Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Trump Presidency -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: i-node who wrote (56910)	2/18/2018 8:12:17 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 361818

Has there ever been a mass shooting in America in a police station? There was an attempt a few miles from where I live. Maybe a mile from where I used to work. But the shooter only killed 2 cops before he was gunned down himself and even by the loose definitions I see floating around about what qualifies as a "mass shooting" its normally would always take at least 3.

To: i-node who wrote (56910)	2/18/2018 9:46:44 PM
From: combjelly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 361818

Has there ever been a mass shooting in America in a police station? Yes. Why do you ask? Do you think there aren't people with grudges against police? That, somehow police get exempt? As to the rest of your post... You are spinning so fast you are going to screw yourself into the ground. No one is claiming that semi-automatic handguns have not been used in mass killings. Are you advocating we ban all semi-automatics? There is a strong case to be made for it...\ It is also a fact that AR-15s and its derivatives are rapidly becoming the weapon of choice. Already the body count from them is far higher than even semi-automatic handguns. And the number has been growing since 2004. This is indisputable. You keep claiming that unless an action cannot stop all mass killings, it isn't worth trying at all. Why is it that you only apply that argument to guns? You are a strong advocate of voter ID, for example, despite the fact that it would only stop a very few illegal votes in any given election. It doesn't even address most of the forms of voter fraud. Yet we should inconvenience millions of people to stop this non-problem.