akillesheel
Exceptional Member
- Messages
- 188
gawrsh i sure am glad cops have never been criticized for using excessive force! i was also born yesterday.Is that why cops carry 5 shot revolvers? Oh wait, they don’t.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
gawrsh i sure am glad cops have never been criticized for using excessive force! i was also born yesterday.Is that why cops carry 5 shot revolvers? Oh wait, they don’t.
Excellent job avoiding having to answer a question that destroys your argument.gawrsh i sure am glad cops have never been criticized for using excessive force! i was also born yesterday.
it's not my argument, but i also don't think using the example of police "destroys" anything, because one of the most common, milquetoast criticisms of police you'll see even from people who like them is that they are over-militarized and resort to deadly force too readily.Excellent job avoiding having to answer a question that destroys your argument.
There are certainly instances of police brutality, no one is disputing that. However, those instances are the rare exception rather that the norm. A police officer is shot on average once every day in the United States. The police engage in gun battles somewhere in the US at least daily. They don't carry 5-shot pistols because they know that doing so would put them at a tremendous tactical disadvantage. These are people trained in marksmanship and combat. Your average layperson is not, so expecting them to outperform the police in a situation where gunfire is being exchanged is unrealistic.it's not my argument, but i also don't think using the example of police "destroys" anything, because one of the most common, milquetoast criticisms of police you'll see even from people who like them is that they are over-militarized and resort to deadly force too readily.
More than 7 in 10 police can go a whole career without firing their weapons. the ones getting into gun battles are choosing to do so repeatedly because they're bad at their jobs and don't know or care to deescalate.The police engage in gun battles somewhere in the US at least daily. They don't carry 5-shot pistols because they know that doing sowould put them at a tremendous tactical disadvantagemake it harder for them to shoot and kill 30 dogs a day.
Looks like they want to try.They can pry my Lexapro from my cold, dead hands.
No vaccines solves autismLooks like they want to try.
What a colossally ignorant idea to float. I've been among the most pessimistic about this second administration, and this almost surprises me.
Lunacy.No vaccines solves autism
No psychiatric medications and kids having guns in schools solve mass murders
RFK Jr. is making America safe again.
![]()
RFK Jr. complains kids can't 'bring their guns' to school amid 'over-medicated nation'
Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. suggested there was a problem in the United States because children could not "bring their guns" to school. During a news conference in Texas on Thursday, Kennedy was asked about whether he considered mass shootings a public...www.rawstory.com
More than 7 in 10 police can go a whole career without firing their weapons. the ones getting into gun battles are choosing to do so repeatedly because they're bad at their jobs and don't know or care to deescalate.
So your argument appears to be:I’m for most of that as long as the gun licensing class is free and offered frequently so that there are no difficulties attending it. Also, hard no on the 5 bullet limit. That would essentially disarm law-abiding citizens and would do nothing to disarm criminals who already own those weapons illegally. The average citizen is not a Delta Force operator who can be expected to land nothing but headshots on a moving target while under fire.
i mean, if you can't tell the difference between performing an action and having something done to you, i don't think i can really converse with you about anything. that's just a fundamental lack of understanding the world at even a juvenile level. what a gross thing to say for no reason because that comparison falls apart with even the barest hint of scrutiny."More than 7 in 10 women can go a whole lifetime without being sexually assaulted. The ones getting raped are choosing to do so because they are bad at observing their surroundings and don't know or care to deescalate."
Aside from your comment being horribly uninformed and victim-blaming, it completely avoids the point. Once again, can you direct me to a single law enforcement agency in the United States that issues their officers 5 shot revolvers?
Your argument is like saying that UNC should have to play against Alabama in football, but UNC isn’t allowed to wear pads or helmets.So your argument appears to be:
ordinary citizens can't shoot accurately and spray bullets every which way, so we should make sure they can pack even more bullets into their guns so they can shoot more?
This is exactly like saying that Jackie Manuel should have been told to shoot MORE 3s, since it took him so many tries to make one. And you think others are the ones not living in reality?
You simply do not understand the concept of "self-defense." Self-defense does not let you hurt innocent people indiscriminately -- not in Gaza, or in Louisville, or Grandma at the mall
When the people who encounter violence most frequently and who are the most trained to engage in gunfights carry more ammunition rather than less of it, they are the experts. Citizens should not be expected to be able to outshoot a Delta Sniper in order to have the means to defend themselves.i mean, if you can't tell the difference between performing an action and having something done to you, i don't think i can really converse with you about anything. that's just a fundamental lack of understanding the world at even a juvenile level. what a gross thing to say for no reason because that comparison falls apart with even the barest hint of scrutiny.
and you're, predictably, missing my point, not the other way around. i am saying that an argument based on police practice holds no water with me in this subject, because police as an institution are not committed to reducing violence - ergo, when you're arguing about ways to effectively reduce violence, telling me what is given to those with an essentially indiscriminate license to kill simply will not move me nor any other reasonable person.
Yeah, it's really weird that he went with victim blaming when referring to the magazine capacity of guns. In his mind, police are always the victims, just like Israel is always a victim and the lives of other people just don't matter. He is, btw, an emergency responder.i mean, if you can't tell the difference between performing an action and having something done to you, i don't think i can really converse with you about anything. that's just a fundamental lack of understanding the world at even a juvenile level. what a gross thing to say for no reason because that comparison falls apart with even the barest hint of scrutiny.
and you're, predictably, missing my point, not the other way around. i am saying that an argument based on police practice holds no water with me in this subject, because police as an institution are not committed to reducing violence - ergo, when you're arguing about ways to effectively reduce violence, telling me what is given to those with an essentially indiscriminate license to kill simply will not move me nor any other reasonable person.
It isn't like that at all. You are bad at arguments. Logic is not your strong suit.Your argument is like saying that UNC should have to play against Alabama in football, but UNC isn’t allowed to wear pads or helmets.