09-05-2019, 12:42 PM
(09-05-2019, 11:49 AM)GMDino Wrote: Sure he has. he blames the far-left bubble liver for not knowing you can just loan a gun to anyone and that there should be no problem with that.
You're using the word incorrectly. He's stating she's wrong, this is not assigning blame.
Quote:All of them? Citation?
Universal backgrounds check laws state that ownership cannot be transferred without a NICS check. Ownership equals possession. There is not universal background check in effect so I should have used the term "as proposed" instead of "as written. However, if you want to use CA as an example, you cannot loan ammunition to your buddy at the range under CA's new background check to buy ammunition horseshit law.
http://downloads.capta.org/leg/BallotMeasures/Prop63_FullText.pdf
Quote:Thanks.
I assume you are exempt due to the training for your job? So if others have a job that require handling a gun and theyhave the proper training are they also exempt?
You'd think that, but you'd be wrong. CA always does a LEO exemption for these types of laws 9see Prop 63 above) to prevent them from fighting them tooth and nail. Also, you can take any amount of training you want, you can be an ex-Navy SEAL, and if you're not a sworn peace officer you cannot buy a single roster exempt pistol.
(09-05-2019, 12:01 PM)GMDino Wrote: Interesting.
Not sure who is this "left" that has their own special definition, so I looked it up.
I found that the FBI considers a mass shooting:
Yes, now use that definition and look up "mass shootings".
Quote:Since wikipedia can be wonky when it comes to updates I did a little further research and found the government has a firm definition signed into law in 2013:[/url]
What is that law, your link does not say? Also, is it different than the one you cited above? I have to think it is otherwise your later numbers would be wildly different.
Quote:So how many "mass shootings" fall into different race categories?says:
[url=https://news.sky.com/story/why-are-white-men-more-likely-to-carry-out-mass-shootings-11252808]One site
Thank you for posting this as it helps prove my point. From your article;
However, organisations such as the Gun Violence Archive categorise a mass shooting as an incident where four people are shot, either wounded or killed, and put the figure at 251 shootings this year.
As I said earlier, using the definition used by the anti-gun side, to artificially inflate numbers and make people afraid, the vast majority of "mass shootings" are committed by young black men. It's a bit of a catch 22 for them. One one hand they can stick to a definition that limits the number of mass shootings to, per your own source, 114 such incidents since 1982, or 3.08 a year. Then they can demonize violent, and don't forget racist, white men. Or they can use their own definition, which allows them to say, and Dem candidates for POTUS have parroted, that there have already been 251 "mass shootings" in this year alone (again per your own source), but then they must blame mostly young black men for these "mass shootings". Quite the quandary for them.
Quote:Here is the Statista report:
https://www.statista.com/statistics/476456/mass-shootings-in-the-us-by-shooter-s-race/
So, using the government's definition (not the "left's"...whatever that is) almost 60% of mass shootings are committed by whites. 96% or so by men.
That seems like "primary" to me.
But I'm just going by the numbers with no hidden motives, so what do I know.
I think I've already addressed this above so I will simply add that by the definition you are using there are 3.08 mass shootings per year in the US, with it being defined as four or more people killed in a single event with no cooling off period. So kindly correct your friends when they claim there has already been 250+ mass shootings in the US in this year alone!!!
