Texas mother, a vocal gun rights advocate, killed by police after fatally shooting her two daughters - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Annoyed Grunt;50597425]A) That's just an example, not a definition B) How many civilians do have this kind of shit? C) Why is it any worse than a pistol or a "non high-powered" rifle?[/QUOTE] FFS it was a joke. Should have put a picture of a minigun.

sounds like more than just a "family argument" happened if a mother is compelled to suddenly shoot both of her children and proceed to get herself killed right after. clearly some mental issues going on with the mother.

I'm sorry but saying that the same would've happened without guns because knives/other weapons is fucking retarded.

[QUOTE=catbarf;50596569]The spirit of John Moses Browning himself does not descend to this mortal plane to transform dinner table arguments into lethal shootouts. If you reach the point where you are willing to [i]murder[/i] someone over an argument I feel pretty confident in saying you have issues and it's not the gun at fault.[/QUOTE] Murderous person + knife = bad things happen Murderous person + gun = VERY bad things happen Guns make it a lot easier (both physically and mentally) to kill someone. With any other weapon you have to invest a lot more effort into killing; with a gun you just aim and pull the trigger and you're done. They're highly optimised to cause a maximum amount of damage with a minimum amount of effort, it's precisely the reason why they were invented in the first place.

[QUOTE=hoodoo456;50595901]Way to jump to a conclusion buddy[/QUOTE] That's precisely the jump anti-gun peeps are gonna use to try to use this to leverage their position. [editline]26th June 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Headhumpy;50597715]Murderous person + knife = bad things happen Murderous person + gun = VERY bad things happen Guns make it a lot easier (both physically and mentally) to kill someone. With any other weapon you have to invest a lot more effort into killing; with a gun you just aim and pull the trigger and you're done. They're highly optimised to cause a maximum amount of damage with a minimum amount of effort, it's precisely the reason why they were invented in the first place.[/QUOTE] Everything you said is 100% irrelevant to what catbarf said. Someone hell bent on murdering someone else over an argument needs only their bare hands and pure unbridled rage. Having a weapon does not change the train of thought that leads to the use of that weapon.

[QUOTE=TestECull;50597731]Everything you said is 100% irrelevant to what catbarf said. Someone hell bent on murdering someone else over an argument needs only their bare hands and pure unbridled rage. Having a weapon does not change the train of thought that leads to the use of that weapon.[/QUOTE] No, but it certainly makes the outcome worse.

[QUOTE=J Paul;50596043]No children here 21 and 17. Just saying. Also based on their background, there is a high likelihoodd of all three of the ladies here being ridiculous retarded right wing supercunts. Not that anyone should be happy about this, just saying, there's no young kids involved, and they were having a domestic argument that was childish and petty enough that it involved handguns, plus it took place in front of the neighbors. It's a damn shame, sounds like we lost some real winners here.[/QUOTE] two people just starting their lives were murdered by an insane person who happened to be the person that society told them they should trust most in the world.

[QUOTE=SonicHitman;50597540]sounds like more than just a "family argument" happened if a mother is compelled to suddenly shoot both of her children and proceed to get herself killed right after. clearly some mental issues going on with the mother.[/QUOTE] This is what I was wondering. What the hell possessed this woman to go this far off the deep end? Do we have any idea what the argument was about?

[quote]"It would be horribly tragic if my ability to protect myself or my family were to be taken away," Sheats wrote in March on her Facebook page, "but that's exactly what Democrats are determined to do by banning semi-automatic handguns."[/quote] Jesus, this quote is some real shit in hindsight.

[QUOTE=Headhumpy;50597746]No, but it certainly makes the outcome worse.[/QUOTE] Dead by strangled = dead by stabbed = dead by run over = dead by shot = dead by snapped neck = dead by hammer blow = dead by <insert literally every other method possible>. It's no different. You kill someone with your bare hands [b]you still killed someone.[/b] The how is irrelevant.

[QUOTE=TestECull;50598194]Dead by strangled = dead by stabbed = dead by run over = dead by shot = dead by snapped neck = dead by hammer blow = dead by <insert literally every other method possible>. It's no different. You kill someone with your bare hands [b]you still killed someone.[/b] The how is irrelevant.[/QUOTE] It's far easier to kill someone with a gun than a knife. Stop being obtuse.

[QUOTE=TestECull;50598194]Dead by strangled = dead by stabbed = dead by run over = dead by shot = dead by snapped neck = dead by hammer blow = dead by <insert literally every other method possible>. It's no different. You kill someone with your bare hands [b]you still killed someone.[/b] The how is irrelevant.[/QUOTE] I would rather have someone attack me with their bare hands than a gun, in fact any close combat weapon is better than long ranged, because you can run away from them, can't do that with guns.

[QUOTE=Headhumpy;50598252]It's far easier to kill someone with a gun than a knife. Stop being obtuse.[/QUOTE] In court, does method of crime trump motivation or outcome?

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;50598401]In court, does method of crime trump motivation or outcome?[/QUOTE] Still being obtuse. Murder attempts with makeshift weapons or none at all are less likely to lead to actual death.

[QUOTE=ScumBunny;50598444]Still being obtuse. Murder attempts with makeshift weapons or none at all are less likely to lead to actual death.[/QUOTE] So I suppose if someone is murdered by a stabbing, he should get a lighter sentence because it was harder for him to kill? Or a heavier sentence because it was more difficult for him to commit? Either way a man is killed, but that doesn't matter because it's all about the method apparently.

[QUOTE=megafat;50596831]I consider a more powerful gun to be anything that can have a high fire rate and a large magazine. There's no practical reason to carry those guns around in your day to day life.[/QUOTE] I don't carry my AR-15 around in my day to day life. I take it to the range once in a while and tear shit up with it when 5.56 is cheap. Sometimes I play gun barbie with it and dress it up to look like different types of AR. That is also fun. [editline]26th June 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=TestECull;50598194]Dead by strangled = dead by stabbed = dead by run over = dead by shot = dead by snapped neck = dead by hammer blow = dead by <insert literally every other method possible>. It's no different. You kill someone with your bare hands [b]you still killed someone.[/b] The how is irrelevant.[/QUOTE] This is exactly the point. Taking away all weapons doesn't do anything to address the drive to murder or commit crimes that exists within certain people. You can start with guns but eventually you'll have to ban knives, clubs (like baseball bats), etc... Why not cut to the chase and attack the problem at its source - by addressing poverty, education, and mental health - so that law abiding citizens without the drive to abuse other citizens can enjoy a fun hobby in peace? Because if murder is cut to down to wholly unpredictable freak occurrences, what's the point in getting rid of guns then? This woman might as well have killed them with a cast iron skillet. It makes no difference to me. What matters is that she murdered them.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;50598456]So I suppose if someone is murdered by a stabbing, he should get a lighter sentence because it was harder for him to kill? Or a heavier sentence because it was more difficult for him to commit? Either way a man is killed, but that doesn't matter because it's all about the method apparently.[/QUOTE] That's not his point. The thing is, a murder attempt with a gun is more likely to succeed than without. It's easier to shoot someone with a gun than to kill with a baseball bat or whatever other makeshift weapon.

[QUOTE=Rainboo;50598544]That's not his point. The thing is, a murder attempt with a gun is more likely to succeed than without.[/QUOTE] I don't understand how this makes a difference. I'd rather have people not attempting murder to begin with, wouldn't you? Or does attempted murder only bother you when it's attempted with a firearm?

[QUOTE=Grenadiac;50598549]I don't understand how this makes a difference. I'd rather have people not attempting murder to begin with, wouldn't you? Or does attempted murder only bother you when it's attempted with a firearm?[/QUOTE] Yes that's a really great aim and I fully support that, but in the meantime we live in the real world where people are emotional and impulsive, bad situations happen all the time where people end up attacking each other, and people get killed as a result. Whether it's a household argument that got too heated, or a robbery gone wrong, whenever guns are involved the situation becomes a lot more precarious than it would otherwise have been.

[QUOTE=Grenadiac;50598549]I don't understand how this makes a difference. I'd rather have people not attempting murder to begin with, wouldn't you?[/QUOTE] Ideally yes. But the point is that it makes it EASIER to murder people. The entire point of guns is that they can be used to kill with minimal effort. For instance, let's say we have two people on the road arguing with each other. A totally common occurrence. The presence of a gun would open up the possibility of one guy grabbing the gun from his car and shooting the other guy in the heat of the moment. Without a gun the worst he could do is attempt to injure the other guy with some pipe or with his fists.

[QUOTE=Grenadiac;50598531] Sometimes I play gun barbie with it and dress it up to look like different types of AR. That is also fun. [/QUOTE] Is this actually a thing :v:

[QUOTE=Rainboo;50598544]That's not his point. The thing is, a murder attempt with a gun is more likely to succeed than without. It's easier to shoot someone with a gun than to kill with a baseball bat or whatever other makeshift weapon.[/QUOTE] Either way it's murder/attempted murder... Itd still be murder if you stabbed someone to death 4,195 times with a paperclip

[QUOTE=Rainboo;50598556]Ideally yes. But the point is that it makes it EASIER to murder people. The entire point of guns is that they can be used to kill with minimal effort.[/QUOTE] "Can" "Could" "Possibly" All these words mean one thing: Guilty until innocent.

How easy it is has nothing to do with it

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;50598456]So I suppose if someone is murdered by a stabbing, he should get a lighter sentence because it was harder for him to kill? Or a heavier sentence because it was more difficult for him to commit? Either way a man is killed, but that doesn't matter because it's all about the method apparently.[/QUOTE] You're talking about what happens [i]after[/i] the person has been killed. I'm talking about how many people end up getting killed [i]in the first place[/i], to which the answer is more when you put guns into the equation, ceteris paribus.

[QUOTE=Headhumpy;50598555]Yes that's a really great aim and I fully support that, but in the meantime we live in the real world where people are emotional and impulsive, bad situations happen all the time where people end up attacking each other, and people get killed as a result. Whether it's a household argument that got too heated, or a robbery gone wrong, whenever guns are involved the situation becomes a lot more precarious than it would otherwise have been.[/QUOTE] Sure, when guns are involved in a crime, things can get hairy easily. People can die. But I don't understand how Timmy sticking a fork in an electrical outlet means I can't have a fork, even though I'm a responsible fork owner. Because that's literally what it boils down to. Person Z abuses a thing, and suddenly Person A-Y can't own that thing, even though they have for years and never had any issues.

It's easier for a body builder to kill someone with his bare hands than a secretary sitting at a desk all day. We need to ban body builders's hands because it's easier for them to kill with them.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;50598557]Is this actually a thing :v:[/QUOTE] Yeah you can stick different bits onto an AR and make it look like another member of the AR family. "Gun barbie" is the joke term for that :v: but the different bits make it handle differently and it's fun to shoot it in a variety of configurations

[QUOTE=Grenadiac;50598577]Sure, when guns are involved in a crime, things can get hairy easily. People can die. But I don't understand how Timmy sticking a fork in an electrical outlet means I can't have a fork, even though I'm a responsible fork owner. Because that's literally what it boils down to. Person Z abuses a thing, and suddenly Person A-Y can't own that thing, even though they have for years and never had any issues.[/QUOTE] Like I said in my first post, if you're happy living in a society where more people die because you want to have a thing, that's fine by me. Meanwhile I'm going to continue laughing at you.

[QUOTE=Headhumpy;50598592]Like I said in my first post, if you're happy living in a society where more people die because you want to have a thing, that's fine by me. Meanwhile I'm going to continue laughing at you.[/QUOTE] Lots of countries practice legal firearms ownership - some are even less regulated than the US - yet they don't have an associated gun crime rate. So is it possible that guns aren't whispering in people's ears and convincing them to commit crimes? Is it possible that [B]other factors that are clearly addressable[/B] are responsible for these crimes? Or should we just go for the easy, feel-good solutions until we eventually run out, and [I]then[/I] actually address the problem?