Do You Think Trump Bares Any Responsibility For The Mass Shootings Occuring?

by minimus 236 Replies latest jw friends

  • minimus

    I agree not all of these killers are crazy. Some might be but they certainly are delusional! They thrive on attention. Maybe they were neglected or bullied. But whatever the reason, they kill or want to kill people. That’s not normal. Trump doesn’t push these people to eradicate innocent people. The fake news would have you believe otherwise though.

  • LV101

    People turn their lives over to the government not because they are nuts but because they believe they are doing the right thing and will have a better life. Not everyone thinks that's the answer. Capitalism isn't perfect but it's lifted gazillions out of poverty (why does everyone want to come here that's poor) and they learn to be self sufficient not depending on crook lifer politicians. If you think socialism is going to ever give those other than at the top (like lifer politicians as we've experienced in the Swamp)) a piece of the pie you're smoking something.

  • LV101

    Exactly, re/Obama and racial issues and he'll possibly go down as one of the most corrupt in power ever.

  • LV101

    No the shooters/killers aren't all crazy but they've become indoctrinated with ideology. Everyone has to blame and poor fake news has to struggle for viewers but the ones they have are scared to death of anything other than what their beloved base throws at them.

  • stillin

    New Zealand certainly didn't mess around in their response to a maniac with an assault weapon! Of course, it's a somewhat different culture and they don't have Donald Trump trying to get re-elected. They just did what had to be done.

    I hope it works for them. This American culture is way too polarized. People can't even have civil discourse because nobody knows what's true anymore. People just believe what they want to believe.

  • LV101

    That's what I thought re/Clinton and showing the facts.

  • RubaDub


    While everyone feels they have to take sides and and either be pro-gun or anti-gun, there is a very workable solution if cooler heads (and less politics and lobbying) were applied based on two simple ideas/facts:

    (In Full Disclosure, I Personally Own Multiple Guns)

    1). The right to bear arms does NOT include all arms. You can't legally purchase any kind of weapon you wish. Many high-powered and automatic type weapons are either not available to the general public or require difficult to get federal licensing and permits. The most obvious difference with assault (military) and assault (citizen) type weapons is that the military versions are typically automatic, meaning the weapon will continue firing when the trigger is pulled once. The same weapon in the citizen variety is just one shot per each pull of the trigger. Slower but still extremely lethal given the number of bullets either of these military style weapons can hold (33 in some cases). What these types of weapons are used for other than shooting people is beyond my pay grade but will be discussed at a later time by others here, I am sure).

    2). So given the fact that the government does indeed limit what we civilians can have within the confines of the Second Amendment, why not just make obtaining the guns more "reasonable" in the context of the 21st century. Regardless of one's political views, guns are designed to shoot people and things. Guns are dangerous if not in the hands of someone who has been trained to properly use them. The same can be said of cars, airplanes, trucks, motorcycles, medicines, moving hazardous chemicals, wiring a house with electric, getting a tooth pulled, etc. The list goes on and on and on .....

    And what is the one common element with all of those mentioned? You need training, a license or some other method of determining proficiency in using or doing it. I just can't start with ANY of those items mentioned (and hundreds or thousands of others) and say I am qualified and do it. By the way, would it be legal to do any of those mentioned without some sort of liability insurance to protect someone if it caused harm to an innocent victim? Let's not go there for the moment.

    And yet, oddly, a device that is designed to harm whatever it hits and can cause immediate harm to the user or those nearby .... well .... in some States if they put a mirror below your nose and you fog it, then you are qualified. No reasonable test, no proficiency exam, no nothing, other than your some cash or a credit card.

    I can't legally do ANY of those things just mentioned above by being the nice guy that I am ... except buy a gun.

    Come on people ... on both sides of the aisle .... this is not rocket science (and you would need a permit to launch a rocket ... lol).

    Reasonable regulations and registration of weapons is in no way taking away ones rights.

    Wouldn't you feel better knowing that a person buying a gun has at least some basic training on how to properly use a gun and some sort of basic psychological test.

    Don't you like to know that the next time you board an airplane that the pilot and copilot have had training?

    Don't you like to know your doctor has had proper training when prescribing medicine to you?

    Do you want anyone to be driving a car next to you regardless of his or her age or ability to drive?

    I really don't think this is an extreme position.

    Maybe the comments above are something that neither side really likes.

    In my mind, that would make it a good thing.

    (Thank you for watching our show tonight. These ideas really aren't mine. I just took a few hours and watched Fox News and then MSNBC, put it into a blender, and this is what came out.)

    Rub a Dub

  • LV101

    They've got to correct these roadblocks on universal background checks (along with these unnecessary firearms) -- data bases prevent critical info being released. This is bi-partisan - the bump stock (after the LV horror shooting) and the 2017 Fix NICS Act. It's going to require serious change.

    Sounds like both of these criminals were ready to die - this hasn't been confirmed by more than one medical expert (as far as I know) but sounds like they were both suicidal. Not that they all are. It was known the Dayton shooter needed help - mental health laws must change as well as gun laws. These corporations need more security to protect people.

  • joey jojo
    joey jojo

    Nicely put RubaDub.

    What's wrong with sensible checks and balances before letting a person get their hands on a lethal weapon?

  • Wasanelder Once
    Wasanelder Once

    I think we could easily summarize the arguments on this thread with:


Share this