REMINDER: THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. has no obligation to monitor the Forums. However, THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. reserves the right to review any materials submitted to or posted on the Forums, and remove, delete, redact or otherwise modify such materials, in its sole discretion and for any reason whatsoever, at any time and from time to time, without notice or further obligation to you. THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. has no obligation to display or post any materials provided by you. THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. reserves the right to disclose, at any time and from time to time, any information or materials that we deem necessary or appropriate to satisfy any applicable law, regulation, contract obligation, legal or dispute process or government request. Click on the following hyperlinks to further read the applicable Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Thankfully there haven't been any school catapultings.You're saying that a rock, a hammered a baseball bat, a knife, and an ar-15 that fires up to 45 rounds per minute are all equal in terms of ease, convenience, and effort required to inflict damage?
The Dobie-O-Matic of Far Side fame just isn't enough anymore.Just wait until I unveil my new pit bull catapult.
"Over the wall Fluffy! Kill!"
You do realize that I don't advocate for that. I do however believe it should be up to the individual states to decide because that's how our Constitution is written.so you obviously realize the folly in banning abortion.
people are gonna do what people are gonna do.
If they prefer white meat or dark meat, does that make the pitbulls racist? Asking for a friend.The Dobie-O-Matic of Far Side fame just isn't enough anymore.
What would do more damage?
Catapulting pitbulls onto the playground during recess or catapulting kids into a fenced pitbull enclosure?
How many 10 year olds could a pitbull eat? Would they stay on one or diversify?
Things to consider.
25 years ago was 1997Funny, though, I haven't heard of any mass killings using a rock, sword or hammer.
I seriously think the reason the AR-15 is popular is because they look cool. I think they look cool. Like an A-10 Warthog or Apache attack helicopter. It's the same aesthetic. Like the Jeep with a light bar, winch, and axe, shovel and traction boards mounted on the racks. It looks "technical," ready for business. (Hey Ifall, you got accessories for your Jeep?). The reason we have killing with these weapons now and didn't 25 years ago, is because the badass ones were not around back then or were not marketed. Now any kid who watches movies sees them in action. Sometimes it's the good guys kicking ass with them. Yeah baby.
Problem is, now, when a kid (or adult in arrested development) gets really pissed off, it's a known option. Oh yeah? Well then, I'm gonna fuk you up.
Snipers do...So why are armies and mass shooters not using deer rifles?
So fucking dishonest, all the time.
Ownership should be protected because they are specifically designed to kill humans? I'd love to read an actual logical argument about this.Again, AR15s are very good, very efficient tools designed specifically for killing human beings.
This is the reason the right of private ownership of these weapons needs to be protected at all costs.
The primary rifle used by US Army snipers is a customized Remington model 700 firing a round that is very similar to the .308 that is popular for deer hunting. Now they are also using the Barrett .50 and the TAC338 which is what you'll see in the movie American Sniper.So why are armies and mass shooters not using deer rifles?
So fucking dishonest, all the time.
Thankfully there haven't been any school catapultings.
WtfWhy the Police Took 78 Minutes to Stop the Uvalde Gunman
In the days since the shooting, questions have abounded about the response from law enforcement officers.www.nytimes.com
Detailed analysis of the timeline.
Edit: Apparently, it was the school district police that has jurisdiction over schools and all other police had to follow its commands.
And the Uvalde mayor defended the independent school district police chief's decision.
Because the second amendment is there as a deterrent to the government turning on its people. The better the weapon in the hands of citizens the better the deterrent, and the more a nefarious government would want to take from us (hence the importance of the need for protection).Ownership should be protected because they are specifically designed to kill humans? I'd love to read an actual logical argument about this.