907
'Gun-loving' GOP governor reportedly seen 'running scared for his life' from mass shooting
(www.rawstory.com)
this post was submitted on 15 Feb 2024
907 points (92.0% liked)
News
23413 readers
2418 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Be the good guy with the gun. Isn't that the reason we need unfettered access to guns?
I dont carry a gun, and my access to something is not why I am in favor of it being legal. Do you want legalized marijuana just because you want to use it or because you think everyone should be allowed to use it?
"I support face eating leopards and would run from one"
Guns are a federally protected right, and yes I would run someone that was shooting at people. You wouldnt?
my dude... of course I would, thats why I dont support gun rights... thats my point...
How would you not supporting gun rights take the guns out of the hands of the shooter(s)?
The same way it works in all other countries. Is not a coincidence that the US is the only country where gun ownership is a right in the constitution and the country #1 in school shootings.
How would you get hundreds of millions of guns out of circulation without making tens of millions of law abiding americans into criminals?
Do you support them being legal and almost entirely unregulated? Because that is the GOP position and there is a big gulf between the two.
I have no problem with guns being legal. Unlike Republicans, though, I don't want them in the hands of, for example, the criminally insane.
I do support unregulated guns, but I am willing to compromise. Right now guns are extremely regulated particularly in some states, which is wrong. I think the biggest problem is that the regulations that some people want are ineffective at best.
Really? So guns for toddlers? Guns for people who have been institutionalized multiple times? Guns for people who have committed treasonous acts?
A former school shooter gets out of prison- give them a gun?
This is the exact reason I support unregulated gun use, because people can claim things and then people lose rights.
Right, so you think clinically insane people and toddlers should have guns.
I think the only valid point you have is that insane people shouldnt have guns; toddlers parents should be in charge of what they have access to. So if you proposition is that we only limit guns to insane people, I agree to this compromise.
Got it. Parents get to decide whether or not toddlers should have access to drugs.
Strawman
Nope, logical inference based on what you said.
Or does "toddlers parents should be in charge of what they have access to" mean something non-literal? Was it metaphorical? I doubt it.
If you're going to make sweeping general statements that apply in every situation, that's not my fault.
Nope, drugs are directly harmful, a child could hold and carry an unloaded weapon with no issue. Or they could shoot a gun that shoots something non lethal.
I said 'access,' not 'use.' A toddler cannot be harmed by picking up a bag of meth any more than they can be harmed by an unloaded weapon.
So it's okay to let them do that, right?
Of course they can... Have you not noticed how cops wear gloves when they deal with drugs, the residue on a bag could literally kill someone.
But if your gun control counter negotiation is no toddlers or insane with guns, I will accept that counter offer.
Yes, I have noticed that cops buy into all kinds of propaganda bullshit about drugs.
And apparently so do you.
Cops also pass out when they touch a tiny bit of fentanyl despite fentanyl not being able to be absorbed by the skin that quickly or easily.
I guess this was fake...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFr41zHKmcU
You do see that she's wearing gloves in that footage, right? So apparently your claim that they wear gloves to stop that is not true.
Also, if you're going to post that video, you may want to watch this video about why that video is bullshit- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b1daCmMFSJg
Use some basic logic. If fentanyl was that strong, a tiny bag would last for years.
Gotcha all coincidence... She had a medical emergency from searching a car. Sure thing!
I guess you know more than those medical experts, right?
Where did you get your medical degree from? Did your medical school not cover psychosomatic disorders? I'd ask for your money back.
Medical experts watching a video... Are you aware that there are more than this one time?
Medical experts who know how fentanyl works.
Again- where did you get your medical degree from and why did it not include the concept of psychosomatic illness?
Again, Are you aware that there are more than this one time?
Do I need a medical degree for knowing exposure to potent drugs causes people to get drugs into their system? I guess if I am claiming a toddler cant be harmed by mild exposure to drugs I would need to keep believing that.
Again. As in it's the second time I asked you.
And yes, you do need a medical degree if you think you know better than the people who explain how it gets into their system.
But you sound like the typical conservative who thinks their gut brain knows better than any of those dumb scientists.
Cool you didnt answer a single one of my questions. Have an amazing day!
The purpose of a joint isn't to kill people. Go ahead, say guns aren't for killing, it'll save a lot of back-and-forth.
I was responding to the idea I want gun rights so I can be a hero. I want people to have guns because they want guns for any variety of reasons. I want legal marijuana because people want marijuana. Both have externality and benefits.
Everyone who takes firearms training learns that the purpose of a gun is to kill things. It is a weapon, and killing is its only purpose. Any reasons to want a weapon involve harming or killing others, or the threat thereof - even if the reason given is "protection", it's only protection in the context of hurting or killing someone before they hurt or kill someone else. This is why cannabis and cars are not a valid comparison.
Guns are for a lot more than just killing. Two other obvious things are target shooting and threat deterrent. Then there is the reason to prevent tyranny.
Target shooting, to make sure you can hit what you're aiming at. Threat deterrent, with the threat of force. "To prevent tyranny" by killing people.
Every reason is a derivative of causing harm. Every single one.
Literally people buy guns to shoot targets. Do you really think people buy 22lr to kill? I have weapons used for target practice and I no plans of shooting anything.
And threat deterrent is more than tyranny, people carry guns so people know they have guns so they are less likely to be attacked (at least that is teh theory).
A gun can literally be a decoration, it doesnt always have to kill things.
Everyone should be allowed to use it, because cannabis isn't a deadly weapon.
Knives and bats are deadly weapons too, so no knives and bats?