Articles
   
       
Pics/Video
       
Wake 101
   
       
       
Shop
Search
 
 
 
 
 
Home   Articles   Pics/Video   Gear   Wake 101   Events   Community   Forums   Classifieds   Contests   Shop   Search
WakeWorld Home
Email Password
Go Back   WakeWorld > Non-Wakeboarding Discussion

Share 
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old     (grant_west)      Join Date: Jun 2005       03-15-2019, 9:45 AM Reply   
Ralph: What the heck? What’s going down in NZ?
Old     (wombat2wombat)      Join Date: Sep 2018       03-15-2019, 9:59 AM Reply   
If you think this is bad, wait till the mooslums respond
Old     (ralph)      Join Date: Apr 2002       03-15-2019, 12:38 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by grant_west View Post
Ralph: What the heck? What’s going down in NZ?
Heart breaking bro, deranged looser with nothing to live for and a heart full of hate kills 50 innocent people in a place of worship. Gun man was an Australian who flew here to do the hit but had on the ground support from some local drongo drop kicks. Hopefully they will be all rounded up and justice will be served.
Old     (grant_west)      Join Date: Jun 2005       03-15-2019, 12:47 PM Reply   
Yes this guys was a total deranged looser:
Guy flys from Oz to shoot and kill people in NZ in hopes a civil War will irrupt in the US?
Old     (Stazi)      Join Date: Sep 2011       03-15-2019, 1:15 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by grant_west View Post
Yes this guys was a total deranged looser:

Guy flys from Oz to shoot and kill people in NZ in hopes a civil War will irrupt in the US?


Exactly. He wants to be the next Gavrilo Princip. *******!!
Old     (ottog1979)      Join Date: Apr 2007       03-15-2019, 1:16 PM Reply   
Terrible news. Sorry to hear Ralph.
Old     (wombat2wombat)      Join Date: Sep 2018       03-15-2019, 1:24 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by grant_west View Post
Yes this guys was a total deranged looser:
Guy flys from Oz to shoot and kill people in NZ in hopes a civil War will irrupt in the US?
He was nuts. As all the moron in America that shoot stuff up. It isn't the guns. It's the mental health. I am curious what if any meds this guy was taking? I'm also curious why it's so taboo in the states to own up to the fact that every shooter was under someone's care taking psychoactive meds
Old     (Stazi)      Join Date: Sep 2011       03-15-2019, 1:54 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by wombat2wombat View Post
He was nuts. As all the moron in America that shoot stuff up. It isn't the guns. It's the mental health. I am curious what if any meds this guy was taking? I'm also curious why it's so taboo in the states to own up to the fact that every shooter was under someone's care taking psychoactive meds


Because it doesn’t suit the left’s narrative.
Old     (grant_west)      Join Date: Jun 2005       03-15-2019, 6:58 PM Reply   
Does New Zealand have the death penalty.
Here in lovely California our POS governor Gavin Newsom. Decided that the death penalty was racist so he’s using his governor powers to stop all executions and dismantle the death chamber here at San Quintin prison. Our governor Has to be the biggest effing retard. I hope he starts going to masks and praying
Old     (ralph)      Join Date: Apr 2002       03-15-2019, 9:13 PM Reply   
No mate, not for 70 years. Why would you want to execute someone with mental illness?
Old     (grant_west)      Join Date: Jun 2005       03-16-2019, 6:59 AM Reply   
I watched the full live stream he posted 16 mins long. This guy was a total A hole. If anyone needs the death penalty then here is your guy. I don’t care if he is mental. He is a disease on mankind. Mentally ill people that do stuff like this should be taken out he killed people just as good as any sain person could. I say if the find the guy mental just kill him. If he is not mental they should slowly torture and kill him. This guy is such a rotten human no normal person would want him breathing air
Old     (wake77)      Join Date: Jan 2009       03-16-2019, 7:16 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stazi View Post
Because it doesn’t suit the left’s narrative.
What "narrative" is that? If the NRA didn't have such strong lobbyists, the topic of guns would never be mentioned by politicians. You are just a pawn in their game. Mass gun control is a chicken-little tactic. It will never happen in the US.
Old     (grant_west)      Join Date: Jun 2005       03-16-2019, 8:25 AM Reply   
^^^^^ LOL at that Idea wake.
In my opinion, a Democrat run government wants to Nanny & take over all portions of your life. They don’t want law abiding citizens to be able to protect them selfs. They want everyone to depend on the government for their personal protection. Sure in a perfect world we would not need guns, but until then, if Democrats wanted “Gun Controll” they would build more Jails, And lock up and throw away the key on all the street thugs and Anyone black, white,yellow,or red who has or uses a gun in the commission of a crime, you would see gun crime drop. As soon as Roaches figured out carrying a gun when your not supposed to or using a gun in the wrong manner (robbing stealing general hood rattary ) was a one way ticket to a life in prison all the Dumb Asses would be gone, I’m sure you would see a Spike in knife crime like the UK has, but the upside IMO law abiding citizens would be able to carry and Roaches would then be “out gunned” we know what happens when you bring a knife to a gun fight.
Old     (grant_west)      Join Date: Jun 2005       03-16-2019, 8:32 AM Reply   
But I’m Sure stupid ass Liberial Democrats like Gavin Newsome would deem that kind of “gun controll“ RACIST. Hummm let’s think about that? The law doesn’t know or care what color or race you are, it only targets behavior. God forbid that you lock up to many people of a certain race or color because they happen to be committing a crime. The law theirfor must be racist. You Liberial Democrats are A plague on the United States
Old     (wake77)      Join Date: Jan 2009       03-17-2019, 3:10 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by grant_west View Post
^^^^^ LOL at that Idea wake.
In my opinion, a Democrat run government wants to Nanny & take over all portions of your life. They don’t want law abiding citizens to be able to protect them selfs. They want everyone to depend on the government for their personal protection. Sure in a perfect world we would not need guns, but until then, if Democrats wanted “Gun Controll” they would build more Jails, And lock up and throw away the key on all the street thugs and Anyone black, white,yellow,or red who has or uses a gun in the commission of a crime, you would see gun crime drop. As soon as Roaches figured out carrying a gun when your not supposed to or using a gun in the wrong manner (robbing stealing general hood rattary ) was a one way ticket to a life in prison all the Dumb Asses would be gone, I’m sure you would see a Spike in knife crime like the UK has, but the upside IMO law abiding citizens would be able to carry and Roaches would then be “out gunned” we know what happens when you bring a knife to a gun fight.
You cannot be serious. No party wants to "take over all portions of your life" more than Republicans.

Jails cost money. Think of that next time you are clamoring for another tax break.
Old     (Stazi)      Join Date: Sep 2011       03-17-2019, 5:36 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by wake77 View Post
You cannot be serious. No party wants to "take over all portions of your life" more than Republicans.



Jails cost money. Think of that next time you are clamoring for another tax break.


OMG, that has to be the most ridiculous comment I have ever read.

I guess you’re not paying attention to how your beloved Democratic Party is springing further and further left towards totalitarian government control of everything, starting with this ridiculous pile of excrement called the “Green New Deal”. You truly are either ignorant or just trolling with the statement you made.

Republicans have always been about less government.

wow....I can’t believe you even typed that pile of nonsense.
Old     (wake77)      Join Date: Jan 2009       03-17-2019, 6:31 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stazi View Post
OMG, that has to be the most ridiculous comment I have ever read.

I guess you’re not paying attention to how your beloved Democratic Party is springing further and further left towards totalitarian government control of everything, starting with this ridiculous pile of excrement called the “Green New Deal”. You truly are either ignorant or just trolling with the statement you made.

Republicans have always been about less government.

wow....I can’t believe you even typed that pile of nonsense.
Maybe at one time, the "Republicans were about less government". Now, they want to tell women they cannot have a legal, medical procedure. They want to discriminate against Americans based on their sexuality. They want to designate Christianity as the national religion. They want to discriminate based on religious beliefs. I can keep going if I need to.
Old     (bass10after)      Join Date: Feb 2010       03-21-2019, 11:27 PM Reply   
First of all these attacks are a terrible tragedy. Second its crazy that , peaceful, liberal new Zealand is the target of a terrorist attack. It really can happen anywhere. Next up the case study of what happens when good guys are kept from owning "bad guns". Not sure if nz is anything like the US but its illegal for felons to own guns here, and yet plenty are arrested with them and they didn't buy them at Dicks sporting goods....
Old     (ralph)      Join Date: Apr 2002       03-22-2019, 12:54 AM Reply   
Yes it will be interesting, personally I think the gun laws here are about right without taking away semis and i don't think it will make us significantly safer but we don't have the second amendment here and no gun culture so it's easy for the government to do something and be seen to do something if you know what i mean.
Old     (grant_west)      Join Date: Jun 2005       03-22-2019, 9:11 AM Reply   
Ok it’s time to Laugh at New Zelands PM

Dont worry folks New Zealand prime Minister to the rescue. They have NOW banned all guns that can hold more then 5 bulllets at one time. Ok now that this new law is in place, everything is fine No worry’s I’m sure this law will make sure somthing like this never happens again. Sorry but NZ is just as STUPID as california now.
Old     (95sn)      Join Date: Sep 2005       03-22-2019, 11:01 AM Reply   
Well it appears that only 5 rounds would make it more difficult to kill 50 people.

I thought that shotguns were only allowed 3 rounds in the USA, but that may just be a hunting rule.
Old     (DeltaHoosier)      Join Date: Mar 2018       03-22-2019, 12:29 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by wake77 View Post
What "narrative" is that? If the NRA didn't have such strong lobbyists, the topic of guns would never be mentioned by politicians. You are just a pawn in their game. Mass gun control is a chicken-little tactic. It will never happen in the US.
Happening in California
Old     (DeltaHoosier)      Join Date: Mar 2018       03-22-2019, 12:30 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by ralph View Post
No mate, not for 70 years. Why would you want to execute someone with mental illness?
The left wants to execute children with defects.
Old     (DeltaHoosier)      Join Date: Mar 2018       03-22-2019, 12:35 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by 95sn View Post
Well it appears that only 5 rounds would make it more difficult to kill 50 people.

I thought that shotguns were only allowed 3 rounds in the USA, but that may just be a hunting rule.
Not really. You can replace a mag in 1 second. Look up the firing rate of British Soldiers with their 303 Infield rifles. Single shot rifles.

I think the point that you are missing, you can modify a gun to hold more rounds. The government trying to make it illegal only stops the people who are going to legally go shoot up a bunch of people. The people who want to illegally shoot up a group of people will not care about the bullet limit.
Old     (wake77)      Join Date: Jan 2009       03-22-2019, 4:18 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier View Post
Happening in California
Which one of CA's gun laws adversely affects your personal ownership of firearms?
Old     (grant_west)      Join Date: Jun 2005       03-22-2019, 10:06 PM Reply   
^^^ Not sure if I wanna go down this rat hole with a compleate idiot. But since you asked.
Here is a example in california, you can buy a gun go threw all the legal means to own a firearm. And our law makers over night make laws
That make it so that,the very gun you bought 1 year ago is now deemed evil and you have to re register it and or modify it and make it lame or face fine or go to jail, because some total idiot that has zero clue about guns and how they work says so. They can turn legal gun owners into criminals with They laws they come up with.

Imagine this. You like wake boarding you buy a wake boat. Some idiot who should not even own a boat uses his wake boat to kill a bunch of people. How would you like the state to tell you you have to convert your wakeboard boat and how it works into a row boat. And if you don’t you will face fines or jail. And then say we didn’t take away your right to own a boat.
Old     (Matt0520)      Join Date: Feb 2019       Yesterday, 4:37 AM Reply   
I see the lack of fact-driven discussion has migrated over to this thread lol.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 95sn View Post
Well it appears that only 5 rounds would make it more difficult to kill 50 people.

I thought that shotguns were only allowed 3 rounds in the USA, but that may just be a hunting rule.
It’s a hunting rule. And the guys will just change mags faster or carry multiple weapons (like the Columbine shooters). Why is it that everyone assumes someone who’s about to commit mass murder will bother to consult and abide by local gun laws? “Let me get the proper lower-capacity magazines before I go smokecheck everyone in this building.” I mean, come on.

I still remember Joe Biden’s advice on the shotgun. Hilarious. It’s actually one of the most dangerous defensive weapons there is. Buckshot carries more energy through drywall (is more lethal after it passes through it) than the “high powered” 5.56 and you have zero shot discrimination with the shotgun. It’s one of the most difficult firearms to use properly.

99% of legislators are completely ignorant on the topic. And yet we want them to make meaningful change for us. Buena suerte!

ETA: lol “fire 2 blasts” indiscriminately. A crime. Yep, Washington will save us.
https://youtu.be/wIuk3G9Xixc

Last edited by Matt0520; Yesterday at 4:43 AM.
Old     (wake77)      Join Date: Jan 2009       Yesterday, 4:45 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by grant_west View Post
^^^ Not sure if I wanna go down this rat hole with a compleate idiot. But since you asked.
Here is a example in california, you can buy a gun go threw all the legal means to own a firearm. And our law makers over night make laws
That make it so that,the very gun you bought 1 year ago is now deemed evil and you have to re register it and or modify it and make it lame or face fine or go to jail, because some total idiot that has zero clue about guns and how they work says so. They can turn legal gun owners into criminals with They laws they come up with.

Imagine this. You like wake boarding you buy a wake boat. Some idiot who should not even own a boat uses his wake boat to kill a bunch of people. How would you like the state to tell you you have to convert your wakeboard boat and how it works into a row boat. And if you don’t you will face fines or jail. And then say we didn’t take away your right to own a boat.
Looking at some of the laws that went into effect this year in CA, it seems like they are addressing your wakeboard boat analogy. I just don't understand why any sort of sensible legislation is viewed as government seizure of firearms.
Old     (Matt0520)      Join Date: Feb 2019       Yesterday, 4:46 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by wake77 View Post
Looking at some of the laws that went into effect this year in CA, it seems like they are addressing your wakeboard boat analogy. I just don't understand why any sort of sensible legislation is viewed as government seizure of firearms.
Bc the majority of the legislation is not sensible. It’s to make the uneducated public feel nice, but it doesn’t make an impact because it’s misguided and doesn’t work towards addressing the core problem.

Last edited by Matt0520; Yesterday at 4:48 AM.
Old     (wake77)      Join Date: Jan 2009       Yesterday, 4:51 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt0520 View Post
I see the lack of fact-driven discussion has migrated over to this thread lol.



It’s a hunting rule. And the guys will just change mags faster or carry multiple weapons (like the Columbine shooters). Why is it that everyone assumes someone who’s about to commit mass murder will bother to consult and abide by local gun laws? “Let me get the proper lower-capacity magazines before I go smokecheck everyone in this building.” I mean, come on.

I still remember Joe Biden’s advice on the shotgun. Hilarious. It’s actually one of the most dangerous defensive weapons there is. Buckshot carries more energy through drywall (is more lethal after it passes through it) than the “high powered” 5.56 and you have zero shot discrimination with the shotgun. It’s one of the most difficult firearms to use properly.

99% of legislators are completely ignorant on the topic. And yet we want them to make meaningful change for us. Buena suerte!

ETA: lol “fire 2 blasts” indiscriminately. A crime. Yep, Washington will save us.
https://youtu.be/wIuk3G9Xixc
What "facts" are you trying to use to bolster your argument? That laws don't work? So let's just eliminate speed limits since people will speed anyway. Why have DUI laws since people are just going to drive drunk anyway? Why spend billions on a wall that we know people will find a way to go under/over/around it?

And while a mass shooter is likely to ignore any "local gun laws", is your advice that we should make it as easy as possible for the shooter to get their hands on a firearm? Because that seems to be the only "fact" you are bringing to the argument.
Old     (Matt0520)      Join Date: Feb 2019       Yesterday, 4:55 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by wake77 View Post
What "facts" are you trying to use to bolster your argument? That laws don't work? So let's just eliminate speed limits since people will speed anyway. Why have DUI laws since people are just going to drive drunk anyway? Why spend billions on a wall that we know people will find a way to go under/over/around it?



And while a mass shooter is likely to ignore any "local gun laws", is your advice that we should make it as easy as possible for the shooter to get their hands on a firearm? Because that seems to be the only "fact" you are bringing to the argument.

Good morning, great ‘straw man’ response. See the facts and questions I posted in the other thread that you didn’t bother responding to. Believe I posted my solutions to the problem there too. Even posted a study from UPenn’s Jerry Lee Center of Criminology on these these BS laws that I bet you didn’t read.

Since you’re not picking up something this simple let me draw it for you in crayon:

The laws we currently have are bull****

I’m all for laws that will actually change things in a measurable way

That won’t happen until we stop relying on mouth-breathing, uneducated politicians to put laws together that do nothing but make stupid people feel better
Old     (wake77)      Join Date: Jan 2009       Yesterday, 4:57 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt0520 View Post
Bc the majority of the legislation is not sensible. It’s to make the uneducated public feel nice, but it doesn’t make an impact because it’s misguided and doesn’t work towards addressing the core problem.
What legislation is 100% infallible?

Look, I own two firearms, I was raised in a home where firearm safety was emphasized. I believe in an American's right to own a firearm, but I believe we can exist as a country where citizens can own firearms and there can be sensible gun laws. The two are not mutually exclusive. I don't see the harm in civility.
Old     (Matt0520)      Join Date: Feb 2019       Yesterday, 5:01 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by wake77 View Post
What legislation is 100% infallible?
Lol that’s no excuse for having stupid puppets wasting time and dollars for zero impact.

Your Senator Feinstein is a perfect example.

What other “sensible” gun laws should be on the books?
Old     (wake77)      Join Date: Jan 2009       Yesterday, 5:03 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt0520 View Post
Good morning, great ‘straw man’ response. See the facts and questions I posted in the other thread that you didn’t bother responding to. Believe I posted my solutions to the problem there too. Even posted a study from UPenn’s Jerry Lee Center of Criminology on these these BS laws that I bet you didn’t read.

Since you’re not picking up something this simple let me draw it for you in crayon:

The laws we currently have are bull****

I’m all for laws that will actually change things in a measurable way

That won’t happen until we stop relying on mouth-breathing, uneducated politicians to put laws together that do nothing but make stupid people feel better
No you aren't. You are only "all for" the laws that you view as nonrestrictive towards you personally.

There is no "straw man" in my response. Your argument was, why have any laws since a mass shooter is going to ignore those laws to begin with. I just applied your argument to countless other laws we have on the books.

CA just initiated a ban for anyone that has ever been committed to a mental institute against their will. What's your problem with that? CA just initiated a ban for people convicted of domestic abuse. What's your problem with that? Maybe you can respond in crayon.
Old     (wake77)      Join Date: Jan 2009       Yesterday, 5:05 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt0520 View Post
Lol that’s no excuse for having stupid puppets wasting time and dollars for zero impact.

Your Senator Feinstein is a perfect example.

What other “sensible” gun laws should be on the books?
Like countless others pieces of legislation? Why are gun laws your only concern?
Old     (Matt0520)      Join Date: Feb 2019       Yesterday, 5:17 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by wake77 View Post
No you aren't. You are only "all for" the laws that you view as nonrestrictive towards you personally.



There is no "straw man" in my response. Your argument was, why have any laws since a mass shooter is going to ignore those laws to begin with. I just applied your argument to countless other laws we have on the books.



CA just initiated a ban for anyone that has ever been committed to a mental institute against their will. What's your problem with that? CA just initiated a ban for people convicted of domestic abuse. What's your problem with that? Maybe you can respond in crayon.

Whatever you say! I’ve spent time plugging holes, trying to stabilize GS victims, being yelled at and spit on because we lost someone on-scene in front of their family. All because of these guns. Oh and lost friends too. But sure, I only care about keeping all my guns.

No my argument was, 100% of the “assault weapons” laws and most other gun laws are pointless. As supported by the ban analysis I posted in the other thread. And yes meaningless magazine capacities are going to be violated by everyone that illegally carries a gun and uses it in the commission of a crime. Wasn’t really a point, more just a common sense observation. So you were refuting a point I wasn’t making...hm sure sounds straw man-ish.

That’s fantastic. Thank them for their service. Maybe they’re finally done with the decades-old practice of drawing circles around scary-looking parts on weapons and passing toothless legislation based on their doodling.

Meaningful change only comes about when what I posted in the other thread happens. Urban environments are empowered from within, jobs are made more readily available, community policing is embraced and supported by both fronts, AND (most importantly) the handgun problem in urban areas is dealt with.

Last edited by Matt0520; Yesterday at 5:19 AM.
Old     (Matt0520)      Join Date: Feb 2019       Yesterday, 5:25 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by wake77 View Post
Like countless others pieces of legislation? Why are gun laws your only concern?

Uh, because that’s the topic at hand sir. Again, awfully presumptive of you that this is my only concern because I’m...staying on topic?
Old     (wake77)      Join Date: Jan 2009       Yesterday, 5:39 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt0520 View Post
Uh, because that’s the topic at hand sir. Again, awfully presumptive of you that this is my only concern because I’m...staying on topic?
I thought the "topic at hand" was that you are somehow a firearms expert because you own a few and you are an EMT?
Old     (Matt0520)      Join Date: Feb 2019       Yesterday, 5:51 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by wake77 View Post
I thought the "topic at hand" was that you are somehow a firearms expert because you own a few and you are an EMT?

As I said in the other thread, ownership doesn’t mean crap. Armorer certs are a whole different layer of experience with the hardware we’re talking about. That, experience with trauma, ballistics research, etc. I thought was an applicable background here.

Sorry if you feel my experience isn’t relevant or up to standards. I should’ve just lead with hysterics and emotion.
Old     (MooSeMan)      Join Date: Sep 2017       Yesterday, 6:08 PM Reply   
DID THE SHOOTING EVEN HAPPEN,,,MUST WATCH...
https://www.bitchute.com/video/VRRZI...ttplG3HY0IGsqM
Old     (wake77)      Join Date: Jan 2009       Today, 5:05 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt0520 View Post
As I said in the other thread, ownership doesn’t mean crap. Armorer certs are a whole different layer of experience with the hardware we’re talking about. That, experience with trauma, ballistics research, etc. I thought was an applicable background here.

Sorry if you feel my experience isn’t relevant or up to standards. I should’ve just lead with hysterics and emotion.
Where exactly does "ballistics research" fit into this conversation?

When have I used "hysterics and emotion" in any of my posts?

Reply
Share 

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 7:21 AM.

Home   Articles   Pics/Video   Gear   Wake 101   Events   Community   Forums   Classifieds   Contests   Shop   Search
Wake World Home

 

© 2019 eWake, Inc.    
Advertise    |    Contact    |    Terms of Use    |    Privacy Policy    |    Report Abuse    |    Conduct    |    About Us