Support NeoGAF

[clarknova156]

FFS, this is the kind of shit that will pull Republicans together further. Please don't be politically motivated

Doesn't matter if it was or was not it will be spun by the right as politically motivated. The right isn't known for rational thought at all.

Still this is awful and not the way to go about dealing with the political crisis we have in the states. Hope all those shot pull through even if they disgust me politically.

 

[BattleMonkey]

It's sad but I'm not surprised this hasn't happened sooner. I fear more of this kind of tragedy is gonna happen with how bad things are.

 

[benicillin]

Maybe they'll remember this experience the next time they take money hand over fist from the NRA and ignore the massive gun culture problems in America. But probably not.

 

[Formless]

Police state here we come

 

[TarNaru33]

I have some experience with weapons

1911
Glock
Remington 870 (I believe)
AR-15


50 bullets is a lot of ammunition to spray down in such a short amount of time.

I really only see two reasonable solutions to our issue with mass shootings, and our general gun problem.

1) Restrict magazine size on all semi-automatic weapons. Magazine capacity can be debated about, but 5 bullets for a semi-automatic weapon like a long rifle is well within reason considering it's limited use for home defense, and it's use in hunting.

2) Ban all semi-auto weapons, allow bolt action rifles and pump action shotguns un-restricted in terms of purchase ability with current background checks still in place.

The first will allow for current weapons to still be legal, while forcibly limiting the amount of ammunition that can be pumped out in a mass shooting situation. Crack down on black market parts, attempt to force manufacturer to make it difficult to modify the weapon to accept a higher capacity mag. Red flags will be raised when someone attempts purchase parts that allow for the modification of weapons.

The second will simply be a sweeping ban on weapons that aren't deemed reasonable for a civilian to own, while allowing weapons that are reasonable for home defense and hunting.

What you said wouldn't do shit because handguns are in the vast majority of killings and can still be used for mass shootings.

 

[Croatoan]

I have some experience with weapons

1911
Glock
Remington 870 (I believe)
AR-15


50 bullets is a lot of ammunition to spray down in such a short amount of time.

I really only see two reasonable solutions to our issue with mass shootings, and our general gun problem.

1) Restrict magazine size on all semi-automatic weapons. Magazine capacity can be debated about, but 5 bullets for a semi-automatic weapon like a long rifle is well within reason considering it's limited use for home defense.

2) Ban all semi-auto weapons, allow bolt action rifles and pump action shotguns un-restricted in terms of purchase ability with current background checks still in place.

The first will allow for current weapons to still be legal, while forcibly limiting the amount of ammunition that can be pumped out in a mass shooting situation. Crack down on black market parts, attempt to force manufacturer to make it difficult to modify the weapon to accept a higher capacity mag. Red flags will be raised when someone attempts purchase parts that allow for the modification of weapons.

The second will simply be a sweeping ban on weapons that aren't deemed reasonable for a civilian to own, while allowing weapons that are reasonable for home defense and hunting.

Neither will work nationally. There are already millions of ar15s and likely 100s of millions of 30 round magazines. You will never take guns or high capacity mags away at a national level. At a state level it is possible though, which is why gun control should be a state issue to begin with.

Nationally, what we can do is register all gun owners with their county sheriff and force yearly taxes per gun on gun owners. Also, 1 month waiting period for purchases and closing of guns show loop holes.

 

[TheLostBigBoss]

What you said wouldn't do shit because handguns are in the vast majority of killings and can still be used for mass shootings.

Which is why I mentioned a magazine capacity limit that would also be enforced on handguns. And handguns are far harder to aim/shoot than a rifle.

Neither will work nationally. There are already millions of ar15s and likely 100s of millions of 30 round magazines. You will never take guns away or high capacity mags away at a national level. At a state level it is possible though, which is why gun control should be a state issue to begin with.

Nationally, what we can do is register all gun owners with their county sheriff and force yearly taxes per gun on gun owners.

Obviously anything like this would include a national buyback plan.

Or a compromise, where buybacks take place, weapons are modified or swapped for newer versions that have mechanics within them to accept only new magazines and reject previous high-cap magazines.

 

[jellies_two]

Well there goes the theory that people carrying guns stops people using guns. I mean he shot 50 rounds? With a trained security detail and in a state bristling with concealed carry?

 

[woolley]

I don't care how you feel about a politician but things like this are never ok and people shouldn't be acting like it is.
But hopefully some good can come out in this, maybe at least some improvement to gun regulations.

 

[Fine Ham Abounds]

Scalise is a piece of shit. He represents me, I can sufficiently say that with no qualms whatsoever. But he's still a human being, and more importantly there's a reason we have a peaceful process for replacing idiots in power. Get a grip, people.

And no, this will result in nothing as far as gun control is concerned. It will almost undoubtedly end up resulting in a bunch of rhetoric scapegoating dirty libs or people with mental illness though.

 

[efyu_lemonardo]

Americans feel like the most hypocritical bunch when violence is concerned. Your country was created and unified through the use of War. You went to war with Mexico to obtain the west coast. You have murdered foreign leaders you dislike, destablized whole regions of the world to promote american ideology. You invaded Panama because you wanted to keep control of the canal. Support terrorist regimes in latin america because the fought aainst the communist influence. Invaded Iraq over dubious reasons. Support modern terrorism by funding Saudi Arabia. Create a police force that violently targets and muders people of color.

But when someone dares suggest that using any of the mechanisms that this country employs as part of its foreign policy towards internal politics, then it becomes absolutely wrong and shouldnt be supported.

A republican congressman just literally refused to condem an ISIS terrorist attack in Iranian parliament and called it a good thing and part of what he considers appropiaty foreign strategy. That is literally what you are accusing others of doing and its coming from your government.

.

 

[Commanche Raisin Toast]

I'm not buying the story about a guy asking about which party members are on the field.

A) if the guy showed up that prepared for a shooting spree then that implies he already knew who was out there. it's idiotic to suggest he would ask something so blatantly revealing of someone.

Bank Robber: "excuse me sir, is this the bank that has the most elderly security guards and has trucks come to deliver cash every day around 11:00am, which happens to be 5 minutes from now?" *has empty sack with $ sign painted on it*

B) if someone did in fact ask that question, it's far more likely that it wasn't the shooter and was just some guy making sure there weren't any 'libruls' out there for him to deal with, or someone just making sure they know what the event is about.

C) the most likely case is this person is making it up because they want it to seem like some dem on gop violence.

I think someone was targeting those leaders specifically for whatever reasons they may have. They found a convenient way to do it. Good thing they have him in custody so we can at least get some answers hopefully, but I'm taking eye witness accounts with a tablespoon of salt for the next few days considering the political climate right now.

 

[gutter_trash]

"We need to do more for mental health" says the party wanting to take healthcare away from millions.

Pretty much.

Donald Trump quietly signed a Pro-NRA bill or exec order that relieves restrictions on people with mental problems history from buying guns

 

[Seth Enosh]

I have some experience with weapons

1911
Glock
Remington 870 (I believe)
AR-15


50 bullets is a lot of ammunition to spray down in such a short amount of time.

I really only see two reasonable solutions to our issue with mass shootings, and our general gun problem.

1) Restrict magazine size on all semi-automatic weapons. Magazine capacity can be debated about, but 5 bullets for a semi-automatic weapon like a long rifle is well within reason considering it's limited use for home defense, and it's use in hunting.

2) Ban all semi-auto weapons, allow bolt action rifles and pump action shotguns un-restricted in terms of purchase ability with current background checks still in place.

The first will allow for current weapons to still be legal, while forcibly limiting the amount of ammunition that can be pumped out in a mass shooting situation. Crack down on black market parts, attempt to force manufacturer to make it difficult to modify the weapon to accept a higher capacity mag. Red flags will be raised when someone attempts purchase parts that allow for the modification of weapons.

The second will simply be a sweeping ban on weapons that aren't deemed reasonable for a civilian to own, while allowing weapons that are reasonable for home defense and hunting.

1. Isn't it relatively simple to print replacement magazines using 3d printing nowadays? A 5 round limit would only affect law abiding citizens in that case. Here's a story from 4 years ago talking about 3d printing AR15 mags. https://www.wired.com/2013/02/printed-magazine/

2. I think this is what Australia did. You can still fire a lever-action rifle quickly but it takes more practice and skill than with a semi-auto. Almost all civilian weapons are semi auto today though except revolvers, so this is a massive gun grab of exactly the type NRA has been warning about for decades.

 

[BronsonLee]

Well there goes the theory that people carrying guns stops people using guns. I mean he shot 50 rounds? With a trained security detail and in a state bristling with concealed carry?

I think the only reason this shooting wasn't much, much worse is because of the trained security detail

 

[Henry Jones Jr]

Pretty disturbing that this happened and could have negative effects for years to come.

It also bothers me that Mike Pence and everyone in the White House is currently huddled in the offices deciding how they want to message this to best help them. At least that's what it sounds like from the reporting.

 

[Tovarisc]

Well there goes the theory that people carrying guns stops people using guns. I mean he shot 50 rounds? With a trained security detail and in a state bristling with concealed carry?

That is semi-automatic assault rifle from range Vs. dinky handgun situation for you. AR's put a lot rounds down the range in very short period of time as long you have reloading down in muscle memory.

 

[Malvolio]

Moron. Do you want a police state? This is how you get a police state.

 

[Shake Appeal]

gloating is a bad look but asking anyone to feel at all sympathetic for a piece of shit like scalise whose entire career is literally built on inflicting political violence on the powerless is somewhat ridiculous

I can loathe Steve Scalise with ever fiber of my being and still not want to see him—or anyone else—shot dead.

 

[Seth Enosh]

Pretty much.

Donald Trump quietly signed a Pro-NRA bill or exec order that relieves restrictions on people with mental problems history from buying guns

That bill was also supported by many disability rights advocates organizations - the regulation it repealed had never gone into effect and had been widely criticized by the ACLU and others as discriminatory. https://www.aclu.org/blog/washington-markup/gun-control-laws-should-be-fair

 

[TheLostBigBoss]

1. Isn't it relatively simple to print replacement magazines using 3d printing nowadays? A 5 round limit would only affect law abiding citizens in that case. Here's a story from 4 years ago talking about 3d printing AR15 mags. https://www.wired.com/2013/02/printed-magazine/

2. I think this is what Australia did. You can still fire a lever-action rifle quickly but it takes more practice and skill than with a semi-auto. Almost all civilian weapons are semi auto today though except revolvers, so this is a massive gun grab of exactly the type NRA has been warning about for decades.

No plan is perfect.

The average person, even one going around planning a rampage, won't have access to a 3d printer, and if they do start looking for people to print such things that would raise red flags in those who own the printer. It would be a major hurdle in the plan, which is part of the point of such tactics and laws. Create enough hurdles to diswade or raise enough red flags to prevent it.

 

[nocturnalis]

I was hoping to wake up to a stupid Trump tweet. Poor victims. I may not agree with them, but that doesn't mean I want them gunned down.

 

[besada]

If you take issue with something a poster posted, you have a couple of options:

1) Report them to a moderator
2) Quote them and respond

The option of blaming the entirety of GAF, the entire thread, or any combination of them is not only aggressively stupid, but will get you banned.

 

[BradC00]

any motive yet?

 

[The Greek Freak]

Moron. Do you want a police state? This is how you get a police state.

Oh sorry did all the unpunished police murders of unarmed civilians last decade not happen? Fake news? Unless you're both white and not dirt poor shit is already a police state.

 

[TarNaru33]

Neither will work nationally. There are already millions of ar15s and likely 100s of millions of 30 round magazines. You will never take guns or high capacity mags away at a national level. At a state level it is possible though, which is why gun control should be a state issue to begin with.

Nationally, what we can do is register all gun owners with their county sheriff and force yearly taxes per gun on gun owners. Also, 1 month waiting period for purchases and closing of guns show loop holes.

It can be done at the federal level. It cannot be done at a state level since states would have different levels of gun control. Gun control would have to be nationally agreed on, due to easy gun trafficking unless you are going to advocate for state border patrols.

Which is why I mentioned a magazine capacity limit that would also be enforced on handguns.

I suppose you are also going to limit the amount of handguns a person can own? Come on man, it still would not do anything for murders. Mass shootings aren't the majority of deaths you know.

I really question you guy's ability to think on this since you both are biased as gun owners.

 

[Fenderputty]

God this thread is a bunch of garbage

"You take away everything from someone and this is how they react!"

We know nothing about the shooter yet, at all.

This post is sadly hilarious considering the immediate post after

 

[jellies_two]

That is semi-automatic assault rifle from range Vs. dinky handgun situation for you. AR's put a lot rounds down the range in very short period of time as long you have reloading down in muscle memory.

Well that would seem like a good time to remind people that the right to bear arms might be better if it was restricted to six shooters. Forever.
Not that America will ever have that conversation.

 

[low-G]

Moron. Do you want a police state? This is how you get a police state.

They can't do that and you know it.

 

[ShadowSwordmaster]

Bullshit already being spread by the white house.

As @AlanMCole notes, Jeff Duncan says the man who asked him about party affiliation was in running clothes, Flake says shooter wore jeans.

https://twitter.com/jbarro/status/874980775241953280

Not surprise by this.

 

[water_wendi]

Moron. Do you want a police state? This is how you get a police state.

For the majority of Americans we are pretty much already there. Some people think that the police have been militarizing for fun or just because they can.. im of the opinion that when you harden your vehicles against ieds you are preparing for a future when you have to face ieds. The people with power know whats coming because its what always comes when a populace has no hope for the future and is desperate for change.

 

[boiled goose]

Maybe his hip should have had a gun.

(Of course it's horrible anyone was shot, but these pro gun politicians lie to people and enable shootings and death. No one deserves to be shot. I hope everyone is ok and if they have incorrect views on this they go through some self reflexion).

 

[Deepwater]

Americans feel like the most hypocritical bunch when violence is concerned. Your country was created and unified through the use of War. You went to war with Mexico to obtain the west coast. You have murdered foreign leaders you dislike, destablized whole regions of the world to promote american ideology. You invaded Panama because you wanted to keep control of the canal. Support terrorist regimes in latin america because the fought aainst the communist influence. Invaded Iraq over dubious reasons. Support modern terrorism by funding Saudi Arabia. Create a police force that violently targets and muders people of color.

But when someone dares suggest that using any of the mechanisms that this country employs as part of its foreign policy towards internal politics, then it becomes absolutely wrong and shouldnt be supported.

A republican congressman just literally refused to condem an ISIS terrorist attack in Iranian parliament and called it a good thing and part of what he considers appropiaty foreign strategy. That is literally what you are accusing others of doing and its coming from your government.

yup. We are insanely hypocritical when it comes to (political) violence. Especially after painting the GOP as the antichrist for the past 4 months.

 

[Croatoan]

Which is why I mentioned a magazine capacity limit that would also be enforced on handguns.



Obviously anything like this would include a national buyback plan.

Or a compromise, where buybacks take place, weapons are modified or swapped for newer versions that have mechanics within them to accept only new magazines and reject previous high-cap magazines.

This is a dream that will also never happen. How many Texans do you think are going to willingly sell their guns, and hand them to a government they don't trust? I know I wouldn't.

How many other states are like Texas and majority pro-gun. It will never happen.

 

[Deepwater]

Moron. Do you want a police state? This is how you get a police state.

it might shock you that many Americans are already living under a police state. But I guess it's cool you're just now arriving to the party

 

[azyless]

I can loathe Steve Scalise with ever fiber of my being and still not want to see him—or anyone else—shot dead.

Good thing the poster never said he wanted him to be shot then.

 

[TheLostBigBoss]

It can be done at the federal level. It cannot be done at a state level since states would have different levels of gun control. Gun control would have to be nationally agreed on, due to easy gun trafficking unless you are going to advocate for state border patrols.



I suppose you are also going to limit the amount of handguns a person can own? Come on man, it still would not do anything for murders. Mass shootings aren't the majority of deaths you know.

I really question you guy's ability to think on this since you both are biased as gun owners.

1) I don't own any guns, I said I have experience with them.

2) Buying multiple handguns is far more expansive than buying current high-cap magazines. I don't understand what your point is with buying multiple handguns.

And yes, I understand that most gun deaths are from handguns and not mass-shootings. Which is why I mentioned banning all semi-auto weapons as a possibility, which include practically all handguns.

 

[Alex_Mexico]

If only there was a "good guy with a gun" somewhere.

 

[Got]

Meh

 

[captive]

Neither will work nationally. There are already millions of ar15s and likely 100s of millions of 30 round magazines. You will never take guns or high capacity mags away at a national level. At a state level it is possible though, which is why gun control should be a state issue to begin with.

completely disagree. Republican love to throw out "but look at chicago they have some of the toughest gun laws around but also the most gun violence around" Gee lets look at why? Maybe because litereally every state around Illinois has lax gun laws?

it needs to be solved nationally. Background checks for all guns, no more gun show loopholes and your 1 month waiting period, would be a heck of a start.

 

[TheLostBigBoss]

This is a dream that will also never happen. How many Texans do you think are going to willingly sell their guns, and hand them to a government they don't trust? I know I wouldn't.

How many other states are like Texas and majority pro-gun. It will never happen.

No shit, obviously in our political climate where kids get mowed down in class, I doubt gun owners who bought their shit because the scary black man might take them away would most likely not be ok with such actions or plans.

I'm simply putting forward what I think a likely plan would be sometime in the future that doesn't simple "ban all guns".

 

[Tovarisc]

If only there was a "good guy with a gun" somewhere.

There was, several actually.

They are called police.

 

[Lightning_Roller]

The party that intends to slash millions of American's mental health coverage.

I actually need therapy and meds to keep me good so seeing this pisses me off something fierce.

 

[Deepwater]

If only there was a "good guy with a gun" somewhere.

nobody died and the suspect was quickly neutralized by the congressman's security detail. I don't think this is an appropriate take.

 

[Poodlestrike]

I'm seeing now that the guy who asked who was playing and the guy who did the shooting were two different people.

Not safe to make assumptions about anything this soon.

 

[Mohonky]

2. I think this is what Australia did. You can still fire a lever-action rifle quickly but it takes more practice and skill than with a semi-auto. Almost all civilian weapons are semi auto today though except revolvers, so this is a massive gun grab of exactly the type NRA has been warning about for decades.

We got rid of full and semo autos as well as pistols.

We also changed the laws from everyone has a right to gun ownership to 'show us why you need a gun'. Basically it got harder to own a gun, you had to have a reasonable reason to own one (farmers, sport shooters, hunting) and you have to prove your are able to be a responsible owner. Which is basically the oppoaite of the US which is more everyone gets a gun until you can prove they shouldnt have one, which is you know, after a bunch of people are usually dead.

 

[TheLostBigBoss]

nobody died and the suspect was quickly neutralized by the congressman's security detail. I don't think this is an appropriate take.

It's half right/wrong.

Good guy with gun is always talking about a conceal/open carry civilian being the hero.

Security detail are people who are trained, and keep up on their training with weapons to actually be effective in taking down people.

 

[Alex_Mexico]

nobody died and the suspect was quickly neutralized by the congressman's security detail. I don't think this is an appropriate take.

Checkmate, libtards!

Spoiler

They're using this in their favor aren't they?

 

[The Technomancer]

oh no not political violence

what have things come to when people's lives are at risk

 

[Henry Jones Jr]

I'm seeing now that the guy who asked who was playing and the guy who did the shooting were two different people.

Not safe to make assumptions about anything this soon.

Yeah. Super stupid for a high profile member of the White House to tweet out unconfirmed reports. I mean even the person who said the quote said they were not sure.