Breaking: Massacre at Texas Church
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> Off Topic This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
ContagiousInspiration
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 07 May 2014
Posts: 3324

PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 2:33 pm    Post subject:

Aeneas Hunter wrote:
Quote:
Texas church shooter Devin Patrick Kelley was arrested on a cruelty to animals charge in August, 2014 in El Paso County, Colorado, according to the Sheriff’s Office there.

He was living in a Colorado Springs RV park at the time.

The witness who made the call to report the abuse incident saw Kelley jump on a young white and brown husky then he "began punching the dog with a closed fist near the head and neck area," according to records. The witness said Kelley then punched the dog four to five times, and "grabbed the dog by the neck and drug him away." Several other witnesses reported similar accounts of the beating of the pup.


Fits the MO

where was the probation and counseling for this abuse of an animal

I hope he did time for it.. like it matters now
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 19187

PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 3:00 pm    Post subject:

jodeke wrote:
IMO the bold is the point where observe and report should have begun. If they had kept Kelly in sight, gave the police his location the police would then do what they are trained to do.


What is it that you think they did differently?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 19187

PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 3:03 pm    Post subject:

Quote:
Col. Don Christensen, former Air Force chief prosecutor, said that Texas church shooter Devin Patrick Kelley once shook his stepson so hard that the boy suffered fractures and bleeding in his skull, which is so dangerous it could be deadly.

The retired Air Force colonel told CNN's Wolf Blitzer the domestic abuse offenses against Kelley's stepson and wife occurred between 2010 and 2012. The abuse started soon after Kelley's son was born in July 2010, Christensen said.

"During this time, he would often be physically violent with his son, including violently shaking him," Christensen said. "As a result of that, his stepson had suffered fractures, had a hematoma and he was eventually charged after he confessed to committing these offenses."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
DuncanIdaho
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 26 Apr 2004
Posts: 14590
Location: In a no-ship

PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 3:05 pm    Post subject:

jodeke wrote:
IMO the bold is the point where observe and report should have begun. If they had kept Kelly in sight, gave the police his location the police would then do what they are trained to do.

Putting your life in danger may be heroic to some, it's not to me. These two men may have families that could have become mourners had things gone array.


If that citizen hadn't intervened, and just watched, the guy would have likely killed the entire congregation. I don't know about you, but that would probably haunt me forever if I just sat and watched it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 19187

PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 3:05 pm    Post subject:

Quote:
Investigators have found indications in Texas gunman Devin Kelley’s social media presence that he was interested in mass shootings, according to a law enforcement official who was briefed on the investigation. Investigators are piecing together from social media and interviews that Kelley slowly spiraled downward and became increasingly obsessed, all over a family dispute.

The official says he could not let go of the family grievance.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
jodeke
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 41728
Location: In a world where admitting to not knowing something is considered intelligent.

PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 3:10 pm    Post subject:

Aeneas Hunter wrote:
jodeke wrote:
IMO the bold is the point where observe and report should have begun. If they had kept Kelly in sight, gave the police his location the police would then do what they are trained to do.


What is it that you think they did differently?


I see what you mean. I was at first under the impression they confronted the suspect after he stopped. My bad.

Another question. Did the first person who fired at Kelly break the law? I'm not fully aware of how the shooting at one another started. Did Kelly shoot at the neighbor first or did the neighbor take it upon himself to shoot Kelly. Is it lawful for citizens to confront a shooter if that shooter is not endangering them?
_________________
Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.

Your prayers are always answered. Sometimes the answer is NO.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 19187

PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 3:20 pm    Post subject:

jodeke wrote:
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
jodeke wrote:
IMO the bold is the point where observe and report should have begun. If they had kept Kelly in sight, gave the police his location the police would then do what they are trained to do.


What is it that you think they did differently?


I see what you mean. I was at first under the impression they confronted the suspect after he stopped.

Another question. Did the first person who fired at Kelly break the law? I'm not fully aware of how the shooting at one another started. Did Kelly shoot at the neighbor first or did the neighbor take it upon himself to shoot Kelly. Is it lawful for citizens to confront a shooter if that shooter is not endangering them?


Okay, we’re on the same page now. Once he went off the road, they would have had no business playing amateur SWAT team. If no one is in danger, wait for the police.

As for your question, here is the relevant provision of the Texas Penal Code:

Quote:
Sec. 9.33. DEFENSE OF THIRD PERSON. A person is justified in using force or deadly force against another to protect a third person if:

(1) under the circumstances as the actor reasonably believes them to be, the actor would be justified under Section 9.31 or 9.32 in using force or deadly force to protect himself against the unlawful force or unlawful deadly force he reasonably believes to be threatening the third person he seeks to protect; and

(2) the actor reasonably believes that his intervention is immediately necessary to protect the third person.


I expect that every state has some variation of this principle.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
jodeke
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 41728
Location: In a world where admitting to not knowing something is considered intelligent.

PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 3:27 pm    Post subject:

This is a shooting that may possibly have been prevented.

Air Force Error Allowed Texas Gunman to Buy Weapons

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/06/us/texas-shooting-church.html

Quote:
SUTHERLAND SPRINGS, Tex. — A day after a gunman massacred parishioners in a small Texas church, the Air Force admitted on Monday that it had failed to enter the man’s domestic violence court-martial into a federal database that could have blocked him from buying the rifle he used to kill 26 people.

_________________
Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.

Your prayers are always answered. Sometimes the answer is NO.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 120900
Location: The Gold Coast

PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 3:32 pm    Post subject:

jodeke wrote:
venturalakersfan wrote:
They reported that some residents near by heard the gunfire and shot him as he escaped. They are not sure if that was the mortal wound or if he killed himself.

Quote:
When police arrived about five minutes later, they approached the suspect's vehicle and found the gunman inside dead of a bullet wound. He was later identified as Devin Patrick Kelley.


This article is disturbing to me. Citizens with guns confronting an chasing a armed suspect is not only dangerous but I believe is unlawful. I don't think they're hero's.

IMO observe and report, follow the suspect at a safe distance, inform the authorities of his location, allow the police to do the job they were trained to, would be more fitting.

LINK


So allowing him to continue shooting at the church, call the cops and wait is what he should have done? How many more would be dead? The citizen did what he should have.
_________________
#lakerclownshow
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
rwongega
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 20 Jul 2005
Posts: 19777
Location: UCLA -> NY

PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 3:44 pm    Post subject:

jodeke wrote:
rwongega wrote:
jodeke wrote:
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
jodeke wrote:
Why in the hell are weapons like THIS argued as legal to own? What's the reason? These are weapon of war. What real purpose do they serve in a civil society?

I'm for taking them off the market. What kind of people buy them? I'm not condemning any, just wondering.

I'm a advocate for the second amendment. I'm also a advocate for a revisit and revision.


This belongs in The Political Thread.


C'mon man! Are you attempting to troll? You my peeps but I think you need to back off on this one.


ChefLinda wrote:
No politics talk. No talk about other posters. Any questions, please PM me.


My response was related to a carry over from AH and DMR.

That's why we have mods, which neither of you are. I'm done with this portion of the discussion.


Lame and utterly false excuse.

As you declined to listen to the advice of a mod, I felt it necessary to provide you with a reminder.
_________________
http://media.giphy.com/media/zNyBPu5hEFpu/giphy.gif
http://bartsblackboard.com/files/2009/11/The-Simpsons-05x18-Burns-Heir.jpg

RIP Jonathan Tang
RIP Alex Gruenberg

Free KBCB
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
jodeke
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 41728
Location: In a world where admitting to not knowing something is considered intelligent.

PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 4:00 pm    Post subject:

venturalakersfan wrote:
jodeke wrote:
venturalakersfan wrote:
They reported that some residents near by heard the gunfire and shot him as he escaped. They are not sure if that was the mortal wound or if he killed himself.

Quote:
When police arrived about five minutes later, they approached the suspect's vehicle and found the gunman inside dead of a bullet wound. He was later identified as Devin Patrick Kelley.


This article is disturbing to me. Citizens with guns confronting an chasing a armed suspect is not only dangerous but I believe is unlawful. I don't think they're hero's.

IMO observe and report, follow the suspect at a safe distance, inform the authorities of his location, allow the police to do the job they were trained to, would be more fitting.

LINK


So allowing him to continue shooting at the church, call the cops and wait is what he should have done? How many more would be dead? The citizen did what he should have.


As I stated in a previous post. I don't know when Kelly and the neighbor started to shoot at one another.

If Kelly was still shooting at the church then yes, the neighbor did the right thing, may not be lawful but the right thing. If he wasn't and was fleeing this is where I think observe and report was the appropriate thing to do.

I'm also curious, did the neighbor break the law by shooting at Kelly? Was Kelly on the run when he started shooting him. Who started shooting at who first? If Kelly was on the run is it lawful for a citizen to shoot him? So many unanswered questions.

Condolences to all affected by the shooting.
_________________
Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.

Your prayers are always answered. Sometimes the answer is NO.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ContagiousInspiration
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 07 May 2014
Posts: 3324

PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 4:18 pm    Post subject:

jodeke wrote:
This is a shooting that may possibly have been prevented.

Air Force Error Allowed Texas Gunman to Buy Weapons

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/06/us/texas-shooting-church.html

Quote:
SUTHERLAND SPRINGS, Tex. — A day after a gunman massacred parishioners in a small Texas church, the Air Force admitted on Monday that it had failed to enter the man’s domestic violence court-martial into a federal database that could have blocked him from buying the rifle he used to kill 26 people.


Just following orders from their CIC to let mentally ill people buy firearms

Can't upset the NRA lobbyists ya know
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ContagiousInspiration
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 07 May 2014
Posts: 3324

PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 4:28 pm    Post subject:

jodeke wrote:
venturalakersfan wrote:
jodeke wrote:
venturalakersfan wrote:
They reported that some residents near by heard the gunfire and shot him as he escaped. They are not sure if that was the mortal wound or if he killed himself.

Quote:
When police arrived about five minutes later, they approached the suspect's vehicle and found the gunman inside dead of a bullet wound. He was later identified as Devin Patrick Kelley.


This article is disturbing to me. Citizens with guns confronting an chasing a armed suspect is not only dangerous but I believe is unlawful. I don't think they're hero's.

IMO observe and report, follow the suspect at a safe distance, inform the authorities of his location, allow the police to do the job they were trained to, would be more fitting.

LINK


So allowing him to continue shooting at the church, call the cops and wait is what he should have done? How many more would be dead? The citizen did what he should have.


As I stated in a previous post. I don't know when Kelly and the neighbor started to shoot at one another.

If Kelly was still shooting at the church then yes, the neighbor did the right thing, may not be lawful but the right thing. If he wasn't and was fleeing this is where I think observe and report was the appropriate thing to do.

I'm also curious, did the neighbor break the law by shooting at Kelly? Was Kelly on the run when he started shooting him. Who started shooting at who first? If Kelly was on the run is it lawful for a citizen to shoot him? So many unanswered questions.

Condolences to all affected by the shooting.


I am hoping it would be some sort of elevated citizens arrest
The man didn't know if Kelly was headed down the road to kill everyone in the cafe etc maybe..
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 39643
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.

PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 6:18 pm    Post subject:

So now we have reached a point where the discussion of the obvious ways to help try and prevent or diminish the human loss of life after a massshooting is too "political" to be discussed in the context of a mass shooting?

This country is completely screwed due to that kind of ridiculous rationale.
_________________
You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show goes up in flames
In 24 frames


Jason Isbell
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ContagiousInspiration
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 07 May 2014
Posts: 3324

PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 6:35 pm    Post subject:

DaMuleRules wrote:
So now we have reached a point where the discussion of the obvious ways to help try and prevent or diminish the human loss of life after a massshooting is too "political" to be discussed in the context of a mass shooting?

This country is completely screwed due to that kind of ridiculous rationale.



Quote:
Thoughts and prayers!!!


Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LakerLanny
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 24 Oct 2001
Posts: 38527

PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 6:48 pm    Post subject:

jodeke wrote:

You don't think that's being reckless?

I think I understand why they did what they did but they could have become victims 28 & 29.

It kinda like police tell citizens not to try to intervene with a police chase. Getting in the way may turn out fatal for those who involve themselves and impede those trained to handle the situation.

Let those who are trained do what they are trained to do.


Yes, it is extremely reckless.

It is also heroic and what I like to think I would do if ever in the same situation.
_________________
Love, Laker Lanny
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
jodeke
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 41728
Location: In a world where admitting to not knowing something is considered intelligent.

PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 7:40 pm    Post subject:

Aeneas Hunter wrote:
jodeke wrote:
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
jodeke wrote:
IMO the bold is the point where observe and report should have begun. If they had kept Kelly in sight, gave the police his location the police would then do what they are trained to do.


What is it that you think they did differently?


I see what you mean. I was at first under the impression they confronted the suspect after he stopped.

Another question. Did the first person who fired at Kelly break the law? I'm not fully aware of how the shooting at one another started. Did Kelly shoot at the neighbor first or did the neighbor take it upon himself to shoot Kelly. Is it lawful for citizens to confront a shooter if that shooter is not endangering them?


Okay, we’re on the same page now. Once he went off the road, they would have had no business playing amateur SWAT team. If no one is in danger, wait for the police.

As for your question, here is the relevant provision of the Texas Penal Code:

Quote:
Sec. 9.33. DEFENSE OF THIRD PERSON. A person is justified in using force or deadly force against another to protect a third person if:

(1) under the circumstances as the actor reasonably believes them to be, the actor would be justified under Section 9.31 or 9.32 in using force or deadly force to protect himself against the unlawful force or unlawful deadly force he reasonably believes to be threatening the third person he seeks to protect; and

(2) the actor reasonably believes that his intervention is immediately necessary to protect the third person.


I expect that every state has some variation of this principle.


Thanks AH. You dispelled my visions of the OK Corral.
_________________
Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.

Your prayers are always answered. Sometimes the answer is NO.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
jodeke
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 41728
Location: In a world where admitting to not knowing something is considered intelligent.

PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 7:50 pm    Post subject:

DuncanIdaho wrote:
jodeke wrote:
IMO the bold is the point where observe and report should have begun. If they had kept Kelly in sight, gave the police his location the police would then do what they are trained to do.

Putting your life in danger may be heroic to some, it's not to me. These two men may have families that could have become mourners had things gone array.


If that citizen hadn't intervened, and just watched, the guy would have likely killed the entire congregation. I don't know about you, but that would probably haunt me forever if I just sat and watched it.


I'm on board with the citizen engaging in a gun fight with the shooter. He was a brave man. He probably saved some lives. I've forgotten how many empty clips were found at the scene.

My position concerns the citizens who followed the shooter. It's been made clear to me they did what they should have, kept him in sight. If I have it right they didn't approach the car, they waited for the police.
_________________
Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.

Your prayers are always answered. Sometimes the answer is NO.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
jodeke
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 41728
Location: In a world where admitting to not knowing something is considered intelligent.

PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 8:04 pm    Post subject:

LakerLanny wrote:
jodeke wrote:

You don't think that's being reckless?

I think I understand why they did what they did but they could have become victims 28 & 29.

It kinda like police tell citizens not to try to intervene with a police chase. Getting in the way may turn out fatal for those who involve themselves and impede those trained to handle the situation.

Let those who are trained do what they are trained to do.


Yes, it is extremely reckless.

It is also heroic and what I like to think I would do if ever in the same situation.


I think I would also. I was blurred to the entire interaction of the two who followed the shooter. I thought they engaged Kelly after he stopped. They didn't. Thus my question of reckless.

I think the man who got into a gun fight with Kelly was a man of courage. I'm going over it in my mind and like you I'd like to think I would have done the same. I won't say I definitely would have.
_________________
Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.

Your prayers are always answered. Sometimes the answer is NO.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Omar Little
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 79074
Location: Formerly Known As 24

PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 10:36 pm    Post subject:

DaMuleRules wrote:
So now we have reached a point where the discussion of the obvious ways to help try and prevent or diminish the human loss of life after a massshooting is too "political" to be discussed in the context of a mass shooting?

This country is completely screwed due to that kind of ridiculous rationale.


I agree that any discussion of this beyond the basic news and platitudes is going to veer to political stuff. And I think trying to tamp that down simply abets one political viewpoint (and yes, "let's just not talk about anything at all related to why this happens or what to do about it, or why we seem to treat white shooters so differently" is totally a political strategy of one group of people on this subject). And frankly, if we cant talk about it like adults, all of it, maybe we shouldnt have this thread open at all? Thoughts?
_________________
Tolerance is an agreement to live in peace, not an agreement to be peaceful no matter the conduct of others. A peace treaty is not a suicide pact.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ContagiousInspiration
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 07 May 2014
Posts: 3324

PostPosted: Tue Nov 07, 2017 4:46 am    Post subject:

maybe these quotes will help the decision

Quote:

Kellyanne Conway Says Debating Gun Control Now ‘Disrespects The Dead’

Ted Cruz echoes her message: “We don’t need politics right now. ... Evil is evil.”

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/conway-gun-debate-disrepect-dead_us_5a00eae3e4b0368a4e868d17

They are dead, now with proof, because of a lack of proper gun control... (bleep)

Politics is evil, yes Mr Cruz you are correct.

Feels like a 3rd world country...

Evil politicians telling the public to pray.. what a joke... Maybe they mean PrEy? like they do on your paycheck and lobbyist monies?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 19187

PostPosted: Tue Nov 07, 2017 5:56 am    Post subject:

Omar Little wrote:
DaMuleRules wrote:
So now we have reached a point where the discussion of the obvious ways to help try and prevent or diminish the human loss of life after a massshooting is too "political" to be discussed in the context of a mass shooting?

This country is completely screwed due to that kind of ridiculous rationale.


I agree that any discussion of this beyond the basic news and platitudes is going to veer to political stuff. And I think trying to tamp that down simply abets one political viewpoint (and yes, "let's just not talk about anything at all related to why this happens or what to do about it, or why we seem to treat white shooters so differently" is totally a political strategy of one group of people on this subject). And frankly, if we cant talk about it like adults, all of it, maybe we shouldnt have this thread open at all? Thoughts?


I think The Political Thread is ample proof of the wisdom of limiting political discussions. I decline to participate in that thread because it became apparent that we cannot discuss these matters like "adults" (including one moderator telling me that I have been brainwashed by Fox News) and because you inexplicably refuse to moderate AMR.

This shooting is a news event. It can be discussed without going into people's opinions about gun control. You can talk about gun control like "adults" in The Political Thread. If you cannot separate news from political diatribes, that is a problem with you, not a problem with the rest of us.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 19187

PostPosted: Tue Nov 07, 2017 6:04 am    Post subject:

More from CNN:

Quote:
Kelley had emptied 15 magazines -- about 450 rounds -- at First Baptist Church, leaving such extensive destruction that the pastor's wife, Sherri Pomeroy said: "Most of our church family is gone, our building is probably beyond repair."


Quote:
Christopher Leo Longoria who went to high school with him said Kelley would focus on women's reactions and that it would "creep out the ladies." Longoria said he had recently unfriended him on Facebook because Kelley was launching into online personal attacks against his friends.

"He was also posting a lot of non-God beliefs, atheism, a lot of gun violence and a lot of weapons that he was into," Longoria told CNN's Don Lemon.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 39643
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.

PostPosted: Tue Nov 07, 2017 6:58 am    Post subject:

Aeneas Hunter wrote:
Omar Little wrote:
DaMuleRules wrote:
So now we have reached a point where the discussion of the obvious ways to help try and prevent or diminish the human loss of life after a massshooting is too "political" to be discussed in the context of a mass shooting?

This country is completely screwed due to that kind of ridiculous rationale.


I agree that any discussion of this beyond the basic news and platitudes is going to veer to political stuff. And I think trying to tamp that down simply abets one political viewpoint (and yes, "let's just not talk about anything at all related to why this happens or what to do about it, or why we seem to treat white shooters so differently" is totally a political strategy of one group of people on this subject). And frankly, if we cant talk about it like adults, all of it, maybe we shouldnt have this thread open at all? Thoughts?


I think The Political Thread is ample proof of the wisdom of limiting political discussions. I decline to participate in that thread because it became apparent that we cannot discuss these matters like "adults" (including one moderator telling me that I have been brainwashed by Fox News) and because you inexplicably refuse to moderate AMR.


Pretty rich coming from someone who routinely insults posters and bullies his way through threads. Though I will grant that your commitment to hypocrisy is fierce.

Quote:
This shooting is a news event. It can be discussed without going into people's opinions about gun control. You can talk about gun control like "adults" in The Political Thread. If you cannot separate news from political diatribes, that is a problem with you, not a problem with the rest of us.


It shouldn't be. And this attitude is exactly what 24 was referring to when he discussed one side shutting down the discussion as being inherently political. You don't want to engage in the discussion, that's fine. But when you tell everyone they can't engage in that discussion because you can't separate the politics of it, that is in itself being political.

It is possible to discuss the topic of reasonable regulation as a common sense safety issue. And it should be (needs to be actually) a part of the discussion every time one of these tragedies occurs.
_________________
You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show goes up in flames
In 24 frames


Jason Isbell
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ContagiousInspiration
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 07 May 2014
Posts: 3324

PostPosted: Tue Nov 07, 2017 7:17 am    Post subject:

A news event involving dead people
They died when someone used piece of politicized machinery to fire thoughts and prayers at them

NO.. it was A GUN.. with bullets that were provided to the killer by your local and federal politicians
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> Off Topic All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 4 of 5
Jump to:  

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum






Graphics by uberzev
© 1995-2010 LakersGround.net. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Terms of Use.
LakersGround is an unofficial news source serving the fan community since 1995.
We are in no way associated with the Los Angeles Lakers or the National Basketball Association.


Powered by phpBB