• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

Another Fucking Mass Shooting At US School

So when is the good guy with a gun going to stop the bad guy with the gun? Still waiting.......
The shooter was shot by armed police. I think that qualifies.
Sorry I didn't make myself clear enough for you to understand what I meant. I wasn't referring to the police and they didn't keep the shooter from killing, they stopped him from killing more people. I'm. talking about all the people who claim that good guys with guns, not the police, stop bad guys with guns from shooting someone. Does that clarify it for you?

And sadly, a lot of police have killed innocent people. Do you remember the 90 year old woman who was killed by the police about 15 or 20 years ago in ATL? She thought someone was trying to break into her home, so she went to the door with a gun in her hands and the police shot her dead. Were they really fearful of a 90 year old woman with a gun? Why weren't they wearing protective vests? She didn't attempt to shoot them. She simply had a gun in her hands. It was all over the news, which is why I recall the episode.

The stupid police had a warrant to arrest someone but they went to the wrong house, so an innocent old woman was shot dead at her door by the police. So much for them always being the good guys. But, we've discussed that type of thing numerous times and if I remember correctly, you usually defend the police. Just sayin'.
 
Sorry I didn't make myself clear enough for you to understand what I meant. I wasn't referring to the police and they didn't keep the shooter from killing, they stopped him from killing more people.
About the best outcome that can be expected from police realistically. Without these, at least.
531e00fea75cef92ab4c78927fc75a27.jpg


I'm. talking about all the people who claim that good guys with guns, not the police, stop bad guys with guns from shooting someone. Does that clarify it for you?
Ok, now I know what you mean. As far as I know, FSU students are not allowed to carry firearms. So that really does not apply then.
And sadly, a lot of police have killed innocent people. Do you remember the 90 year old woman who was killed by the police about 15 or 20 years ago in ATL? She thought someone was trying to break into her home, so she went to the door with a gun in her hands and the police shot her dead.
I remember. It was a clusterfuck. The police obtained the warrant for the no-knock raid fraudulently, and then after the shooting they planted some weed in the house.
However, she did not go to the door with a gun, but shot at the police as they were entering. Returning fire can be justified, but not the rest.
Were they really fearful of a 90 year old woman with a gun?
Anybody who points a gun and squeezes the trigger is a threat, whether they are 9, 90 or anything in between.
Why weren't they wearing protective vests?
They did. But vests do not cover everything.
She didn't attempt to shoot them. She simply had a gun in her hands. It was all over the news, which is why I recall the episode.
Your recall is off. She did shoot one round, but did not hit anybody.
 Killing of Kathryn Johnston
you usually defend the police. Just sayin'.
The police who planted evidence and lied to obtain the warrant are obviously wrong. But those merely returning fire when shot at are not.

But what does the tragic case of Kathryn Johnson have to do with this mass shooting at a university? Are you alleging police did anything wrong here?
 
Last edited:
As far as I know, FSU students are not allowed to carry firearms. So that really does not apply then.

You are allowed to have a concealed firearm in your vehicle which is what the shooter originally had. So other registrants of concealed firearms could also have them in their vehicles. (As far as you know). And further, since he failed first with a shotgun after he brought it out of his car and then went back to his car, such persons (again As far as YOU know) could then get their guns to respond while he was getting a different gun from his vehicle). So as far YOU KNEW people couldn't carry concealed firearms in a car, but they actually can carry concealed firearms in a vehicle which is what he did until he didn't and a person could respond in self-defense with their own gun from their own vehicle. As far as you know.
 
As far as I know, FSU students are not allowed to carry firearms. So that really does not apply then.

You are allowed to have a concealed firearm in your vehicle which is what the shooter originally had. So other registrants of concealed firearms could also have them in their vehicles. (As far as you know). And further, since he failed first with a shotgun after he brought it out of his car and then went back to his car, such persons (again As far as YOU know) could then get their guns to respond while he was getting a different gun from his vehicle). So as far YOU KNEW people couldn't carry concealed firearms in a car, but they actually can carry concealed firearms in a vehicle which is what he did until he didn't and a person could respond in self-defense with their own gun from their own vehicle. As far as you know.
And if no one had a firearm none of this would have happened.
 
As far as I know, FSU students are not allowed to carry firearms. So that really does not apply then.

You are allowed to have a concealed firearm in your vehicle which is what the shooter originally had. So other registrants of concealed firearms could also have them in their vehicles. (As far as you know). And further, since he failed first with a shotgun after he brought it out of his car and then went back to his car, such persons (again As far as YOU know) could then get their guns to respond while he was getting a different gun from his vehicle). So as far YOU KNEW people couldn't carry concealed firearms in a car, but they actually can carry concealed firearms in a vehicle which is what he did until he didn't and a person could respond in self-defense with their own gun from their own vehicle. As far as you know.
And if no one had a firearm none of this would have happened.

Silly.

The left is worried about a fascist takeover. Nazis, commies, whatever, ... they all do gun control and confiscation first.

What's the left's plan to smash the fasch? Strongly worded poasts online and whatever they find in the closet?

Buy an AR, 10 magazines, and 1000 rounds for every family member. It's a more effective long term strategy and entirely legal now.

People unarmed is exactly what they want.
 
Buy an AR, 10 magazines, and 1000 rounds for every family member. It's a more effective long term strategy and entirely legal now.
It's an entirely ineffective strategy, and will just get you shot by the government forces.

We have had this discussion on these boards before, and the basic facts are unchanged:

In answer to this very question a while back, I looked through history and found something very important:

At no time since the advent of what we would consider "modern" military power -- that is, in the years since the advent of military aviation and mechanized warfare -- has it been possible for an armed civilian uprising to prevail against its government without the support of the country's military.

That's not to say that revolutions don't happen, or that governments don't get overthrown, or that popular revolts cannot prevail. It is simply that a popular revolt cannot prevail unless it is popular with the state's armed forces as well. This, is necessarily, requires a mutiny on a massive scale, usually involving one or more popular generals defecting to the side of the revolutionaries and taking a huge chunk of the army with him.

Once the military switches sides, THAT'S when things become interesting.

The example that really solidified this is the Syrian Civil War. A lot of people forget that Syria has had small scale uprisings before, most of which were quickly and decisively crushed by the Assad government before their feet even hit the ground. But this case was different: some portion of the Syrian military had already joined the uprising earlier in the spring, and by September the Free Syrian Army basically had a core group made up of military deserters and Islamist militia veterans.

To compare with America's situation: imagine if two of the top ranking generals of the U.S. Marine Corps threw their support behind Black Lives Matter and encouraged every black soldier under their command to do the same. In a single day, five thousand soldiers abscond from their bases with fifty trucks, eighty Humvees, twenty M1A3 main battle tanks, and clean out the armories of their bases, including an impressive number of anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles. When three days later a black teenager is shot in the face while sitting on a swingset in a public park (the officer claims he "reached for his waistband" but no weapon is found), suddenly BLM shows up in the middle of the I-90 with a pair of tanks, a hundred trained Marines with assault rifles and anti-aircraft missiles and announces, "The Kennedy Expressway will remain closed until Officer Dickface is fired and prosecuted for murder."

A responsible government will try to defuse the situation and eventually appeal to the soldiers' sense of honor and get them to turn themselves in to face charges for mutiny, with a dishonorable discharge and a brief jail sentence. An asshole totalitarian government will send another group of soldiers to try and force the protesting soldiers to surrender, which results in two different units of your armed forces opening fire on each other, which in turn results in more defections ("What kind of asshole orders us to fire on our own people just because so Officer Dickface can keep his job? Fuck that!") and makes the revolt stronger.

tl;dr: Any popular uprising against the government is dead on arrival unless at least SOME of the military is backing it up. It is indeed true that freedom grows out of the barrel of a gun, but it is also true that those kinds of guns cannot be bought in stores.

^This.

There's a good reason why successful revolutions since the advent of the machine gun resulted in a government led by General Someoneorother, or at the very least Colonel Whatshisname.

Revolutions started without the level of military organisation implied by field rank leadership are non-starters - so no nation is run by Captain Whosehisface, or Sergeant Thatguythere.

Organisation, tactics, secure communication and logistics are all more critical than numbers, passion, and righteousness; and none of these can be simply thrown together overnight - they require training, discipline and time to establish.
A civillian with a gun, or even thousands of civilians with guns, is no obstacle whatsoever to a modern police force, and even less of an obstacle to a modern army.

If the government needs to be overthrown, having your own weapons is futile; You need your own army, and an army is not just a bunch of guys with guns.

You need discipline, organisation, secure communications, and above all, logistics. An AR provides you with none of these things.

If the army is on your side, they don't need you to BYO weapons, they have plenty.

If the army is not on your side, being armed just makes you a target. It doesn't give you any chance of winning.
 
So far as this individual, he shouldn't have been able to have a gun. His step-mother should have also locked her guns away so he could not have access. He was clearly mentally ill. BUT he's so close to what passes for normal among conspiracy-theory Russia-loving extremist Christian right-wingers these days that most people living in Florida wouldn't be calling him that.
 
Having been quiet for a while I was really hoping you yanks had better things to do than shoot each other in mass shootings. Sadly not it seems.
 
Having been quiet for a while I was really hoping you yanks had better things to do than shoot each other in mass shootings. Sadly not it seems.
Well, baseball season doesn't start for another couple of weeks...
 
Buy an AR, 10 magazines, and 1000 rounds for every family member. It's a more effective long term strategy and entirely legal now.

People unarmed is exactly what they want.
At one point in time it was an easier pill for a lefty liberal like me to accept -when people had to have training and get a concealed carry permit. Not jsut own the gun, but training not only in HOW to use the gun, but WHEN to use the gun. So what did Republicans do? Passed "constitutional carry"...we don't need no stinking permits. And so many gun nuts think they will be just like Dirty Harry....enjoying a nice hot dog for lunch when they notice robbers coming from the bank across the street, so they casually take the last bite of the hot dog...proceed out of the diner, still chewing their food, casually raising their weapon, and firing away, not injuring any bystanders.
 
If the army is on your side, they don't need you to BYO weapons, they have plenty.
The problem among gun nuts today....if Trump declared martial law tomorrow..sending troops against citizens....the gun nuts would support that and the only reason they WOULDN'T have their own weaponry is because they don't want to be mistaken for a lefty lib commie America hating Democrat. I always have an image of a good old boy in his MAGA hat and clutching his AR standing face to face with an M1 tank.
 
As far as I know, FSU students are not allowed to carry firearms. So that really does not apply then.

You are allowed to have a concealed firearm in your vehicle which is what the shooter originally had. So other registrants of concealed firearms could also have them in their vehicles. (As far as you know). And further, since he failed first with a shotgun after he brought it out of his car and then went back to his car, such persons (again As far as YOU know) could then get their guns to respond while he was getting a different gun from his vehicle). So as far YOU KNEW people couldn't carry concealed firearms in a car, but they actually can carry concealed firearms in a vehicle which is what he did until he didn't and a person could respond in self-defense with their own gun from their own vehicle. As far as you know.
You're forgetting that it's a school. Mass shootings very disproportionally happen in gun free zones. The gun people insist there's a causal relationship, I consider it unproven because there's a big selection bias: the very places with the highest density are mostly prohibited zones.
 
A civillian with a gun, or even thousands of civilians with guns, is no obstacle whatsoever to a modern police force, and even less of an obstacle to a modern army.

If the government needs to be overthrown, having your own weapons is futile; You need your own army, and an army is not just a bunch of guys with guns.

You need discipline, organisation, secure communications, and above all, logistics. An AR provides you with none of these things.

If the army is on your side, they don't need you to BYO weapons, they have plenty.

If the army is not on your side, being armed just makes you a target. It doesn't give you any chance of winning.
It comes down to the popular sentiment.

Civilian firearms are hopeless against modern forces in open battle but can make life very unpleasant for a sufficiently disliked oppressive government. Individual defense is impossible, but in an urban environment the guy who fires one long range shot and slips away can make life hell if the people choose to not see him.
 
Seemed like we were due. Shooting at Catholic School in Minnesota. Early reports indicate five patients admitted to local hospital. Shooter allegedly 'contained'.
 
So, not at the school, but at the adjacent church where mass was being held. I hope this wasn't religious based, Trump will go nuts.
 
Shooter is allegedly transgender.

FBI head Patel says they are treating this as domestic terrorism against Catholics. Not certain whether they found anything so quickly to justify that conclusion. Shooter had a parent that worked at the school.
 
Shooter is allegedly transgender.

FBI head Patel says they are treating this as domestic terrorism against Catholics. Not certain whether they found anything so quickly to justify that conclusion. Shooter had a parent that worked at the school.

The shooter is reportedly a former student and the mother a former employee.

Whether or not the shooter was transgender is still uncertain, in my opinion.

Calling this domestic terrorism against Catholics is a bit difficult given the near certainty that the shooter was apparently Catholic.

As sick as this is, initially I assumed that this was a case of someone shooting up a building to give Trump cover to try to occupy Minneapolis. Something I believe will still likely happen, with this as a pretext.

Minnesota is heavily Catholic and heavily Lutheran, with increases in other denominations in more recent years.
 
The shooter is reportedly a former student and the mother a former employee.
Whether or not the shooter was transgender is still uncertain, in my opinion.
Why do you doubt that the shooter was trans?

In any case, this reminds of the shooting in Nashville.
 2023 Nashville school shooting
Both shooters attacked a religious school they were students of, both of them were trans (Hale was FTM though) and both had mental health issues.
Calling this domestic terrorism against Catholics is a bit difficult given the near certainty that the shooter was apparently Catholic.
I could see it if th shooter was angry at the Catholic Church over its stance on LGBTQABCXYZ issues.

As sick as this is, initially I assumed that this was a case of someone shooting up a building to give Trump cover to try to occupy Minneapolis. Something I believe will still likely happen, with this as a pretext.
This shooter certainly seems to be anti-Trump though.
123549403.jpg


Minnesota is heavily Catholic and heavily Lutheran, with increases in other denominations in more recent years.
Especially Islam.
 
Back
Top Bottom