Rhode Island State Representative Wants to Tax Violent Video Games

Gigus Fire

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Messages
2,275
No. The NRA spends 100s of millions of dollars bribing the government to get their own laws passed, force their puppets to attack children that were victims of a school shooting, and create diversionary bullshit like this. The NRA needs to die.
The first part i can agree with you on. They're a lobbying group. They fight for the rights of gun owners. Now the rest? I'm going to need some credible citations.
 

lcpiper

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 16, 2008
Messages
10,611
So please explain , Mr Lawmaker why Koreans, Swedes, Germans, Brazilians, Japanese, and Chinese who consume plenty of video games including violent ones don't have school children being killed by semi automatic rifles.

Yes people kill people. That is true. But readily and easily available AR15s sure make it easy.

There are far more effective ways to do it than an AR-15.

Do you think the military uses a weapon based on the AR-15 because it's the most effective combat rifle? If you do then you are mistaken. It's effective enough, cheap enough, ammunition is portable enough, it's the result of many considerations and pure combat effectiveness is not the only consideration.

There are several other ways to cause much more loss of life than a single gunman with an AR-15, but the media insists on buffing the image, the ultimate terror.

It's ignorance gone rampant.
 

Derangel

Fully [H]
Joined
Jan 31, 2008
Messages
20,036
The first part i can agree with you on. They're a lobbying group. They fight for the rights of gun owners. Now the rest? I'm going to need some credible citations.

Look at the people the NRA gives the most money to (like Trump and the thirty god damn million they "donated" to his campaign) and look at how they talk about certain issues. Funny how it lines up exactly with the NRA's statements isn't it?

Just the NRA or Lobbyists all together? Because, I could go for a blanket ban of purchasing our politicians....

Lobbyists in general really. I despise the practice. It should never have been allowed in the first place. Lobbying is nothing more than legal bribery.
 

c3k

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 8, 2007
Messages
2,313
14,000 murders in the US.
~ 5,500 committed with firearms.
3.8% of those committed with firearms used rifles.
Less than 1% of the rifles used were semi-auto (or “assault weapon”, a term used by the ignorant.)

Do the math.

When I see a poster, upstream, state that fully auto weapons are easy to get, I ignore them as a shill.

Another fact? 40% of mass shootings since 2000 (4 or more killed) were committed by immigrants or their immediate offspring.

The lack of assimilation into a common culture is a problem.
 

Derangel

Fully [H]
Joined
Jan 31, 2008
Messages
20,036
14,000 murders in the US.
~ 5,500 committed with firearms.
3.8% of those committed with firearms used rifles.
Less than 1% of the rifles used were semi-auto (or “assault weapon”, a term used by the ignorant.)

Do the math.

When I see a poster, upstream, state that fully auto weapons are easy to get, I ignore them as a shill.

Another fact? 40% of mass shootings since 2000 (4 or more killed) were committed by immigrants or their immediate offspring.

The lack of assimilation into a common culture is a problem.

40%? So the other 60% (aka the majority) were made by people that weren't immigrants?
 

Gigus Fire

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Messages
2,275
14,000 murders in the US.
~ 5,500 committed with firearms.
3.8% of those committed with firearms used rifles.
Less than 1% of the rifles used were semi-auto (or “assault weapon”, a term used by the ignorant.)

Do the math.

When I see a poster, upstream, state that fully auto weapons are easy to get, I ignore them as a shill.

Another fact? 40% of mass shootings since 2000 (4 or more killed) were committed by immigrants or their immediate offspring.

The lack of assimilation into a common culture is a problem.
I agree, but watch out, you may be compared to Hitler for doing so.
 

Gigus Fire

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Messages
2,275
40%? So the other 60% (aka the majority) were made by people that weren't immigrants?
You realize that it's not about total %, but respective %. 60% may have been made by non immigrants, but how much of that 40% represents the total population? If immigrants (first/second generation) make up 1% of the population, isn't that a big issue?
 

TAP

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 29, 2016
Messages
236
There are far more effective ways to do it than an AR-15.

Do you think the military uses a weapon based on the AR-15 because it's the most effective combat rifle? If you do then you are mistaken. It's effective enough, cheap enough, ammunition is portable enough, it's the result of many considerations and pure combat effectiveness is not the only consideration.

There are several other ways to cause much more loss of life than a single gunman with an AR-15, but the media insists on buffing the image, the ultimate terror.

It's ignorance gone rampant.

Fact: the weapon in two major school shootings was an ar15. Not a hypothetical weapon that could be more effective even though we have no idea what it is. Zero logic in your argument. A weapon like an ar15 or any other high rate of fire rifle makes it easy for those with emotional or mental issues to act on their rage
 

vegeta535

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 19, 2013
Messages
9,677
Hitler blamed immigrants and diversity for a lot of problems as well. Get help.
See that show you as a typical dumb liberal that like to call people out as racist cause his views differ from your own. Diversity doesn't just mean skin color. It people with different cultures, faith, ideas amount other things. Some cultures clash and some get along. The more cultures you stick in a small area will eventually start causing trouble.
 

Etherton

Will Bang for Poof
Joined
Aug 7, 2006
Messages
6,997
A weapon like an ar15 or any other high rate of fire rifle makes it easy for those with emotional or mental issues to act on their rage

So does a truck, pressure cooker, container of gasoline, ect...

See where we are going?
 

TAP

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 29, 2016
Messages
236
I agree, but watch out, you may be compared to Hitler for doing so.

Why don't you guys go hang out in another thread titled "Nazi theories were right about immigration, diversity and mass shootings". That would be a hoot to watch how bigots converse.
 

TAP

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 29, 2016
Messages
236
So does a truck, pressure cooker, container of gasoline, ect...

See where we are going?

Lol. The ole "should we ban a insertstupidcomparison here" argument. An AR15 was designed to kill. It is good at it as are other military style weapons now available for consumer purchase. When someone has a moment where they have rage, a gun like that allows them to easily act on that rage immediately. The key word is immediately. A pressure cooker does NOT. Pressure cooker???? Lol!
 

Etherton

Will Bang for Poof
Joined
Aug 7, 2006
Messages
6,997
That would be a hoot to watch how bigots converse.

See? Anyone who disagrees with your particular view is labeled a bigot. People like you can not be reasoned with. The tolerant left is far more racist than the right. AntiFa quickly comes to mind. Bigots, racists and domestic terrorists. Check, check and check...
 

spugm1r3

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 28, 2012
Messages
1,153
Montu, I think your discussion has been derailed. We should run some analytics to see how many posts it takes before we devolve into a Left/Right conversation.
 

TAP

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 29, 2016
Messages
236
See that show you as a typical dumb liberal that like to call people out as racist cause his views differ from your own. Diversity doesn't just mean skin color. It people with different cultures, faith, ideas amount other things. Some cultures clash and some get along. The more cultures you stick in a small area will eventually start causing trouble.

Hilarious! You're saying that someone who is anti-diversity shouldn't be called a racist? Well what the heck are they then? Pro-anyone-not-Anglo Saxon? The lunacy of these arguments and comments is mind boggling.

Nicolas Cruz made racist comments online. Are you saying that diversity caused his mental instability and made him racist therefore its ultimately the fault of diversity? Hahaha.
 

Patton187

Gawd
Joined
Feb 12, 2012
Messages
672
Toronto is one of the most diverse cities in the world if not he most diverse. Explain please why there are no school shootings.

I will not be brought down to the level of blaming ethnic differences for something as tragic as this. Get help.
I wont be brought down to the level of qualifying my bullshit. Outraged!
 

TAP

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 29, 2016
Messages
236
Montu, I think your discussion has been derailed. We should run some analytics to see how many posts it takes before we devolve into a Left/Right conversation.

Thus isn't even a left/right discussion anymore. There are literally people coming in here espousing white nationalist views as a legitimate explanation for why this country has more school shootings than any other. This is now a discussion on WTF just happened to the United States of America!
 

Derangel

Fully [H]
Joined
Jan 31, 2008
Messages
20,036
So, pick and choose depending on your views? You said "in general". Can't have it both ways as much as you'd like too.

Its not picking and choosing. I don't like lobbying at all. Doesn't stop me from disliking the NRA and their tactics beyond just lobbying though. This isn't an "either or" situation. People are capable of having complex opinions on matters that are not summed up in simple terms or bullshit political "sides".
 

Etherton

Will Bang for Poof
Joined
Aug 7, 2006
Messages
6,997
People are capable of having complex opinions on matters that are not summed up in simple terms or bullshit political "sides".

Scans through thread....

YOU-GOTTA-BE-or8baw.jpg
 

TAP

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 29, 2016
Messages
236
I haven't ignored anyone for a while now. To hell with these useless trolls.

Thank you! In case you've never been taught this, harboring hate for people of different ethnicities and blaming then for the world's problems is wrong. Now go out to the world and shine your light of goodness onto all!
 

NWRMidnight

Limp Gawd
Joined
Oct 23, 2010
Messages
352
I'm going to ignore your Hitler statement as a example of how to deride discussions based on facts and statistics and just trying to add in nonsense to shut down debate.
Going back to the original post, explain why sweeden and germany have seen an uptick in crimes since the refugee crisis? Explain why places with less diversity typically (typically is the key word) have less violent crimes than places with lots of diversity? I'm sure there are socio-economic intricacies at play here as well, but from a broad standpoint there seems to be a correlation between the two.

I suspect that there is more of a correlation with poverty levels and violent crimes then there is with diversity. Your example in Sweden, Germany, etc, if you take away the diversity you are implying, and keep same low income/poverty stricken people moving into the area, the crime rate and violent crimes would be increasing just the same. Violent crimes and such is not a diversity issue. It is a proven fact that poor areas has a higher number of such crimes, doesn't matter if it is race, religion, beliefs, or what ever diversify make up you want to spin. And considering the very example you are using with the refugees, is low income/zero income/ poverty stricken people moving into the area, supports the statistics of poverty levels/crime rate correlation more so than your diversity angle. Not to mention that as these people move in, the population increases which also effect stability of the area, and increases crime, specially if you don't increase services to take care of the extra population properly which includes law enforcement.
 

vegeta535

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 19, 2013
Messages
9,677
Thank you! In case you've never been taught this, harboring hate for people of different ethnicities and blaming then for the world's problems is wrong. Now go out to the world and shine your light of goodness onto all!
Who say anything about hating another race? People don't get along when their values and ideas clash. People like to be around like minded people. That doesn't mean they hate everyone else you fool. Some cultures are more aggressive when people move in their area and try to force their ways on them. Get out in the real world and you will see. Hell people in the same cultures have a hard time getting along.
 

TAP

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 29, 2016
Messages
236
What does anything you just said have to do with the Parkland shooting? There is ZERO evidence that diversity or a mix of cultures, ideas, skin colors etc. caused this shooting. It is mind boggling that this theory is propagating here.

Can I ask where you get these ideas from? What other source of information that you frequently use is supporting this argument?
 

Gigus Fire

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Messages
2,275
I suspect that there is more of a correlation with poverty levels and violent crimes then there is with diversity. Your example in Sweden, Germany, etc, if you take away the diversity you are implying, and keep same low income/poverty stricken people moving into the area, the crime rate and violent crimes would be increasing just the same. Violent crimes and such is not a diversity issue. It is a proven fact that poor areas has a higher number of such crimes, doesn't matter if it is race, religion, beliefs, or what ever diversify make up you want to spin. And considering the very example you are using with the refugees, is low income/zero income/ poverty stricken people moving into the area, supports the statistics of poverty levels/crime rate correlation more so than your diversity angle. Not to mention that as these people move in, the population increases which also effect stability of the area, and increases crime, specially if you don't increase services to take care of the extra population properly which includes law enforcement.
Aren't you making an assumption that the refugees in germany and sweeden live in poverty? That's news to me.

I said there probably are socio-economic intricacies at play, which would point to what you're saying, but then again there's loads of history of people killing each other because they are of a different culture. Even today the only ongoing genocide is between christian and Muslim Africans. In other places where the population is less diverse (Japan, Canada, Norway even China) have less crime overall than more diverse areas (Norway compared to sweeden of today for example). It's very difficult to compare apples to apples, but it lends some credibility that more homogenized culture leads to less violence given equal economic circumstances.
 

alxlwson

You Know Where I Live
Joined
Aug 25, 2013
Messages
8,693
Are you saying that almost a round per second is slow when firing into a group of people?


Hahaha! This is my last response to you. I'm giving you the courtesy to let you know that you are ignorant in the subject, and obviously don't wish to be educated.

1RPS? Hot damn, my bolt action and lever are now high ROF!!!!!
 

kirbyrj

Fully [H]
Joined
Feb 1, 2005
Messages
30,107
See? Anyone who disagrees with your particular view is labeled a bigot. People like you can not be reasoned with. The tolerant left is far more racist than the right. AntiFa quickly comes to mind. Bigots, racists and domestic terrorists. Check, check and check...

Exactly...TAP, welcome to my ignore list.
 

FrgMstr

Just Plain Mean
Staff member
Joined
May 18, 1997
Messages
53,878
Let's play nice people. Otherwise I will put you in time out.
 

dgingeri

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 5, 2004
Messages
2,830
No. The NRA spends 100s of millions of dollars bribing the government to get their own laws passed, force their puppets to attack children that were victims of a school shooting, and create diversionary bullshit like this. The NRA needs to die.

Sorry, the NRA doesn't even receive "100s of millions of dollars" to bribe the government. They received $42 million in donations and dues in 2016, and spent $3 million on lobbying, $5 million on advertising and fund raising, and $15 million on other PACs. The rest was spend on staffing. Donations from gun manufacturers totaled less than a third of their budget, or about $13 million. The NRA doesn't have nearly the power the MSM claims they have. The 2017 numbers aren't in yet, but I'd be willing to bet they spent less than $20 million on political measures, a far cry from hundreds of millions. They spend less than 1/200 of what Big Pharma spends on political measures, and less than 1/100 of what the AFL/CIO spends on political measures.

Personally, I find them to be spending too much on staffing and fund raising, and not enough to actually opposing things. They're too moderate for me.

I'm a Frontline Defender (meaning I donate $25/month) with the National Association for Gun Rights, and have been since 2013. With a quarter of the membership of the NRA and half the budget, they spend more on political measures at around $25 million, and most of their fund raising is done by unpaid volunteers. They've made more of an impact on the gun rights movement than the NRA has over the last decade.

The NRA is nothing but a straw man target for leftists, to divert attention away from the fact that their precious antidepressants are more of a common ground between mass murderers than guns.
 
Joined
Dec 13, 2003
Messages
2,238
I'm going to ignore your Hitler statement as a example of how to deride discussions based on facts and statistics and just trying to add in nonsense to shut down debate.
Going back to the original post, explain why sweeden and germany have seen an uptick in crimes since the refugee crisis? Explain why places with less diversity typically (typically is the key word) have less violent crimes than places with lots of diversity? I'm sure there are socio-economic intricacies at play here as well, but from a broad standpoint there seems to be a correlation between the two.

Don't ever try to use logic on a Liberal, it doesn't work. Liberals will always result to the bigot or Hitler analogy when they're faced with logic/facts.
 

tec1500

Weaksauce
Joined
Jan 30, 2016
Messages
68
People on both sides of the spectrum are a bunch of whiny, virtue signaling, attention whores that don't actually care about human life as much as they would have you believe.

People on the left. "AR-15s are the most deadly gun out there because we've had mass shooting with them. We care about human life and these need to be banned." Tell a person on the left that actually handguns account for about 95% of murders in their country and by math, that makes them far more deadly than rifles and they lose their shit on you and call you a troll even though you back it up with evidence and fact.

People on the left. "AR-15s are the most deadly gun out on the market because they are (insert uneducated knowledge here) fully automatic, very high powered, used by the military, very easy to purchase and acquire and the AR even stands for Assault Rifle!". Since when have AR-15s been automatic? Since when are they higher powered than a 308 or 30-06 semiautomatic rifle? The military really uses rifles that don't have selective fire? Is the AR-15 easier to purchase than any other gun in a store? I thought the AR stood for Armalite...


People on the right. "Maybe if we armed teachers, we'd have less school shootings." Sounds good to me. I don't want teachers teaching my kids anyways. I'd rather they spent their time being bodyguards to my kids. /s Perhaps we need actual officers in schools to protect children, but certainly not the teachers. They already have the most important job. Teaching our children to be good, smart and don't kill in the first place.

People on the right. "People on the left have never owned or fired a gun before. That makes them incapable of deciding what should be done with them". Wrong. When someone you know has been murdered by a gun, I think you inherit the right to say how you want to see the world become a safer place.

Here is a question about the AR-15s for the left. If you got every one of them banned in the US (other countries have not banned them, only restricted them. Just pointing that out.), so they didn't exist anymore, do you think mass shooters would wake up and in the morning and go "Gee, today seems like a great day to gun down a bunch of people. Oh shit! The AR-15 doesn't exist anymore. Well if I can't do it in the style, then I'm not going to do it at all."? Do you honestly believe murderers would stop committing murder just because they don't have access to an AR-15?


Both sides, all people, need to stop and acknowledge that there is a problem in the US when it comes to gun violence. They need to look at the stats and find out where the biggest problems are, what is causing it and figure out solutions on how to fix it. The Swiss have higher gun ownership than most parts of the western world. How come they don't have higher gun violence? Do they have better gun control laws that people abide by? Could it be that they have better early education and their people are taught to value human life a bit more and at an earlier age? Do they have stricter laws that punish criminals more harshly?

How about we come up with some ideas, good, bad and so-so, that could have an impact to reduce gun violence? How about we stop passing the blame around and trying to act more virtuous than the next person so you can feel better about yourself? How about we actually give a shit about human life and respect the dead that died from guns by coming up with reasonable ideas and solutions to save people in the future?

Here, I'll go first. Good, bad and so-so ideas.
1. Smaller magazine sizes. Could it have an impact? Shooters were have to reload more often. Could lead to less killing.

2. Stop posting the faces and names of mass shooters all around the nation. Could reduce the amount of copycat killers in the future.

3. Place officers or security guards in school. Have better lockdown procedures. Could reduce the amount and/or magnitude of school shootings that there are.

4. Get rid of every single gun there is in the US. Technically no one could ever be killed by a gun again. Would it stop people from committing mass murders?

5. Better education or mandatory education about guns at early ages in school. They don't have to shoot or hold them, but they should be shown how dangerous they are, how quick they can hurt or kill someone, how powerful they are, what they should only be used for, etc. If kids respected guns at an early age, would they be less likely to kill other humans with them?

6. Restrict handguns like Canada and other countries do. Less handguns out there and harder to acquire and use could mean less shootings with them.

7. Better statistics on guns when people actually use them for good, such as defense of themselves or others. Then we can evaluate the merits of having them in the first place for good reasons.

8. Educate people on real facts about guns such as the AR-15. How it is similar to other guns, yet feared more and these others guns aren't in danger of going away. You put some plastic on a rifle and paint it black and suddenly people have an irrational fear of it. Stop watching CNN when they tell you that you should be scared more about it than handguns, when handguns quite clearly are used in far more murders.

9. Maybe everyone that hasn't fired a gun should be required to spend a day at the gun range and learn about them. Might lead to more respect and less killing.

10. Longer waiting periods before you can purchase a gun. Impulses of revenge and murder cool off after you've calmed down.

11. Higher age limit before you could legally purchase guns. 19 year olds wouldn't be able to legally buys guns and shoot up schools with them...

12. Better mental health reporting. Places like the FBI take reports more seriously and do something about it. If it's a manpower issue, then hire more people.

13. If friends and family members believe you are a threat to yourself and others, if they can prove it to authorities, then have the weapons confiscated.

The way I see it we have a few choices that we can make. We can all sit at our computers and complain, virtue signal, blame others and be internet warriors. Or we can exit the conversation because it's getting too heavy or stressful. Or we can come up with ideas on how to prevent people from dying in the future. I'd really like to choose option number 3 here.

If you don't like what I've said, please be critical of it and explain why something is not good. Or explain how something could be improved upon. Please don't bash. That doesn't save lives.
 

TAP

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 29, 2016
Messages
236
Hahaha! This is my last response to you. I'm giving you the courtesy to let you know that you are ignorant in the subject, and obviously don't wish to be educated.

1RPS? Hot damn, my bolt action and lever are now high ROF!!!!!

I'm ignorant on the subject because I feel a semiautomatic rifle that can shoot a round per second is a high rate of fire weapon? Okie dokie there fella. Whatever makes you feel smarter.
 
Top