Shots fired on Michigan State University campus; police ask everyone to shelter in place

[snakestretcher]

there you go - you don't want to address violence, you want to stop the 18,000 people every year who want to commit homicide by taking away constitutional rights from 100,000,000 gun owners

stay in the UK, enjoy your country that is vastly different than the USA and I'll not try and tell ya'll how to do thing in Britain and in return I'll ask you not tell American's how to do things in the USA - fair ?

BTW almost all of my knives would be banned in UK - isn't that stupid?

See, some things called 'rights' aren't pertinent in the 21st century. Only 200 or so years ago when there was some parity in arms between government and citizenry in black powder weapons was this 2A relevant. All the talk I hear from gun-obsessives about protection from a 'tyrannical government' turning on the people is laughable. I haven't seen a 'well regulated militia' recently either; have you?

 

[Mika-El]

hang on. let's go back to these slaughters in preschools in the UK.

when were they??

No that won't establish your argument that better gun regulation reduces gun crimes. It simply establishes the argument that even with gun regulation mentally unstable people can find guns. It doesn't mean the gun regulation reduced other mentally unstable people or "normal" people from accessing guns.

You throw out a tragedy to argue, since it happened it proves all regulations are meaningless. That is illogical. You use an extremist argument that one failure means all the other potential crimes that may have been prevented never existed.

Gun regulation has helped reduce crimes where guns are used. The statistics in your country are kept and they have been provided many times on this forum and they are there for anyone to find.

More to the point you are well aware of the difference in gun related deaths in the UK and the US but you deliberately choose to ignore them and why this is the case.

 

[The flaming lib]

See, some things called 'rights' aren't pertinent in the 21st century.

God am I glad your not American. Rights not pertinent in 21st century my ass. Ask the 250,000 illegals who are caught trying to enter this country every month what they think about the rights in the US?

 

[snakestretcher]

God am I glad your not American. Rights not pertinent in 21st century my ass. Ask the 250,000 illegals who are caught trying to enter this country every month what they think about the rights in the US?

Try another straw man. I'm not biting. Oh, and it's 'you're', not 'your'. Always happy to educate.

 

[RF667799]

Keep regurgitating your tired old excuses; I've heard them all.

They're called arguments, and they're surely a thorn in your side.

 

[CaughtInThe]

No that won't establish your argument that better gun regulation reduces gun crimes. It simply establishes the argument that even with gun regulation mentally unstable people can find guns. It doesn't mean the gun regulation reduced other mentally unstable people or "normal" people from accessing guns.

You throw out a tragedy to argue, since it happened it proves all regulations are meaningless. That is illogical. You use an extremist argument that one failure means all the other potential crimes that may have been prevented never existed.

Gun regulation has helped reduce crimes where guns are used. The statistics in your country are kept and they have been provided many times on this forum and they are there for anyone to find.

More to the point you are well aware of the difference in gun related deaths in the UK and the US but you deliberately choose to ignore them and why this is the case.

hell, i was just trying to figure out when all the preschool slaughters happened in the UK.

do you know?

 

[RF667799]

See, some things called 'rights' aren't pertinent in the 21st century. Only 200 or so years ago when there was some parity in arms between government and citizenry in black powder weapons was this 2A relevant. All the talk I hear from gun-obsessives about protection from a 'tyrannical government' turning on the people is laughable. I haven't seen a 'well regulated militia' recently either; have you?

And you like the idea of rights not being "pertinent"?

Well...I suppose you must live within the circumstances forced upon you.

 

[CaughtInThe]

 

[ttwtt78640]

No one said better gun regulation will cease crime except you. You created that extreme and absurd conclusion to try belittle the concept of better gun regulation. Stop projecting. Neither I or anyone in support of better gun regulations has ever said it will make crime cease. Stop distorting what I or others have said who are pro gun regulation.

Next of course access to guns is linked to gun crimes. For you to deny that is absurd. The crime is done with a gun. Oh go on try figure it out.

What are the “gun regulations” in Canada? How have they changed in the last 10 years?

 

[RF667799]

Violence won't go away, but guns can. Guess how many firearm fatalities Britain suffered in 2019? Thirty (30). In the same year America had 45,000. And don't even think about whining 'but knives...'. The US has 10x the number of fatal stabbing that the UK does.

You should be grateful for our inherent violence, in case we have to step in and save you again. Personally, I wouldn't. I mean...it was different in the past when your country was actually relevant to world affairs. Now it's just bad weather, worse food, and a pompous attitude.

 

[hecatmoggie]

hang on. let's go back to these slaughters in preschools in the UK.

when were they??

lets go back to my question - could you put laws in place to stop someone today from choosing to do that ?

you can't - can you ?

I'm glad the people in the UK isn't as violent as the people in the USA are ..... but fact remains laws don't stop violence do they ?

 

[hecatmoggie]

You wouldn't have the absurdly easy access to the guns to do it with, unlike the US. I'm eternally grateful that Britain is nothing like the US.

you couldn't stop someone though could you ?

which is exactly the point I was making - thank you

 

[RF667799]

Stop playing victim. You are not a "wild eyed American" nor does hiding in the collective reference "Americans" make what you say more legitimate. Your nationality is not the issue. Your belief that guns make you free is what is being challenged. Anyone defending the continuous slaughter of Americans by Americans with guns is being challenged when they come up with the same stale excuse over and over. Stop hiding behind other Americans. Stop playing victim. The dead are the victims and if you want a society where its so easy to get weapons, then this is the direct consequence, more and more deaths.

By the way many of your fellow Americans like me not that I speak for them, have concerns about access to weapons and are asking what measures can be done to assure this accessibility can be scrutinized to screen out unstable people from owning guns. It doesn't even make them anti gun. I am pro gun control yes but not absolute prohibition. My Prime Minister went too far with his legislation in a country where people need guns to hunt for food. I am not wild eyed. I do have a bias against guns. Yes. Don't expect you to agree.

As for you being wild eyed I do not know how big your eyes are and whether you have a thyroid condition that might explain them bulging. I won't assume anything. I mean maybe you just have big eyes? Lol have a good day.

To all Americans, I do not relish seeing your continuous deaths by people with guns. It doesn't mean I think I am better than you-just worried. I feel bad for you guys. Many of us outside the US do. We would like to think the US is far better than these continuous murders. We still will but damn you guys need to review your gun laws. Please.

At last a well measured post.

I often propose criminal background checks as a requirement for possession of guns and motor vehicles.

You should consider them for your country as well. Most of the gun control advocates here want nothing to do with it.

 

[CaughtInThe]

How long until the next mass slaughter (that gets national headlines)?

 

[ttwtt78640]

Dangerous, mentally ill person previously identified, yet left to roam freely among us.

 

[hecatmoggie]

See, some things called 'rights' aren't pertinent in the 21st century. Only 200 or so years ago when there was some parity in arms between government and citizenry in black powder weapons was this 2A relevant. All the talk I hear from gun-obsessives about protection from a 'tyrannical government' turning on the people is laughable. I haven't seen a 'well regulated militia' recently either; have you?

I've actually not read that much - for many gun owners, its about protection of our right to self defend, to hunt, shooting sports etc and we know how a little gun control works and goes ... we can look at UK for that can't we ?

trying to stop violence by going so far as to ban knives with under 3" blades

good gawd - just pass a law that says don't murder someone - why isn't that enough?

 

[hecatmoggie]

How long until the next mass slaughter (that gets national headlines)?

How long until the next person defends themselves with a gun vs becoming a victim ?

 

[RF667799]

How long until the next mass slaughter (that gets national headlines)?

How long until you repeat this cliche?

Do you have anything interesting, or is hand wringing really the extent of it?

 

[CaughtInThe]

Dangerous, mentally ill person previously identified, yet left to roam freely among us.

it's interesting that the same thing isn't said when it's young black guys shooting.

but i will say that when it's young white guys shooting we do hear that a lot.

 

[CaughtInThe]

How long until the next person defends themselves with a gun vs becoming a victim ?

i'm sure that matters to the families of the (future) dead victims and their families.

are you the poster that said your daughter should have been gunned down save for a last second change of plans?

 

[RF667799]

it's interesting that the same thing isn't said when it's young black guys shooting.

but i will say that when it's young white guys shooting we do hear that a lot.

That's your response to hearing it about a middle age black guy?

Badly fumbled attempt at pulling a race card from your sleeve.

 

[ttwtt78640]

it's interesting that the same thing isn't said when it's young black guys shooting.

but i will say that when it's young white guys shooting we do hear that a lot.

This was the MSU mass shooter:

McRae had had to forfeit a weapon and was sentenced to a year of probation after he was arrested in June 2019 by Lansing police and charged with a felony for carrying a concealed weapon without a permit, Ingham County court and state criminal records show. But in that case, he pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor for possession of a loaded firearm in a vehicle and was discharged from probation in May 2021, court records show.

McRae purchased two guns in 2021 in Michigan, a law enforcement source told CNN. One was a Taurus G3C and the other was a Hi-Point 9mm. Both are compact pistols, according to their manufacturers’ websites.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/14/us/michigan-state-university-shots-fired-tuesday/index.html

 

[hecatmoggie]

i'm sure that matters to the families of the (future) dead victims and their families.

are you the poster that said your daughter should have been gunned down save for a last second change of plans?

no, not "should have been" ......... the thugs broke several laws that night and a dozen more wouldn't have stopped them from killing

NRA-ILA | Armed Citizen®

Collection of armed citizens exercising their right to self-defense.

www.nraila.org

500 pages of self defense stories - every day people save their lives and properties and defense themselves because they have guns - truth




"I'm gonna say something that's always controversial but there is no rationale for assault weapons and magazines that hold 50, 70 bullets."

What are the facts? The facts are that the shooter used a handgun, not a semi-automatic rifle. He was also a felon who had previous gun charges dismissed by a progressive prosecutor in the name of social justice. “Assault weapons” that hold “50, 70 bullets” were not a factor in the tragedy that played out on the MSU campus, and there was essentially no viable gun law that could have prevented what happened. The location was already a gun-free zone, and the shooter had no legal right to possess a gun.
Yet, this shameless ghoul we call president decided to appropriate the deaths of three students to push his unrelated, self-serving political pet project. What an absolute clownish, degrading thing to do.

Bad people do bad things. There is not always a magical government solution to every problem. In this case, the man appears to have been mentally ill. Using his murderous act as a way to push an irrelevant “assault weapons” ban when he didn’t even use an assault weapon is disgusting. Unfortunately, it’s completely on brand for Biden, though.

Amidst a Fight With the Teleprompter, Joe Biden Ghoulishly Politicizes the MSU Shooting

Joe Biden is so good at his job. In fact, according to Karine Jean-Pierre, he’s the best commu

redstate.com

 

[hecatmoggie]

it's interesting that the same thing isn't said when it's young black guys shooting.

but i will say that when it's young white guys shooting we do hear that a lot.

it depends on the person and their mental history - not color of skin

 

[ttwtt78640]

it depends on the person and their mental history - not color of skin

Not only their “mental history”. This mass shooter was charged with an easy to prove felony in 2019, but was allowed to plead guilty to a misdemeanor, given brief probation and then legally purchased guns in 2021.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/14/us/michigan-state-university-shots-fired-tuesday/index.html