Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire What's going on in DFW

That's pretty close to home, chit!

Bart, glad you're alright. Sadly, they lost a 5th officer.

WTF the world needs another flood and to start from scratch again

That sucks. My balcony faces west down Main St. I could have been pretty effective with my 220 Swift if needed but....
God bless and prayers for those officers.

[bleep] you

I was just thinking about where you were when they showed it all happening in that area of downtown. I remember that you said lived right downtown in that general area. Glad to hear your OK.

When was the last time a liberal addressed the issue of gun violence with anything even approaching commonsense? That is the better question. In the first place, less than 2% of all murders are committed with so called "assault weapons" and that is using a generous definition of "assault weapon". By far, the firearm of choice for most killers is a cheap handgun. Furthermore, mass shooting events, as a crime problem, are very minor. They are blown way, way out of proportion because of their sensational nature. Statistically, they are such a minor problem it's actually embarrassing to witness a presumably intelligent person interested in reducing gun violence even waste anyone's time speaking of them. If gun violence is your real concern and your premise is that banning firearms will stop the violence, focusing on so called assault weapons is utterly and completely stupid.

Furthermore, if the premise for banning a firearm used in less than 2% of murders is that such a ban would stop the use of said firearms and therefore the commission of said murders, then that is even dumber still. In the first place, if bans are effective, isn't that an argument for banning virtually all firearms, especially handguns? And does anyone with an IQ of an ant seriously think that banning assault weapons would result in would-be murderers simply choosing not to kill at all, since they can't do it with an AW? That's liberal logic at work for you right there. Furthermore,
which firearm is most likely to have utility for self-defense---especially for women? Precisely. A handgun. So, a ban on handguns would make the balance of power even worse in favor of opportunistic murderers and rapists.

Even if you could ban all assault weapons and handguns (which you can't---a ban hasn't a snowball's chance in hell of working---unless you're talking about turning the USA into a police state, amending the Constitution to eliminate the 2nd and 4th Amendments and then forcibly searching every home for handguns and severely punishing every law-abiding citizen who dissents), what kind of guns will perps start using then? How 'bout double barrels and single shots? And does anyone besides Alice in Wonderland really think the murder rate would magically go down?

States and localities with generous concealed carry have far, far lower rates of violent opportunistic crime than jurisdictions with strict gun control. Why is that? What gun control does, virtually by definition, is disarm law abiding citizens, making them completely vulnerable to opportunistic violent criminals and thus making the problem of such crime far, far worse. Murderers---people who are intent on taking the lives of others---have no intention whatsoever of obeying gun prohibition laws. Do you actually believe that someone who is perfectly okay with killing another human being has some sort of compunction against illegal possession of a firearm or ammo?

All of the gun control in the world will not make guns one wit less available to persons who want to use them to obtain a force advantage over victims. What gun control does in American culture is make the problem of gun violence, far, far worse because, virtually by definition, it creates a power imbalance in favor of socio-paths hell bent on murdering innocent people. Truly, gun control is a murderer's best friend. They positively love the way gun control makes sheep out of everyone.

Democrats have a helluva lot of blood on their hands. Will they ever be held to account?

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1994/03/the-false-promise-of-gun-control/306744/

Jordan

A more pertinent question Rob would be to ask "when was the last time a conservative turned mass shooter".

No...this is your fault and every one who voted for that piece of [bleep] half nig we have as a president.

You democrats created this nonsense now phugging own it

Glad to hear you're okay.

I am waiting to hear from the pres that this is all the fault of the NRA and we need more gun control.

He has to be told what to say first, but stick around.

Obama on this:

https://gma.yahoo.com/president-oba...ing-074414102--abc-news-topstories.html#



Funny how he doesn't address HIS part of creating all this racial division...

do we know anything about the shooters?

The media called them snipers, but from what I seen, they were simply "ambush shooters".

weapons used?

Number of [bleep]?

etc...

They're not saying anything about who the shooters were, or what they were. So that means it's someone they will try to protect as a victim of some sort.

I'm sure it's possibly some Black Lives Matter radicals, but with one of them taking his own life, I wouldn't be surprised if it was a Muzzy sympathizer taking advantage of the situation.

As far as the weapons used, I'm sure it'll be some of those scary black guns.

The number of azzholes, they are saying 3, with a triangulation of attack.

Easy. Wake up one day and find yourself on the wrong end of this bitch.

Media is buzzwording sniper and triangulation, and they haven't got a fuggin clue what either of them really imply, so take that with a grain of salt.

10-4 on that. I never believe anything the MSM says, especially early on.

We are reaping the result of a society where God has been mocked, shunned and all but eliminated. Somebody has their hand on the "reset" button.

What do we know about the suspects and the one dead shooter?