Archive

Shooter targets Republican baseball practice

  • SportsAndLady
    justincredible;1858973 wrote:Ok.
    Haha if actually done, thanks!
  • iclfan2
    QuakerOats;1858975 wrote:He is dead.
    Good
  • salto
    queencitybuckeye;1858940 wrote:Just heard the first, highly unlikely reference to "automatic weapon". Only a matter of time before the equally (and intentionally) wrong term "assault rifle" is used.

    Hard to take claims of wanting a discussion seriously when they can't wait to tell the same baldfaced lies.
    Personally, I've not heard the term "automatic weapon" used yet. Do you not believe the M4 is indeed an assault rifle? Seems like most of the internet considers it one.
  • queencitybuckeye
    salto;1858979 wrote:Personally, I've not heard the term "automatic weapon" used yet. Do you not believe the M4 is indeed an assault rifle? Seems like most of the internet considers it one.
    The M4 is an automatic weapon (equipped for 3 round burst or full auto).

    Are there reports that an M4 was the weapon used?
  • iclfan2
    salto;1858979 wrote:Personally, I've not heard the term "automatic weapon" used yet. Do you not believe the M4 is indeed an assault rifle? Seems like most of the internet considers it one.
    I'll be surprised if it was an M4. Those are highly illegal for civilian use. The M4 is an automatic weapon, either fully or burst.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  • salto
    queencitybuckeye;1858983 wrote:The M4 is an automatic weapon (equipped for 3 round burst or full auto).

    Are there reports that an M4 was the weapon used?
    Yes. Although, I thought the M4 did not have full auto. It has semi and 3 round burst.

    That said, even if a civilian version with only semi - is it still an assault weapon?
  • queencitybuckeye
    salto;1858985 wrote:I agree and yes. Although, can a semi-auto version of the M4 still be considered an assault weapon?
    Link? The ones I've seen are saying AR-15 which is indisputably NOT an "assault weapon".
  • salto
    queencitybuckeye;1858986 wrote:Link? .
    Not arguing here, just what I've heard on CBS.


    As for links (no idea if correct or not) Search Google - "shooter republican softball practice m4" and you'll find a few.
  • queencitybuckeye
    salto;1858985 wrote:Yes. Although, I thought the M4 did not have full auto. It has semi and 3 round burst.
    The variant with full-auto capability is known as an M4A1.
    That said, even if a civilian version with only semi - is it still an assault weapon?
    Not by any definition I've ever heard except for politicians with an agenda.
  • salto
    queencitybuckeye;1858990 wrote:
    Not by any definition I've ever heard except for politicians with an agenda.
    Other than it looks cool, why do you believe so many civilians want a military styled rifle? Even the semi auto version is designed to mimic the M4, which is for close-quartered "combat" situations.
  • fish82
    salto;1858993 wrote:Other than it looks cool, why do you believe so many civilians want a military styled rifle? Even the semi auto version is designed to mimic the M4, which is for close-quartered "combat" situations.
    You already said it...because it "looks cool."

    These are essentially the exact same gun.

  • justincredible
    Regardless of their looks, they are fun to shoot and easy to customize.
  • like_that
    SportsAndLady;1858969 wrote:Thread ban for sleeper please. I'm interested in information on this shooting, not sleeper's troll attempts to get the conservatives of this site riled up.
    +1, troll trash sleeper just can't help himself.
  • like_that
    iclfan2;1858974 wrote:His facebook page identifies him as a Bernie supporting Trump hater.
    Apparently he campaigned for Bernie too [emoji848].
  • mcburg93
    I am still dumbfounded how a guy planning on killing people, shoots fifty to sixty times(some of the reports have said this number) and only hit a few people and killing none. I would think you would practice with your gun first to know how to aim it and be somewhat accurate. Cant really have a killing spree if you do not kill people. On a serious note, I am glad there were only a few injuries and the gunman is now going to be plant food.
  • SportsAndLady
    mcburg93;1859013 wrote:I am still dumbfounded how a guy planning on killing people, shoots fifty to sixty times(some of the reports have said this number) and only hit a few people and killing none. I would think you would practice with your gun first to know how to aim it and be somewhat accurate. Cant really have a killing spree if you do not kill people. On a serious note, I am glad there were only a few injuries and the gunman is now going to be plant food.
    He probably wasn't expecting shots to be fired back at him by police. I imagine most of the shots fired were towards them, and not just people standing there.

    But that's a complete guess.
  • QuakerOats
    https://news.grabien.com/story-left-wing-twitter-celebrates-shooting-rep-scalise
  • rocketalum
    Can we get a ban for QO. Without Sleepers troll act or QO's links maybe the adults can have a conversation. Any chance this thread stays out of the politics forum?
  • CenterBHSFan
    Not a fan of just banning people we don't like them or don't like their posting style.
  • rocketalum
    Agree but if the point of this thread is discuss the developing situation and not have it turn into just flaming the right or left as monsters then we need to either move it the politics thread and let it devolve down that path or, remove those that can't help themselves so the rest of us can talk about it as a event not a political weapon.
  • queencitybuckeye
    CenterBHSFan;1859026 wrote:Not a fan of just banning people we don't like them or don't like their posting style.
    If by "posting style", you mean someone who disagrees with my views, I couldn't agree more. If by "posting style", you mean transparent trolling, I completely disagree.
  • SportsAndLady
    CenterBHSFan;1859026 wrote:Not a fan of just banning people we don't like them or don't like their posting style.
    Sleeper was trolling and it was blatantly obvious.
  • Fab4Runner
    Eye roll. Right wing Twitter is just as bad.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/gabby-giffords-shooting-response-twitter_us_59414537e4b09ad4fbe4a66f?ncid=engmodushpmg00000004
  • like_that
    queencitybuckeye;1859032 wrote:If by "posting style", you mean someone who disagrees with my views, I couldn't agree more. If by "posting style", you mean transparent trolling, I completely disagree.
    This, plus QO hasn't really done anything to justify a ban from this thread.
  • CenterBHSFan
    I don't think Sleeper's views have changed at all. I think he's just shitstirring for laughs.

    But, what if I'm wrong? What if he does think what he posts? What if the general consensus about him is wrong?

    At the end of the day, we choose if we engage him or ignore him. Sometimes we ignore him, sometimes we play along. It's up to us, really. I don't think banning is the answer.