Jump to content
Carolina Huddle
  • Hey There!

    Please register to see fewer ads and a better viewing experience:100_Emoji_42x42:

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Gazi

Virginia TV reporter, photographer shot to death during live interview this morning

Recommended Posts



I never said it relies on quantity sold.  They discounted more because public picks up a large tab.  General public pays almost $1 a bullet... Government pays no where near that.

 

If what you said were true, then the manufacturers would require that a certain quantity be sold, so it would have to dependent on quantity sold to a great degree.   Regardless, the two are unrelated.  The US military doesn't even use the same type of ammunition as the general public.  Its akin to saying the US Navy gets a discount on small boats because the US public buys bass boats. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can get 9mm rounds for less than 20 cent. Ammo prices have fug all to do with anything though. Crazy people are the problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This whole situation is sickening. My thoughts go out to the families and friends of those involved. I hope there will come a time when both sides of the political spectrum cease spewing their inane rhetoric, and actually engage in a meaningful dialogue in order to come up with a solution to help prevent meaningless violence in the future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How would your party's proposed laws have prevented this? Didn't sound like an 'assault weapon' or an excessively large magazine to me. 

your party's entire platform on this issue is "do nothing because to do something is to take all your freedoms away." it's a mindless position that relies on apathy, normalization of gun violence, and deflection (they were black! they were mentally ill!) to preserve your right to pop tin cans on the weekend and pretend you can hold off a fire squad of obama marines when they come to bury you in plastic FEMA coffins.

your post is representative of the collective shrug by your party and its constituency on matters like this. i don't have a party, but as a constituency base i and other like-minded people recognize that we're the only western nation in the world with this problem and that something needs to be done to fix it, and if mah freedums are sacrificed as a result, so be it. i'm willing to not have the right to pop tin cans on the weekend and pretend i'm staving off the government with a rifle behind every blade of grass if it means dipshits aren't equipped to end a life with the twitch of a finger muscle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can get 9mm rounds for less than 20 cent. Ammo prices have fug all to do with anything though. Crazy people are the problem.

This is all to true.  Crazy people who are somewhat intelligent will find a way.  The largest mass killings in US history used things like fertilizer, an airplane, or explosives used by farmers to clear brush and stumps.

 

That being said, I actually do support stricter gun control laws.  Not to stop things like this, but to slow down the more typical murders that occur so often and are a far bigger problem, but are largely ignored because they aren't dramatic enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is that incorrect?

no, but it's framed to fit a narrative commanded by breitbart's constituency of readers, namely that the media overplays white on black crime so HERE LOOK SEE AT THIS BLACK KILLING WHITES SMH

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no, but it's framed to fit a narrative commanded by breitbart's constituency of readers, namely that the media overplays white on black crime so HERE LOOK SEE AT THIS BLACK KILLING WHITES SMH

I think the problem is every time a white person commits a crime against a black victim, it's a hate crime, but it's taboo to even consider any black on white crime a hate crime because if you do, that's racist. 

I don't know if this is a hate crime or not. I think the dude is a nut. The fact he mentions race and he supposedly has a history of trying to sue stations for racial discrimination leads me to believe this could've been race driven. 

Could just be a nut though. Anyone who does the poo he does has to have some problems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To bad the guy died.  Would have been better if he had to see and live with the consequences of what he did, being locked up in a cell for the rest of his life. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is that incorrect?

Knowing what we know now, no. when they published that article with said headline they were acting like G5 on steroids. Didn't they end up deleting it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whether it's Dylan roof or Bryce Williams, angles will be played and facts will be spun. Divide and conquer as usual. Love one another. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the news says he wrote about the shooting in charleston, sexual harassment, and the voices in his head (he calls these voices "jehovah" of course). also he targeted his former place of work. there seem to be quite a few angles to take this on yet for some reason, surely an innocent one, breitbart goes full on race war. they know their audience.

Yeah, it's ignorant to jump straight to hate crime because their races are different. 

Plenty of angles here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the problem is every time a white person commits a crime against a black victim, it's a hate crime, but it's taboo to even consider any black on white crime a hate crime because if you do, that's racist. 

I don't know if this is a hate crime or not. I think the dude is a nut. The fact he mentions race and he supposedly has a history of trying to sue stations for racial discrimination leads me to believe this could've been race driven. 

Could just be a nut though. Anyone who does the poo he does has to have some problems.

It's a hate crime. His manifesto leaves no doubt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites



  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      20,333
    • Most Online
      3,693

    Newest Member
    amazingmac
    Joined
  • Topics

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      147,588
    • Total Posts
      4,872,622
  • Posts

    • If they would have had the #5 pick then they could have had so many teams trying to trade up there for a QB. They'd be ahead of the Chargers and Dolphins who both need QB's. The Dolphins have 3 first round draft picks this year. That would have been such a good haul, potentially grabbing those picks had they won more games. They'd have to leapfrog several teams. Unfortunately at #7 both the chargers and the Dolphins don't need to move up. The only scenario i'd see is if they pick the QB's they need and the Dolphins pull the trigger on a OT to protect their QB, the Panthers would get the 18th and 26th, plus a lower round pick to move up to #7 if the draft board falls to where no OT was taken prior to the Panthers pick.      The thing is, that if the Panthers decide to stay with Cam, they need to protect his blind side and if the best OT is on the board, I don't think they would give up that pick for 2 first rounders. I wouldn't. Especially when it's the best tackle of the draft. I don't know.    IF they stay at the pick and Brown is available or Thomas...Take Thomas. 
    • Becton went 4th Ovr in Daniel jeremiahs last mock- I’m gonna go out on a limb and say he isn’t available in the third  
    • This has all been thoroughly debated examined and tested by people who are experts in the field. Noll is not one guy out on a limb. The bottom line is the consensus amongst respected experts is that sports stadiums do not provide the economic impact they claim to. https://research.stlouisfed.org/publications/page1-econ/2017-05-01/the-economics-of-subsidizing-sports-stadiums/ https://ritholtz.com/2017/07/economics-subsidizing-sports-stadiums/ That article was written by a member of the Federal Reserve. Surely he doesn't know what he's talking about when it comes to money and economic impact. Here are a few quotes from that article I would particularly draw to your attention:  "When surveyed, 86 percent of economists agreed that “local and state governments in the U.S. should eliminate subsidies to professional sports franchises.” "In a 2017 poll, 83 percent of the economists surveyed agreed that “Providing state and local subsidies to build stadiums for professional sports teams is likely to cost the relevant taxpayers more than any local economic benefits that are generated.” It's not that stadiums don't bring in any money, or have any economic impact, no one is arguing that. But the reality is that the numbers show that impact is less than the cost of the subsidies provided, by large margins. This is why the vast majority of economists say they should be discontinued. Your math about tickets is irrelevant because all of that revenue goes into the private owners pockets. The point is that fewer games means fewer times people are coming to the area and having that impact you are talking about. That's why more games has more impact. Ticket prices and sales are irrelevant because we're talking about the impact on the economy, not actual ticket sales. It's not about how many tickets are bought at what prices, it's about how many times people stay in hotels, eat in restaurants, etc etc etc. And the people who measure these things and look at the data far more than you or I say it's not close, stadiums are a bad deal for taxpayers as an economic investment. Bottom line, if a cardiologist tells you you'd better stop eating fried foods or you're not likely to last another five years, do you do what the highly trained expert says, or do you sit there and argue with him about whether the burgers you cook on the grill should count or not?
  • Masters of PIE !

×
×
  • Create New...