What's new
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Gun Control 1: Kiss Kiss, Bang Bang

Status
Not open for further replies.
There’s between one and two mass shootings everyday in the U.S., not to mention countless shootings that don’t qualify as a mass shooting, such as this one. There’s almost too many options for newsrooms to choose from to report on. I think you’re missing the forest for the trees, bro.
 
Statistically, one of us will eventually have a relative taken out by one of Drew's Army.

2A is a relic. Either nuke it or give us heavy arty and we'll take care of it ourselves.
 
Statistically, one of us will eventually have a relative taken out by one of Drew's Army.

2A is a relic. Either nuke it or give us heavy arty and we'll take care of it ourselves.

As a trans woman, I could really use an M1 Abrams tank with full artillery, a drone equipped with Hellfire missiles, and a grenade launcher with lots of grenades.
 
Somehow not Florida.

FORT WAYNE, Ind. -- An Indiana man faces felony charges after he was shot in the back by a 2-year-old boy who found the weapon on a bed, according to authorities.

Justin T. Wiley, 32, of Fort Wayne was charged this week with neglect of a dependent resulting in serious bodily injury and unlawful possession of a handgun. He is not legally allowed to carry a gun because of prior felony convictions, The Journal Gazette reported.

Fort Wayne police officers found Wiley on Sept. 9 suffering from a gunshot wound in his middle to upper back, according to a probable cause affidavit.

He was shot in the home of a woman who has an active protection order against him.
 
An instance in which I am 100% on the side of the shooter and wish he had blown this guy's head clean off.

The prankster deserved a beatdown, no doubt. But I don't know how many people I trust discharging a firearm inside a mall under almost any circumstances unless someone is obviously threatening a life. It's why my firearm never leaves my house. If you are in my home, you either belong or you're not wanted. It's easy to tell if someone needs shooting, who needs shot, and the environment is controlled. Not so much in a mall. Frankly I think the shooter did us a favor and maybe idiots like this prankster will think twice, but we encourage more people to think they're gonna be that proverbial "good guy with a gun" if we let the shooter off with a total walk.
 
but we encourage more people to think they're gonna be that proverbial "good guy with a gun" if we let the shooter off with a total walk.

No. This guy was not playing impotent Republican with a gun thinks he's High Plains Drifter. He was just an innocent civilian scared by Douche Bro. Douche Bro's brains sprayed all over Auntie Anne's solves the entire problem.
 
No. This guy was not playing impotent Republican with a gun thinks he's High Plains Drifter. He was just an innocent civilian scared by Douche Bro. Douche Bro's brains sprayed all over Auntie Anne's solves the entire problem.

Jury acquitted him on 2 of 3 charges, including both serious ones. He was found guilty of firing a gun inside the mall, but that's been set aside, at least for now.

Good.
 
You sound like Republicans when cops kill Black people...no hyperbole.

I don't care how douchy the guy was you don't fire a gun unless you are threatened. The guy should go to jail and never be allowed to have a gun again.
 
You sound like Republicans when cops kill Black people...no hyperbole.

I don't care how douchy the guy was you don't fire a gun unless you are threatened. The guy should go to jail and never be allowed to have a gun again.

A jury found that he felt threatened, given that they acquitted him. So...

I'm sorry, but self defense is a thing and if some asshole starts looming over someone after they tell them to stop, they get what's coming to them.
 
A jury found that he felt threatened, given that they acquitted him. So...

I'm sorry, but self defense is a thing and if some ******* starts looming over someone after they tell them to stop, they get what's coming to them.

If you’re a food delivery driver you’re 100% justified in carrying as far as I’m concerned.

If you go up to some random person and shove a phone in their face you should expect to get punched, stabbed, shot, etc. There is no justifying that kind of behavior.
 
The fact he said "stop" three times showed he was not in imminent danger, and that takes away the justification for straight-up shooting someone. (Note: this is based on my opinion, and not knowledge of the actual laws, fwiw.) If he did it immediately after the prankster did it the first time, then yes, maybe it was a gut reaction when he felt mortally threatened, but by the third time I just don't see it that way. Don't get me wrong, the prankster's behavior was completely unacceptable; if the shooter had just mercilessly beaten the shit out of him, then he's in the right for the extent to which he felt bothered/threatened and the way in which he responded. But to me to shoot someone there has to me some extra threat that I don't see here. I'm not saying the shooter should get anything serious, mind you, because 95% of the example set here needs to be on the prankster and not the shooter.

Also, this is amusing because this mall is roughly a mile from where my mom lives.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top