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    deltahoosier            10-05-2017, 3:13 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheWakeIsReal View Post
I truly don't think you would commit a crime as such as that, but being able to stock pile weapons like this guy makes the crime absolutely devastating when somebody who WILL commit that crime pulls the trigger. Like I said, keep your gun, but I don't think you need a safe full of rifles. When that amendment was put into the constitution I don't think the forefathers ever dreamed up a scenario where a guy could shoot 600 people by himself. That was musket times.

Just take a look at America vs other countries and the gun violence vs gun ownership. You're really saying there is no correlation between the amount of guns in the country and the amount of gun violence?
actually if you do the math. A person would have to kill over 300 people to equal the killing power of a musket back when the USA was formed. I would also think that every person back in 1776 was more critical to the survival of a nation than an individual is today. Not saying we don't have worth today, but most of our jobs today all revolve around pleasure where their jobs actually meant survival.
Old     (shawndoggy)      Join Date: Nov 2009       10-05-2017, 3:17 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by deltahoosier View Post
actually if you do the math. A person would have to kill over 300 people to equal the killing power of a musket back when the USA was formed. I would also think that every person back in 1776 was more critical to the survival of a nation than an individual is today. Not saying we don't have worth today, but most of our jobs today all revolve around pleasure where their jobs actually meant survival.
now there is a dark dark argument. That the pie stays the same size, the slices just get smaller.

A slippery slope down to "who needs music festival fans anyhow?"
Old    deltahoosier            10-05-2017, 3:17 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by ralph View Post
Its telling that he thinks NZ is a sick society when he thinks the murder rate is twice as much as the US. Then when the reality is the US has 5x the murder rate of NZ there is no self reflection about why that is, what that means or the need to do anything about it.
If we were to remove guns from democrats, our murder rate would drop by 90%
Old    deltahoosier            10-05-2017, 3:22 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheWakeIsReal View Post
I don't think bringing up cities tough on gun laws is a great example. It isn't tough to drive a couple hours and buy one legally. Or from the guy who just did that. It would need to be nation wide, you know like the Australia one?
and people can still go get them down the street or they will bring in AK's through Mexico by the millions. You can build an AR lower assembly in a very short time from a block. The only part that is registered on a AR platform rifle is the stripped lower. None of the other parts are even considered a gun. They are a collection of parts that can be assembled. You will never stop that.
Old    deltahoosier            10-05-2017, 3:26 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by shawndoggy View Post
now there is a dark dark argument. That the pie stays the same size, the slices just get smaller.

A slippery slope down to "who needs music festival fans anyhow?"
I don't think that is the overall direction of the argument however CNN is trying to pin the victims as "Trump" supporters like they are going to try and trick Republicans to say they are right on the 2nd and reverse course.

In regards to the extremely lame and tired musket argument. A musket would kill the same portion of the population at the time as someone who kills over 300 people today with one shot. So, you would actually have to give a person a 1000 lb bomb for the most part in order to do the same amount of damage to the overall society as on pull of a musket trigger.
Old    deltahoosier            10-05-2017, 3:35 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by cwb4me View Post
It happens everyday in Chicago. Multiple people murdered everyday. It's also illegal to possess a gun in Chicago.
I have been talking about that fact of Chicago and other cities since we were arguing about the beginning of the second gulf war. Democrats have never cared about lives, they only care about politicizing lives. They can not make in roads politically by fixing their big city issues such as Chicago. They already own those votes.
Old    deltahoosier            10-05-2017, 3:40 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by 95sn View Post
Zero probability. None. Perhaps banning bump stocks or silencers at the very most. Seems reasonable. Is there a good argument to keep them?
silencers are not an issue at all. A silencer is not like in the movies.
Old     (shawndoggy)      Join Date: Nov 2009       10-05-2017, 3:50 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by deltahoosier View Post
In regards to the extremely lame and tired musket argument. A musket would kill the same portion of the population at the time as someone who kills over 300 people today with one shot. So, you would actually have to give a person a 1000 lb bomb for the most part in order to do the same amount of damage to the overall society as on pull of a musket trigger.
But what you are saying with this argument is that the lives of american citizens have a cumulative finite value and that adding a person to the pool dillutes the value of all of the other lives. Kinda like saying as a parent that you only have so much love to give and that it gets divided between the number of kids you have.
Old     (racer808)      Join Date: Jan 2013       10-05-2017, 3:51 PM Reply   
What's the deal with bump stocks? The people I've talked to said they're a joke & you can't control the rifle / shoot straight with them on? Seems this case was about the only time they would be useful? I have no problem with those being banned. The silencers though is pure ignorance.
Old     (shawndoggy)      Join Date: Nov 2009       10-05-2017, 4:07 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by deltahoosier View Post
If we were to remove guns from democrats, our murder rate would drop by 90%
Think of the drop if we just removed them from men.
Old     (95sn)      Join Date: Sep 2005       10-05-2017, 6:21 PM Reply   
What is the benefit of a silencer? I don't see the benefit of quieter killing. Is the shooter concerned for their hearing? Foam ear plugs are at the 99 cent store, 2 pair for .99.
Old    deltahoosier            10-05-2017, 6:24 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by shawndoggy View Post
But what you are saying with this argument is that the lives of american citizens have a cumulative finite value and that adding a person to the pool dillutes the value of all of the other lives. Kinda like saying as a parent that you only have so much love to give and that it gets divided between the number of kids you have.
What I am saying that the killing power of a musket was 300 times greater to our civilization than it is now. With that in mind to the absolute destruction to society in the 1700's, our founding fathers still determined that having such a destructive weapon in the hands of normal people was paramount enough to call it a "Right".

The main portion of the argument people like to make is the musket could not kill that many people with a single shot. I say it can kill 300 times as much of our civilization as a single bullet today when you are speaking of survival of our country thus we should be allowed to have the same killing power as those allowed in the 1700's.
Old    deltahoosier            10-05-2017, 6:26 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by 95sn View Post
What is the benefit of a silencer? I don't see the benefit of quieter killing. Is the shooter concerned for their hearing? Foam ear plugs are at the 99 cent store, 2 pair for .99.
or, we can allow people to purchase them which makes the weapon even larger and safer to shoot for the sportsman. Besides. We can use the same argument as pot. sell it and let's tax it.
Old     (rdlangston13)      Join Date: Feb 2011       10-05-2017, 6:28 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by 95sn View Post
What is the benefit of a silencer? I don't see the benefit of quieter killing. Is the shooter concerned for their hearing? Foam ear plugs are at the 99 cent store, 2 pair for .99.


Ever fired a pistol indoors? Someone breaks into your house at 3 am, you really going to have time and the forethought to install earplugs?
Old     (95sn)      Join Date: Sep 2005       10-05-2017, 6:42 PM Reply   
If someone is breaking into my house...I don't think future hearing issues would be in the top 100 or even 1000 of things going thru my mind. In addition I am hoping the sound alerts my family and neighbors there is something big going on and shots are being fired. The more others hear the better for my survival. I do not want to keep this a secret. Now, the intruder may want to keep things quiet but I'm not on his side. Who needs quiet gunshots other than the bad hombre?
I use and own several handguns .22-.45, shotguns... 410, 20 ga, 12 ga, side by side, super nice Browning over/under, several rifles. Hunting with my dad since I was 8. I have never worn ear protection ever.
David,
Are you saying you would hesitate shooting the intruder because you did not have your silencer on your weapon?

Last edited by 95sn; 10-05-2017 at 6:52 PM.
Old     (ralph)      Join Date: Apr 2002       10-05-2017, 9:24 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by deltahoosier View Post
In regards to the extremely lame and tired musket argument. A musket would kill the same portion of the population at the time as someone who kills over 300 people today with one shot. So, you would actually have to give a person a 1000 lb bomb for the most part in order to do the same amount of damage to the overall society as on pull of a musket trigger.
That is an extremely tenuous argument, if the populating density gets high enough you would be able to use the same logic to justify a citizen having tactical nukes.
Old     (pesos)      Join Date: Oct 2001       10-05-2017, 9:44 PM Reply   
Tenuous is a generous word. That's straight up Grant-level logic.

Old     (rdlangston13)      Join Date: Feb 2011       10-05-2017, 10:55 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by 95sn View Post
If someone is breaking into my house...I don't think future hearing issues would be in the top 100 or even 1000 of things going thru my mind. In addition I am hoping the sound alerts my family and neighbors there is something big going on and shots are being fired. The more others hear the better for my survival. I do not want to keep this a secret. Now, the intruder may want to keep things quiet but I'm not on his side. Who needs quiet gunshots other than the bad hombre?

I use and own several handguns .22-.45, shotguns... 410, 20 ga, 12 ga, side by side, super nice Browning over/under, several rifles. Hunting with my dad since I was 8. I have never worn ear protection ever.

David,

Are you saying you would hesitate shooting the intruder because you did not have your silencer on your weapon?


Not at all, but if I could have access to a suppressor that may be able to help me maintain communication with my family in this situation I would for sure use it. I don't want to be temporarily deafened by ear ringing and not be able to hear other people that may be important.
Old     (wake77)      Join Date: Jan 2009       10-06-2017, 3:56 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by racer808 View Post
You should probably go read up on Russia, Holmes. Don't you ever get tired of being wrong?

Here's the best thing too, your wishes for gun laws simply aren't going to happen.
So I guess your modus operandi is to make $h!t up when people don't agree with you. I never said anything about "wishing for gun laws". It's just your limited brain unable to realize that people don't always have to choose a side when it comes to issues.

Last edited by wake77; 10-06-2017 at 4:05 AM.
Old     (wake77)      Join Date: Jan 2009       10-06-2017, 4:04 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by ralph View Post
That is an extremely tenuous argument, if the populating density gets high enough you would be able to use the same logic to justify a citizen having tactical nukes.
Exactly. And if you head backwards in time, rocks would probably be a 1000 x' s more lethal than that musket.
Old     (wake77)      Join Date: Jan 2009       10-06-2017, 4:05 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by deltahoosier View Post
If we were to remove guns from democrats, our murder rate would drop by 90%
So all gang bangers are democrats? Is that because since they are black, they have to be democrats?

LOL.
Old     (jarrod)      Join Date: May 2003       10-06-2017, 9:52 AM Reply   
[QUOTE=wake77;1968719]So all gang bangers are democrats?

Is that because since they are black, they have to be democrats?

Oh yeah... everything is because they are black man. Always.
Old     (jarrod)      Join Date: May 2003       10-06-2017, 10:01 AM Reply   
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cGfckZLJhPQ
Old     (joeshmoe)      Join Date: Jan 2003       10-06-2017, 12:00 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by deltahoosier View Post
What I am saying that the killing power of a musket was 300 times greater to our civilization than it is now. With that in mind to the absolute destruction to society in the 1700's, our founding fathers still determined that having such a destructive weapon in the hands of normal people was paramount enough to call it a "Right".

The main portion of the argument people like to make is the musket could not kill that many people with a single shot. I say it can kill 300 times as much of our civilization as a single bullet today when you are speaking of survival of our country thus we should be allowed to have the same killing power as those allowed in the 1700's.
Where do you get this stuff? Or, do you make it up as you go along? So, one life today is worth 300 times Less than a life 200 years ago? Wow! I didn't know a ordinary rock could be more powerful than an atomic bomb! So, 50,000 years ago, or when the population was 10,000 people, one of the cavemen killed another caveman with a rock, hit him in the head and busted it open, with the equivalent destruction of the atomic bomb used in Japan 50,000 years later! Not saying you are wrong, .007% of the worlds population is .007% of the worlds population no matter what the year.
Old     (95sn)      Join Date: Sep 2005       10-06-2017, 3:30 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by rdlangston13 View Post
Not at all, but if I could have access to a suppressor that may be able to help me maintain communication with my family in this situation I would for sure use it. I don't want to be temporarily deafened by ear ringing and not be able to hear other people that may be important.
I'm not convinced this is an entirely honest response, run it by your wife and see if she keeps a straight face.
I see suppressors/silencers as a benefit financially to those who sell them and an advantage to criminals more so than for non criminals. Again, the more people that hear gunfire happening, the quicker a response will occur, and first responder will be better prepared for what he is up against.
Old     (wake77)      Join Date: Jan 2009       10-07-2017, 6:54 AM Reply   
[QUOTE=jarrod;1968732]
Quote:
Originally Posted by wake77 View Post
So all gang bangers are democrats?

Is that because since they are black, they have to be democrats?

Oh yeah... everything is because they are black man. Always.
Delta brought it up, not me pal.
Old     (xstarrider)      Join Date: Jun 2007       10-07-2017, 6:21 PM Reply   
[QUOTE=wake77;1968761]
Quote:
Originally Posted by jarrod View Post

Delta brought it up, not me pal.
No you turned it into race as you do everything. He specifically used term democrats. But since you brought it up ........that portion of society consistently votes democrat. It's a fact jack.
Old     (ralph)      Join Date: Apr 2002       10-07-2017, 7:43 PM Reply   
As Shawndoggy pointed out, let's just ban all men from possessing guns since 99.9% of all gun violence is by men.
Old     (xstarrider)      Join Date: Jun 2007       10-07-2017, 11:41 PM Reply   
Like I said wake. Laws on the books that get next to zero punishment , 10 yrs for stealing over 100 guns


https://chicago.suntimes.com/chicago...rail-yard/amp/

The best part.

Shelton, 43, and the father of 10 children, should have known better than anyone how guns shatter lives because he lost his dad to gun violence and has been shot 12 times himself, Judge John Tharp told the hearing in Chicago. Some of Shelton’s fellow thieves had also been shot and their relatives killed.

Shelton, who Tharp called “a serial train robber,” has been convicted six times before for stealing bikes, shoes and other items from trains. But Tharp said pilfering and selling new guns, which are coveted by criminals because they’re harder to trace, was in a different league.



And he gets a slap on the wrist ........, from a FEDERAL JUDGE For stealing over 100 ****ing guns. I am
Sure he was just about to turn his life around for his 10kids. The racist police and gun mfg's are the problem tho.

Last edited by xstarrider; 10-07-2017 at 11:51 PM.
Old     (wake77)      Join Date: Jan 2009       10-08-2017, 6:36 AM Reply   
[QUOTE=xstarrider;1968781]
Quote:
Originally Posted by wake77 View Post

No you turned it into race as you do everything. He specifically used term democrats. But since you brought it up ........that portion of society consistently votes democrat. It's a fact jack.
Not all blacks are gangbangers, you racist POS. Gangbangers don't vote. That's a fact jack.
Old     (xstarrider)      Join Date: Jun 2007       10-08-2017, 10:07 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by wake77 View Post

Not all blacks are gangbangers, you racist POS. Gangbangers don't vote. That's a fact jack.
Again putting words into text that nobody even said or typed to drive your agenda and paint a false picture. Right out of the left's playbook. Don't you ever get tired of making **** up ? It's clear you have no idea how gangs work in major urban areas . Gangs are actually one of the driving forces to get votes out in their districts. They are also the benefactor of many liberal programs that fund dollars their way. Gangs most definitely ensure people vote , they also vote in in numbers. . Gamgs have a direct connection in most cases to "community activists " and politicians .


NO comment on Shelton and his sentence tho right

Last edited by xstarrider; 10-08-2017 at 10:13 AM.
Old    TheWakeIsReal            10-08-2017, 11:05 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by xstarrider View Post
Again putting words into text that nobody even said or typed to drive your agenda and paint a false picture. Right out of the left's playbook. Don't you ever get tired of making **** up ? It's clear you have no idea how gangs work in major urban areas . Gangs are actually one of the driving forces to get votes out in their districts. They are also the benefactor of many liberal programs that fund dollars their way. Gangs most definitely ensure people vote , they also vote in in numbers. . Gamgs have a direct connection in most cases to "community activists " and politicians .


NO comment on Shelton and his sentence tho right
To be fair, it is pretty clear you are a racist.
Old     (xstarrider)      Join Date: Jun 2007       10-08-2017, 6:20 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheWakeIsReal View Post
To be fair, it is pretty clear you are a racist.
Basing your views and comments off factual data doesn't make you a racist it makes you a realist. Please get your labels correct.


Still awaiting your crime stat numbers that completely dispute the FBI's database.

Last edited by xstarrider; 10-08-2017 at 6:22 PM.
Old     (wakeslash)      Join Date: Sep 2017       10-08-2017, 9:23 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheWakeIsReal View Post
To be fair, it is pretty clear you are a racist.
You pull out the race card every other sentence
Old    deltahoosier            10-10-2017, 2:22 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by wake77 View Post
So all gang bangers are democrats? Is that because since they are black, they have to be democrats?

LOL.
Statistically speaking......yes. What 98% is the going number for black democrat voters?
Old    deltahoosier            10-10-2017, 2:49 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by ralph View Post
That is an extremely tenuous argument, if the populating density gets high enough you would be able to use the same logic to justify a citizen having tactical nukes.
Not at all. If you are going to have to fight a ignorant argument to begin with, then you have to use simple logic. A musket back then was similar to a tactical nuke in very limited respects. The amount of destruction one person being killed in a community could be critical. The founding fathers were more aware of that then than we are as a collective today and they absolutely made sure that right was preserved.

The argument that keeps being brought up is why do you need a weapon of today that can kill so many people? The argument is you need enough fire power to make it hurt, those groups who are trying to repress you, enough to stop. A musket will not do that today. A musket back then absolutely could and the founder fathers were aware of this. What would be a logical conclusion to the amount of fire power needed to keep with the original intent of the right? I would say the starting point to that discussion is what would be a good representative of population killed per weapon? Per trigger pull? What is the metric? If you simply say by weapon. That is fair enough. Is there a timeline for the destruction of the weapon. Is it over minutes, days, weeks or is it in a matter of seconds like a musket? If it is like a musket with one trigger pull within a second, then you would have to advocate a fully auto belt fed weapon at a minimum as one trigger pull would fire off many rounds in a matter of many seconds and maybe not 300 or so in one burst. You may have to advocate high explosives to have that type of societal destruction in one event.
Old     (fly135)      Join Date: Jun 2004       10-10-2017, 3:35 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by deltahoosier View Post
Not at all. If you are going to have to fight a ignorant argument to begin with, then you have to use simple logic. A musket back then was similar to a tactical nuke in very limited respects.
WHAT???? In my best pitch rising questioning voice!

If you can rationalize that, then you can rationalize anything.

If you had said... "giving smallpox infected blankets to the natives is similar to a tactical nuke", then ok maybe.
Old    deltahoosier            10-10-2017, 3:39 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by fly135 View Post
WHAT???? In my best pitch rising questioning voice!

If you can rationalize that, then you can rationalize anything.

If you had said... "giving smallpox infected blankets to the natives is similar to a tactical nuke", then ok maybe.
possible. I don't know the effectiveness of a tactical nuke. Is it a couple blocks? They were shooting them out of cannons so they could not have killed that many people at once. So, yes in a very limited sense without knowing what a small tactical nuke can do.
Old     (ralph)      Join Date: Apr 2002       10-10-2017, 4:17 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by deltahoosier View Post
possible. I don't know the effectiveness of a tactical nuke. Is it a couple blocks? They were shooting them out of cannons so they could not have killed that many people at once. So, yes in a very limited sense without knowing what a small tactical nuke can do.
If you think you can justify a citizen owning a tactical nuke under any circumstance then I struggle to see how you can support preventing NK from developing there own nukes.
Old     (xstarrider)      Join Date: Jun 2007       10-10-2017, 4:24 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by deltahoosier View Post
Statistically speaking......yes. What 98% is the going number for black democrat voters?
Posting factual data will get you nowhere. They will choose to ignore it and call you a racist !
Old     (fly135)      Join Date: Jun 2004       10-10-2017, 4:42 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by deltahoosier View Post
possible. I don't know the effectiveness of a tactical nuke. Is it a couple blocks? They were shooting them out of cannons so they could not have killed that many people at once. So, yes in a very limited sense without knowing what a small tactical nuke can do.
This made me go look it up. The atomic bomb dropped on Japan was 21 Ktons. Tactical nukes apparently range from less than a Kton to 100 Ktons. So I guess there's a pretty big range. Not sure about the leftover radiation. Apparently that wasn't too bad in Japan because the bombs were air detonations.

Heard a report on NPR the other day about a guy who survived Hiroshima with burns from about 1.5 miles. Then took a train to Nagasaki and got blasted again. Lived for another nearly 60 years to the age of 93.
Old    TheWakeIsReal            10-10-2017, 5:03 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by xstarrider View Post
Posting factual data will get you nowhere. They will choose to ignore it and call you a racist !
Your "factual data" comes from right wing websites. You keep wanting a response, I gave you one. When I looked up your FBI facts they came right from some right wing website.
Old    deltahoosier            10-10-2017, 5:29 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by ralph View Post
If you think you can justify a citizen owning a tactical nuke under any circumstance then I struggle to see how you can support preventing NK from developing there own nukes.
You brought up Tactical Nukes. I was just expanding through a segway to my points. Many conventional munitions have the same killing power as a tactical nuke like the ones they tested by shooting out of a field artiliery piece. Of course Nukes are out of the question as you have after effects that can hurt people and environment further.

The rest of my discussion points stand.
Old    deltahoosier            10-10-2017, 5:34 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheWakeIsReal View Post
Your "factual data" comes from right wing websites. You keep wanting a response, I gave you one. When I looked up your FBI facts they came right from some right wing website.
Well of course many of the talking points are going to come from "right wing" news sites. You really think left wing sites are willing to talk about these facts?
Old    deltahoosier            10-10-2017, 5:36 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by fly135 View Post
This made me go look it up. The atomic bomb dropped on Japan was 21 Ktons. Tactical nukes apparently range from less than a Kton to 100 Ktons. So I guess there's a pretty big range. Not sure about the leftover radiation. Apparently that wasn't too bad in Japan because the bombs were air detonations.

Heard a report on NPR the other day about a guy who survived Hiroshima with burns from about 1.5 miles. Then took a train to Nagasaki and got blasted again. Lived for another nearly 60 years to the age of 93.
Interesting find. Glad you looked it up. Was not even sure what those things could do.
Old     (ralph)      Join Date: Apr 2002       10-10-2017, 6:04 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by deltahoosier View Post
You brought up Tactical Nukes. I was just expanding through a segway to my points. Many conventional munitions have the same killing power as a tactical nuke like the ones they tested by shooting out of a field artiliery piece. Of course Nukes are out of the question as you have after effects that can hurt people and environment further.

The rest of my discussion points stand.
Well the point is there should be a limit to what a john q citizen should be able to get his hands on, could be nukes could be 1t of plastic explosive, the argument is the same, I say there should be limits, you say there shouldn't, it's protected by a document conceived 200 years ago.
Old     (xstarrider)      Join Date: Jun 2007       10-10-2017, 9:05 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheWakeIsReal View Post
Your "factual data" comes from right wing websites. You keep wanting a response, I gave you one. When I looked up your FBI facts they came right from some right wing website.
Proof you a complete dong tard. Whether the FBI stats come from a right wing blurb or a left wing one their still the same you idiot ! They're the national crime stats ! About the most unbiased numbers one can reference , and the numbers the left chooses to ignore most times because they don't fit their narrative .

Last edited by xstarrider; 10-10-2017 at 9:11 PM.
Old     (rdlangston13)      Join Date: Feb 2011       10-10-2017, 9:38 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by fly135 View Post
This made me go look it up. The atomic bomb dropped on Japan was 21 Ktons. Tactical nukes apparently range from less than a Kton to 100 Ktons. So I guess there's a pretty big range. Not sure about the leftover radiation. Apparently that wasn't too bad in Japan because the bombs were air detonations.



Heard a report on NPR the other day about a guy who survived Hiroshima with burns from about 1.5 miles. Then took a train to Nagasaki and got blasted again. Lived for another nearly 60 years to the age of 93.


I have a really good documentary that takes from the manhattan project all the way through Russia detonating their 50 (if I remember correctly) megaton bomb. It showed a test of a tactical nuke being fired from an artillery canon. The one showed was like 5kilotons.

Wild to think how big the blasts in Japan were only to realize that the Russian one was 2381 times stronger.
Old     (deneng)      Join Date: Feb 2005       10-10-2017, 11:12 PM Reply   
Has the casinos or for sake of clarity the government released any video of him bringing in these guns yet? I do not know if this has been addressed here. Of course the conspiracists theories are adding up.
Old    TheWakeIsReal            10-11-2017, 10:30 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by xstarrider View Post
Proof you a complete dong tard. Whether the FBI stats come from a right wing blurb or a left wing one their still the same you idiot ! They're the national crime stats ! About the most unbiased numbers one can reference , and the numbers the left chooses to ignore most times because they don't fit their narrative .
"We have concluded that Xstarrider is a "dong tard", and that he is identifiable with a sheep."

SOURCE FBI.GOV

How easy was that? Just because you say they're from the FBI doesn't mean **** if the stats don't add up to what the **** says on the FBI website haha. What you posted I couldn't find anywhere else, and the stats directly conflicted with other reports from FBI stats.
Old     (rdlangston13)      Join Date: Feb 2011       10-11-2017, 10:50 AM Reply   
So there are new reports now that the original time line of events they released is inaccurate. Now apparently he fired 200 rounds at the security guard through the door striking and wounding him before opening fire on crowd below. Which is odd, why would the security guard be up there snooping around before he started shooting?
Old     (fly135)      Join Date: Jun 2004       10-11-2017, 11:19 AM Reply   
Isn't a security guard's job to snoop around? And if he's on the clock wouldn't it be logical that he's snooping before the shooter started shooting. Otherwise he'd either be a slacker or on break.
Old     (shawndoggy)      Join Date: Nov 2009       10-11-2017, 11:28 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by fly135 View Post
Isn't a security guard's job to snoop around? And if he's on the clock wouldn't it be logical that he's snooping before the shooter started shooting. Otherwise he'd either be a slacker or on break.
Totally. Latest is that he was investigating an open door on the floor and heard drilling from the shooter's room.

https://www.reviewjournal.com/local/...investigation/

No known gambling debts either, so there goes my theory.
Old     (racer808)      Join Date: Jan 2013       10-11-2017, 1:56 PM Reply   
Seems a hotel maintenance worker tried to phone in the shooter before the shooting even began

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/worker-...fire-on-crowd/

Conspiracy or no conspiracy, **** just isn't adding up
Old     (shawndoggy)      Join Date: Nov 2009       10-11-2017, 2:14 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by racer808 View Post
Seems a hotel maintenance worker tried to phone in the shooter before the shooting even began

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/worker-...fire-on-crowd/

Conspiracy or no conspiracy, **** just isn't adding up
Did you read the story? I'm reading that the security guard was shot and the maintenance guy was under fire before he started firing on the concert, not after as was earlier reported.

But where's the conspiracy in that?
Old     (racer808)      Join Date: Jan 2013       10-11-2017, 3:40 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by shawndoggy View Post
Did you read the story? I'm reading that the security guard was shot and the maintenance guy was under fire before he started firing on the concert, not after as was earlier reported.

But where's the conspiracy in that?
He radioed it in & the hotel didn't call dispatch. I didn't say there's a conspiracy, I said conspiracy or no conspiracy (IE; if there is one or if there isn't one) **** just isn't adding up with this story or the most inept investigation is taking place. I've seen Cops Las Vegas on TV, they aren't total morons. For the record, I am not claiming there is a conspiracy but that doesn't mean there isn't one or that they may have very well been warned prior to the shooting but ignored the warning.
Old     (95sn)      Join Date: Sep 2005       10-11-2017, 3:48 PM Reply   
Quote:
If you are going to have to fight a ignorant argument to begin with, then you have to use simple logic. A musket back then was similar to a tactical nuke in very limited respects
I think a musket back then was used to go out back and shoot a possum for supper. Tactical nuke, not much good for huntin.
Old     (ralph)      Join Date: Apr 2002       10-11-2017, 3:52 PM Reply   
Dennie is angling at conspiracy but his tinfoil hat is just a bit tight. The harsh truth is there is nothing special about this dude, he is a product of his environment, "othering" society with easy access to guns.
Old     (racer808)      Join Date: Jan 2013       10-11-2017, 5:22 PM Reply   
You'd have to be retarded to think the founding fathers, men who lived much harsher lives than ours & weren't stripped of masculinity like our fellow lefties here, would somehow be like; "yeah, them new fancy guns you have are too dangerous. If you have to go up against tyranny that has those weapons you'd be better off without them". Their beliefs at the time wouldn't have changed, they would have **** themselves, shot them endlessly, probably would go settle some things they couldn't with a single shot & the ones arguing "too dangerous", would have been run out of town. True story.
Old    deltahoosier            10-11-2017, 5:40 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by ralph View Post
Well the point is there should be a limit to what a john q citizen should be able to get his hands on, could be nukes could be 1t of plastic explosive, the argument is the same, I say there should be limits, you say there shouldn't, it's protected by a document conceived 200 years ago.
Not sure I am saying there should be no limits. I am saying the constitution has given us rights. A right can not be removed. The question on guns obviously morphed on what guns are part of that right. I am proposing a like for like on how destructive a weapon of that time was to society and trying to account for inflation to today. Straight population argument means that one gun would need to be able to kill over 300 people with a single trigger pull today to have the same impact as musket back then with a single trigger pull. I think it is fair to dice up the debate from there. I don't think that is unlimited power. You certainly could do some serious damage at that rate just like someone back then could do.
Old    deltahoosier            10-11-2017, 5:43 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by 95sn View Post
I think a musket back then was used to go out back and shoot a possum for supper. Tactical nuke, not much good for huntin.
You could certainly knock them out of the tree though......
Old    TheWakeIsReal            10-11-2017, 6:05 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by deltahoosier View Post
Not sure I am saying there should be no limits. I am saying the constitution has given us rights. A right can not be removed. The question on guns obviously morphed on what guns are part of that right. I am proposing a like for like on how destructive a weapon of that time was to society and trying to account for inflation to today. Straight population argument means that one gun would need to be able to kill over 300 people with a single trigger pull today to have the same impact as musket back then with a single trigger pull. I think it is fair to dice up the debate from there. I don't think that is unlimited power. You certainly could do some serious damage at that rate just like someone back then could do.
Weren't you the one saying Muslim countries don't respect life like us? Bit of hypocrisy here eh?
Old     (racer808)      Join Date: Jan 2013       10-11-2017, 6:20 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheWakeIsReal View Post
Weren't you the one saying Muslim countries don't respect life like us? Bit of hypocrisy here eh?
We do respect life. Unless it's our enemies or the unborn.
Old    TheWakeIsReal            10-11-2017, 6:29 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by racer808 View Post
We do respect life. Unless it's our enemies or the unborn.
He essentially said what is 300 deaths because in colonial times it was the amount of 1 death due to population growth. Doesn't really sound like it.
Old     (racer808)      Join Date: Jan 2013       10-12-2017, 7:05 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheWakeIsReal View Post
He essentially said what is 300 deaths because in colonial times it was the amount of 1 death due to population growth. Doesn't really sound like it.
It's hard to take you guys serious on life as well. The only time you people seem to speak up is when it's a mass shooting. No one gives a **** about the endless murders between blacks. How can anyone argue about life when we have no problem killing it in the womb at it's most innocent stage? The left loves to argue that only a small amount die in terrorist attacks & thus we need to tolerate it. It's a joke, the only time life seems to matter anyone these days is if they can score some political points.
Old     (fly135)      Join Date: Jun 2004       10-12-2017, 7:36 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by deltahoosier View Post
Not sure I am saying there should be no limits. I am saying the constitution has given us rights. A right can not be removed. The question on guns obviously morphed on what guns are part of that right. I am proposing a like for like on how destructive a weapon of that time was to society and trying to account for inflation to today. Straight population argument means that one gun would need to be able to kill over 300 people with a single trigger pull today to have the same impact as musket back then with a single trigger pull. I think it is fair to dice up the debate from there. I don't think that is unlimited power. You certainly could do some serious damage at that rate just like someone back then could do.
I counter propose a musket, which is what they were thinking about when they wrote the 2nd.
Old     (racer808)      Join Date: Jan 2013       10-12-2017, 7:51 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by fly135 View Post
I counter propose a musket, which is what they were thinking about when they wrote the 2nd.
Because the Gov only had muskets as well. If they just got done fighting the war with automatic rifles, knowing the military they may have to fight had them, they wouldn't be just thinking about the musket.
Old     (racer808)      Join Date: Jan 2013       10-12-2017, 8:30 AM Reply   
This morning we learn Jesus Campos the security shot before the real shooting started wasn't even a registered security guard in NV. NV requires all security guards armed or not be registered. So why was he there?
Old     (rdlangston13)      Join Date: Feb 2011       10-12-2017, 8:40 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by racer808 View Post
It's hard to take you guys serious on life as well. The only time you people seem to speak up is when it's a mass shooting. No one gives a **** about the endless murders between blacks. How can anyone argue about life when we have no problem killing it in the womb at it's most innocent stage? The left loves to argue that only a small amount die in terrorist attacks & thus we need to tolerate it. It's a joke, the only time life seems to matter anyone these days is if they can score some political points.


This. The # cause of death in America for black people is abortion. Every 4 days more black people are killed by abortion than were killed in the Vietnam War. People like to argue that abortion is about women's rights when it is really about Negative Eugenics.
Old     (fly135)      Join Date: Jun 2004       10-12-2017, 9:11 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by racer808 View Post
Because the Gov only had muskets as well. If they just got done fighting the war with automatic rifles, knowing the military they may have to fight had them, they wouldn't be just thinking about the musket.
So what you're saying is now that we have automatic weapons we need to rethink the 2nd amendment as it applies to today's society using our judgement just as they did back then. That'll piss off the Constitutionalists.
Old     (fly135)      Join Date: Jun 2004       10-12-2017, 9:20 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by rdlangston13 View Post
Every 4 days more black people are killed by abortion than were killed in the Vietnam War.
LOL, because all abortions are by black people, and the Vietnamese aren't people so they were left out of the equation.
Old    deltahoosier            10-12-2017, 10:17 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeshmoe View Post
Where do you get this stuff? Or, do you make it up as you go along? So, one life today is worth 300 times Less than a life 200 years ago? Wow! I didn't know a ordinary rock could be more powerful than an atomic bomb! So, 50,000 years ago, or when the population was 10,000 people, one of the cavemen killed another caveman with a rock, hit him in the head and busted it open, with the equivalent destruction of the atomic bomb used in Japan 50,000 years later! Not saying you are wrong, .007% of the worlds population is .007% of the worlds population no matter what the year.
Sorry did not see this earlier. It has nothing to do with life be preserved of the aggressor. The reason for the second is specifically to take a life. Sorry. That is the cold honest truth. You have a government (foreign or domestic) out of control oppressing people, the people have the right to defend itself. That is the rational behind the second amendment. By definition, it is to take life.

With that out of the way, the discussion has morphed to how much fire power should the citizens be allowed to have. The left likes to say the 2nd was only about muskets. I say BS. The second was about stopping tyranny. Ok, how much fire power then? Nukes should be off the table. Artillery? Probably not. What is the answer? My reasoning is a citizen should have as much stopping power against an invading force (foreign or domestic) as a citizen of 1779.
Old    deltahoosier            10-12-2017, 10:18 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by ralph View Post
Dennie is angling at conspiracy but his tinfoil hat is just a bit tight. The harsh truth is there is nothing special about this dude, he is a product of his environment, "othering" society with easy access to guns.
He did not have easy access to guns. He had to follow all laws and waiting periods to get his weapons. Nothing easy about that.
Old     (racer808)      Join Date: Jan 2013       10-12-2017, 10:19 AM Reply   
On a scale of 1 to F-16 in your driveway, how Libertarian are you?
Old     (fly135)      Join Date: Jun 2004       10-12-2017, 10:28 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by deltahoosier View Post
My reasoning is a citizen should have as much stopping power against an invading force (foreign or domestic) as a citizen of 1779.
That reasoning is pretty flawed. Your reasoning is based on the premise that we can turn our brains off 200 years ago because the people back then figured out everything for eternity.
Old    deltahoosier            10-12-2017, 10:30 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheWakeIsReal View Post
Weren't you the one saying Muslim countries don't respect life like us? Bit of hypocrisy here eh?
I think that is a reach. The second was about oppressive governments (foreign and domestic). No, many muslim countries teach the men to hide behind the women and children while firing weapons.

What you are trying to morph is a societal values with having the ability to do what needs to be done by a government (by the people) action. We as a society do value human life unless you are supporting the genocide that was started against the black community then we could have that conversation. We as American's generally do value human life. That is why there are millions of guns and actually very few murders. Get rid the top 5 democrat cities and the rate is extremely low.
Old     (racer808)      Join Date: Jan 2013       10-12-2017, 10:37 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by deltahoosier View Post
I think that is a reach. The second was about oppressive governments (foreign and domestic). No, many muslim countries teach the men to hide behind the women and children while firing weapons.

What you are trying to morph is a societal values with having the ability to do what needs to be done by a government (by the people) action. We as a society do value human life unless you are supporting the genocide that was started against the black community then we could have that conversation. We as American's generally do value human life. That is why there are millions of guns and actually very few murders. Get rid the top 5 democrat cities and the rate is extremely low.
We should note almost all muslim countries encourage the populace (except women) to have AK's. Flippin 7 year olds run around with AK's over there.
Old    deltahoosier            10-12-2017, 10:47 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by fly135 View Post
That reasoning is pretty flawed. Your reasoning is based on the premise that we can turn our brains off 200 years ago because the people back then figured out everything for eternity.
I think that the people back then had seen the birth and destruction of many different forms of government and many of those people as they came from different portions of the globe have actually lived under the tyranny of said government systems. You and I, not so much. What they local town board not allow a gas station near your house or turn down the local steak and shake food chain in town?

I absolutely argue that people back then were 100 times more in tune with society and it's down falls than Americans today. Hell vast majority of Americans in the cities and surrounding areas don't even know their neighbor never mind their elected official.
Old    deltahoosier            10-12-2017, 10:48 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by racer808 View Post
We should note almost all muslim countries encourage the populace (except women) to have AK's. Flippin 7 year olds run around with AK's over there.
Or Christians, Jews and the wrong sort of Muslims are not allowed to have weapons.
Old     (racer808)      Join Date: Jan 2013       10-12-2017, 10:49 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by deltahoosier View Post
I think that the people back then had seen the birth and destruction of many different forms of government and many of those people as they came from different portions of the globe have actually lived under the tyranny of said government systems. You and I, not so much. What they local town board not allow a gas station near your house or turn down the local steak and shake food chain in town?

I absolutely argue that people back then were 100 times more in tune with society and it's down falls than Americans today. Hell vast majority of Americans in the cities and surrounding areas don't even know their neighbor never mind their elected official.
Exactly. And that's how we end up with militias, ANTIFA, idiots on facebook openly talking about civil war. Openly stating they want to take guns by force "preferably from their cold dead hands" as several celebrities have stated. The ones arguing for gun control are actually making the argument on the dangers of giving them up.

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 6:26 AM.

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

 

© 2016 eWake, Inc.    
Advertise    |    Contact    |    Terms of Use    |    Privacy Policy    |    Report Abuse    |    Conduct    |    About Us