4473
Also he wouldn't have been arrested, just denied.
another
>I support gun rights... But....
thread.
saged and reported
>they don't say they're communist or do anything communist
>b-but theyre communist I swear!
t. tinfoil hat brainlet
and if you ban guns total he could just get on the blackmarket and if you coudn't get a gun he would just use a bomb and if he couldn't get a bomb he would use a knife and if he couldn't get a knife he would use a car
>he would have just...!
Maybe he would have just driven a truck through a crowd like a Muslim if he had been denied and killed 80 people
Or built a bomb and killed 300
Your speculation is pointless
>or do anything communist
marxists.org
Nevertheless, in most advanced countries, the following will be pretty generally applicable.
1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public
purposes.
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.
4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
5. Centralisation of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank
with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.
6. Centralisation of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the
State.
7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the
bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally
in accordance with a common plan.
8. Equal liability of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for
agriculture.
9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of
all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the
27 Chapter II: Proletarians and Communists
populace over the country.
10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children’s
factory labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial
production, &c, &c.
>Yeah he would have just been denied and he wasn't dishonorably discharged, it was a bad conduct discharge and that's not on the 4473
>Also he wouldn't have been arrested, just denied.
He had a domestic violence charge and assault on him. The nics failed because the airforce didn't report any of these crimes that would have disqualified him immediately
Even if he went to arms list he would still be in illegal possession of a firearm
because nigs shoot up schools and churches right?
Again not a dishonorable discharge. Even if it was and reported he wouldn't have been arrested but only denied and would have gone bought it off of armslist.
These arguments from you dumbfucks make us look bad.
In this case extreme vetting would have been to ask the air force about this individual before selling him the gun. Another possible form of extreme vetting could be references. Like asking your wife if she believes that youre mentally fit to own one or your parents. Im sure that would keep at least 90% of poltards from owning guns.
>These arguments from you dumbfucks make us look bad.
America has looked like a laughing joke since you elected a reality TV star. Don't worry, you'll get that wall just cut taxes on the rich.
Well lets require background checks for armlist
>If he was denied he would have just gone to armslist and picked up a used ar for 400$ Off of armslist.
again, we have no idea what he "would" have done. We DO know what he did and we know there was a mistake in his background check that should have prevented that sale. How hard is this for you to understand?
It's not dishonourable no, but it was for domestic violence, which again is lying on the 4473.
They do shoot up schools, there's been several examples of that.
Not sure how your question is even applicable though, who cares if the killings are done all at once or one at a time, or where they are done (other than to look at the effect of certain laws for that locale)? Blacks are hugely disproportionately likely to commit a murder compared to other races.
It's a quick and easy stopgap measure and nobody really wants the delve into the actual issue
a nigger shot up a church two months ago you fucking retard
What do you think would have happened if he was denied?
"Oh geez I can't buy this gun here. Guess I won't be doing that mass shooting suicide I was planning on. Aww geez."
source?
That would mean admitting Americans aren't the best at everything and perfect. American narcissism can't possible swallow that conclusion.
And again he would only be denied and not arrested and would have bought it privately.
>looked like a laughing joke
GG.
Might have drove his truck through the church.
Don't be a faggot, you lost this argument before you even started.
If X then Y, whatever, it wasn't denied, even if it was he just wouldn't have been able to purchase the gun there. But it wasn't denied and he did buy it there. Quit talking hypotheticals.
thanks to Soros and his paid minions for propping up the Racism and BLM rhetoric
He wasnt planning on it when he bought it. He got into it with his gf parents probably for beating his gf. He then snapped and went to kill them and anyone else around them. He used the gun cause it was avaliable to him, he wanted to kill ppl because judging by his history he was an angry violent person, angry violent ppl that have a history of that on record shouldnt own guns.
maybe
America is the best country on earth, shutup
>Dylan Roof was a Soros plant.
This is your mind on extreme partisanship.
Poltards conveniently skipped this
>he would hav drove his small truck through the church
>you probably don't even know if there were my sort of barriers that would prevent that
>he was planning on targeting other churches
Yeah, that's what he would have done. Not spend message someone on armslist to buy an ar and do what he originally planned to do.
>posting the communist manifesto will prove my point!
seriously what does any of this have to do with anything? some of these things have happened to an various extent's in every country as have some things that Nazi Germany practiced, unless you can show me someone who is making a cohesive effort to carry out communist policy in America you've still failed to answer my question
no one died
This so much
You're arguing with "What if" and "But then", don't be butthurt when its used right back at you to show you that it's a dumb argument.
39 year old mother of two died
First of all fuck you and your dumb condescending attitude.
He bought the gun a year ago and used it for shooting in his back yard, if he "bought the gun because he was planning a mass shooting and suicide" then why not do it right after buying the gun? It's more likely his mental state deteriorated as time passed. A year after buying the gun (which he shouldn't have been able to do) he suddenly decides to go on the shooting and LOOK he has the gun in his house to do it with.
If he had been denied the purchase a year ago it's unlikely he would have gone through the trouble to get one illegally or through a private sale with someone he didn't know since there is nothing to indicate he was even planning the shooting when he bought the gun. Idiot. He bought the gun, went on living his life for a year, and then snapped and decided to massacre people at a later date. Having the gun made it easier for him to make the decision to do that, and probably contributed significantly to his violent state of mind in the months leading up to the shooting since neighbors said they often heard gunfire from his property.
If he had been denied the gun a year ago he might have just continued being a sad loser for years until eventually hanging himself in the barn. The shooting was never a motive to buy the gun, he bought it for fun.
And?
Looking at European descended white American's only, no hispanics, you commit 1.5-2x the amount of violent crimes of Australia and Scotland, per capital. I believe you are roughly tied with several countries in eastern Europe.
>in this case extreme vetting would been the laws already in place
Finally someone itt with an IQ over a 100
Thats exactly what I said in this post down here
well yea,we haven't been an "Anglo" country since the turn of the last century
>includes slav immigrants
>wonders why the numbers are like slav countries
/k/ mods are such faggots
Fuck /k/ mods
Faggots
They p much just killed the thread.
If if if if if if if if...
Really okeys my doke.
shhhhh don't bump the thread...if the Sup Forumsacks catch our scent then the shitposting will begin
Polacks shills were here from the very fist post.
