Maybe we need to legalize prostitution so these incels can get laid? Or take their guns away when they sexual assault someone? Just another “responsible” gun owner, I guess.
Maybe we need to legalize prostitution so these incels can get laid? Or take their guns away when they sexual assault someone? Just another “responsible” gun owner, I guess.
Just another gun loving woman hating incel. Probably considered himself a true patriotic American. From the Vox article.....
In the videos, Beierle rants about women who canceled dates or gave him their phone numbers even though they had boyfriends. He also mentions Elliot Rodger, the gunman who killed six people and wounded 13 in Isla Vista, California in 2014 — and who has become a hero to men who identify as “incels” (short for “involuntary celibate”).
Everyone should be trained to stop the bleeding in the event of a mass casualty event caused by a “responsible” gun owner. Teach your kids how to cross the street safely, not to talk to strangers or get into a car with someone they don’t know and how to stop the bleeding. Fucked up society America.
I’m remembering when I caught crap for laughing at the dumbass protester that accidentally got shot in the face by some duck hunters. I guess it’s okay to resume making fun of him again, right? Hard to keep up with the hypocrisy around here.
Kind of a different situation isn't it?
If you're accidentally shot by your own hunting party (a dog no less)... that's different than what I think you're describing over there (some morons hunting ducks shoot a dude protesting something).
Splitting hairs? That's idiotic. You are comparing laughing at a man shot on accident by his own dog to laughing at a woman shot by ideological opponents in an incident that was negligent at best and possibly intentional. Your left-hatred is robbing you of your critical thinking skills. Every post is saturated with it, it seems like your only purpose here is to try and stick it to liberals.
If we really want to stop these mass shootings, the fastest way would be to attack the First Amendment, not the Second. The vast majority of mass shooters lately have fit a specific internet activity profile, and quicker than rounding up the guns would be rounding up the people who fit that profile.
To be clear, I'm not advocating for that, not at all. We have a regular poster here who absolutely fits the mass shooter internet activity profile, and as disgusting as some of their posts are, I don't think they are a risk for that kind of atrocity. My point is just that we aren't going to be able to stop this problem without drastic measures, which means we aren't going to be able to stop it at all.
If we really want to stop these mass shootings, the fastest way would be to attack the First Amendment, not the Second. The vast majority of mass shooters lately have fit a specific internet activity profile, and quicker than rounding up the guns would be rounding up the people who fit that profile.
To be clear, I'm not advocating for that, not at all. We have a regular poster here who absolutely fits the mass shooter internet activity profile, and as disgusting as some of their posts are, I don't think they are a risk for that kind of atrocity. My point is just that we aren't going to be able to stop this problem without drastic measures, which means we aren't going to be able to stop it at all.
I don’t really agree. But perhaps we think differently about what is drastic. This is a completely fixable issue should we actually want to fix it. It will take a much longer time to fix because a lot of people don’t care about it enough yet. But it is frustrating that so many more people will have to die senselessly in the meantime.
If we really want to stop these mass shootings, the fastest way would be to attack the First Amendment, not the Second. The vast majority of mass shooters lately have fit a specific internet activity profile, and quicker than rounding up the guns would be rounding up the people who fit that profile.
To be clear, I'm not advocating for that, not at all. We have a regular poster here who absolutely fits the mass shooter internet activity profile, and as disgusting as some of their posts are, I don't think they are a risk for that kind of atrocity. My point is just that we aren't going to be able to stop this problem without drastic measures, which means we aren't going to be able to stop it at all.
Here comes the thought police...sounds a bit fascist to me. “Fits the active shooter internet activity profile”...who exactly? I haven’t seen anyone here threaten anyone. Essentially what you are advocating is that anyone against strict gun control measures get “rounded up”? What a joke. It sounds to me like you really just want to shut people up that believe differently than you do. That definitely fits the active shooter profile.
If we really want to stop these mass shootings, the fastest way would be to attack the First Amendment, not the Second. The vast majority of mass shooters lately have fit a specific internet activity profile, and quicker than rounding up the guns would be rounding up the people who fit that profile.
To be clear, I'm not advocating for that, not at all. We have a regular poster here who absolutely fits the mass shooter internet activity profile, and as disgusting as some of their posts are, I don't think they are a risk for that kind of atrocity. My point is just that we aren't going to be able to stop this problem without drastic measures, which means we aren't going to be able to stop it at all.
I don’t really agree. But perhaps we think differently about what is drastic. This is a completely fixable issue should we actually want to fix it. It will take a much longer time to fix because a lot of people don’t care about it enough yet. But it is frustrating that so many more people will have to die senselessly in the meantime.
I don't see any magic bullets that will make this go away, and regardless of what you or I think is drastic, there is a sizeable enough portion of people in this country to start a civil war over any measures that would be drastic enough to kill this problem in less than 2 or 3 generations.
If we really want to stop these mass shootings, the fastest way would be to attack the First Amendment, not the Second. The vast majority of mass shooters lately have fit a specific internet activity profile, and quicker than rounding up the guns would be rounding up the people who fit that profile.
To be clear, I'm not advocating for that, not at all. We have a regular poster here who absolutely fits the mass shooter internet activity profile, and as disgusting as some of their posts are, I don't think they are a risk for that kind of atrocity. My point is just that we aren't going to be able to stop this problem without drastic measures, which means we aren't going to be able to stop it at all.
Here comes the thought police...sounds a bit fascist to me. “Fits the active shooter internet activity profile”...who exactly? I haven’t seen anyone here threaten anyone. Essentially what you are advocating is that anyone against strict gun control measures get “rounded up”? What a joke. It sounds to me like you really just want to shut people up that believe differently than you do. That definitely fits the active shooter profile.
Take a breath, maybe have a cup of coffee. Take your helm off and put down your left-hand pitchfork, and read my post again.
If we really want to stop these mass shootings, the fastest way would be to attack the First Amendment, not the Second. The vast majority of mass shooters lately have fit a specific internet activity profile, and quicker than rounding up the guns would be rounding up the people who fit that profile.
To be clear, I'm not advocating for that, not at all. We have a regular poster here who absolutely fits the mass shooter internet activity profile, and as disgusting as some of their posts are, I don't think they are a risk for that kind of atrocity. My point is just that we aren't going to be able to stop this problem without drastic measures, which means we aren't going to be able to stop it at all.
Here comes the thought police...sounds a bit fascist to me. “Fits the active shooter internet activity profile”...who exactly? I haven’t seen anyone here threaten anyone. Essentially what you are advocating is that anyone against strict gun control measures get “rounded up”? What a joke. It sounds to me like you really just want to shut people up that believe differently than you do. That definitely fits the active shooter profile.
Take a breath, maybe have a cup of coffee. Take your helm off and put down your left-hand pitchfork, and read my post again.
“Left-hand pitchfork”. You crack me up, man. Maybe it is because you only see the very liberal ATM, but this place is not half as hostile as many far right or far left forums.
Oh, I know, I'm on Facebook lol My point stands, you carry a fork and torch enough that you missed me explicitly saying I didn't advocate for that and accused me of doing so.
Oh, I know, I'm on Facebook lol My point stands, you carry a fork and torch enough that you missed me explicitly saying I didn't advocate for that and accused me of doing so.
I'm talking about people who are swindled by and peddlers of conspiracy theories from 4chan and alt-right news sources. People who ascribe to crazy "truths" like false flags, the Clinton hit squad, globalist conspiracies, etc. People who seriously fear feminism, communism, and white genocide. People who talk about defending themselves from society and government with their guns, and running over protestors who block roads with such zeal that it reads like eager fantasizing. People who are consumed with opposition to perceived radical liberalism so fervently they can't see they are radical conservatives. When people display all those traits, they are fitting in with a pretty suspicious crowd.
Comments
F**king goof.
https://apple.news/ArMPzBIERQvW5jw6RJ41XvQ
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Probably considered himself a true patriotic American.
From the Vox article.....
In the videos, Beierle rants about women who canceled dates or gave him their phone numbers even though they had boyfriends. He also mentions Elliot Rodger, the gunman who killed six people and wounded 13 in Isla Vista, California in 2014 — and who has become a hero to men who identify as “incels” (short for “involuntary celibate”).
https://www.ctvnews.ca/world/jewish-nurse-who-treated-synagogue-shooting-suspect-i-did-it-out-of-love-1.4162816?fbclid=IwAR0MUOasqrAXb8KGsop8lV_pjHU0Jiwfewl2fsSemuZV5Eg5u5Xktav5uY8
The children of gun owners kill people
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/learning-how-to-stop-the-bleed-after-a-mass-shooting-60-minutes/
Everyone should be trained to stop the bleeding in the event of a mass casualty event caused by a “responsible” gun owner. Teach your kids how to cross the street safely, not to talk to strangers or get into a car with someone they don’t know and how to stop the bleeding. Fucked up society America.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
https://globalnews.ca/news/4629813/arizona-boy-11-allegedly-shoots-kills-grandmother-and-himself-after-being-asked-to-clean-room/?utm_medium=Facebook&utm_source=GlobalNews&fbclid=IwAR05jufVgAIO7VBhE3kFNQe9zfjOXDIqTBwY3Pvgqq1CXrph0fxiUgoav_o&fbclid=IwAR0MGU-Q7O_FtDm3ZEdJvjRY58pff8qqzlOjdYTt6Oa8GDhxlqyTpL-BEsk
This story doesn't add up. I'll be curious to what the police investigation turns up.
I agree - this doesn't add up. It actually seems pretty obvious what happened.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Your left-hatred is robbing you of your critical thinking skills. Every post is saturated with it, it seems like your only purpose here is to try and stick it to liberals.
The vast majority of mass shooters lately have fit a specific internet activity profile, and quicker than rounding up the guns would be rounding up the people who fit that profile.
To be clear, I'm not advocating for that, not at all.
We have a regular poster here who absolutely fits the mass shooter internet activity profile, and as disgusting as some of their posts are, I don't think they are a risk for that kind of atrocity.
My point is just that we aren't going to be able to stop this problem without drastic measures, which means we aren't going to be able to stop it at all.
My point stands, you carry a fork and torch enough that you missed me explicitly saying I didn't advocate for that and accused me of doing so.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/posteverything/wp/2017/09/14/what-do-most-mass-shooters-have-in-common-hint-it-isnt-politics-video-games-or-religion/?noredirect=on
People who seriously fear feminism, communism, and white genocide. People who talk about defending themselves from society and government with their guns, and running over protestors who block roads with such zeal that it reads like eager fantasizing. People who are consumed with opposition to perceived radical liberalism so fervently they can't see they are radical conservatives.
When people display all those traits, they are fitting in with a pretty suspicious crowd.