Gun Control - The Debate, Argument Or Whatever ...

Waco was televised. Also, look at the casualty figures of Taliban vs. Russians.... I would bet the Taliban suffered a huge loss of life, property and what little economy they had. A pyrrhic victory is not really a victory. But this was also a long time ago.

You underestimate the amount of crazies in this country and there are many with nothing to lose. Besides, the Taliban are still there and still at it fighting all that technology and still dug in like ticks.
 
If the lack of religion is the primary cause, then according to this study/poll: http://www.pewglobal.org/2002/12/19/among-wealthy-nations/ Canada, Britain, France, Germany, Italy, and many other wealthy and irreligious western nations (which are a valid comparison to the US) should have far far more mass shootings than the US does- yet this isn't the case. Yet the US is far more religious than any of them.

Saying that a lack of religion is primarily to blame for mass shootings is as erroneous as blaming this problem on guns. Two different sides of the same coin jmo...

Not defending or refuting the validity of the religious argument but the irreligious western nations mentioned don't have the 2nd Amendment nor have the amount of people, crazies, or guns as we do so that's an apples to oranges comparison.
 
If the lack of religion is the primary cause, then according to this study/poll: http://www.pewglobal.org/2002/12/19/among-wealthy-nations/ Canada, Britain, France, Germany, Italy, and many other wealthy and irreligious western nations (which are a valid comparison to the US) should have far far more mass shootings than the US does- yet this isn't the case. Yet the US is far more religious than any of them.

Saying that a lack of religion is primarily to blame for mass shootings is as erroneous as blaming this problem on guns. Two different sides of the same coin jmo...
I believe @reedy0312 said it was one of the major causes, not the primary or sole cause. And I don't think it is the same as blaming the gun (an inanimate object) - religion (regardless of which one believes in) influences a person's thoughts and behavior.

Edit: I also don't believe that 60% number - there are many folks I know who say they are religious and don't go to church except Christmas, don't read the bible, and in general just don't live as what they claim to be.
 
Last edited:
Another factor I see is the breakdown of the rule of law in this country. Don't like immigration laws and standing in line to enter the U.S. legally? Walk across the border and claim asylum. Don't like the federal drug laws? Make up your own and "legalize" marijuana. Don't want ICE nabbing the illegals in your city? Warn them in advance. Want illegals in your locality to do the dirty work? Make it a sanctuary city/town/school. Don't want illegals driving without licenses and insurance? Pass legislation so they can come to DOT and get a "special" license without fear of arrest. Don't like the 2nd Amendment? Make up the most draconian, restrictive gun law imaginable and get away with it to negate constitutional rights (D.C. and other major cities and states). Have a President who wants to enforce laws as he is sworn to do? Castigate him ad infinitum. Don't like the guy going to Africa to hunt elephant? Make up a backdoor rule to prevent it. It goes on and on in from my view, we are in a never ending, liberal court rulings, move to anarchy where anything is legal as long as it feels good and doesn't infringe on one's personal freedom.
 
I believe @reedy0312 said it was one of the major causes, not the primary or sole cause. And I don't think it is the same as blaming the gun (an inanimate object) - religion (regardless of which one believes in) influences a person's thoughts and behavior.

Edit: I also don't believe that 60% number - there are many folks I know who say they are religious and don't go to church except Christmas, don't read the bible, and in general just don't live as what they claim to be.

Agree and as time goes by, in theWestern world, agnosticism seems to be more prevalent than in the past.
 
I think another difference between the US in the "we are more religious than the other countries who don't have this issue so it isn't religion* and other countries argument is purpose. The United States has lost it's purpose. We've lost our unity. We are divided in a way that we haven't been since the civil war.

What if the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor today? I'd wager there would be a large group of people that would say that we had it coming and had done something to deserve it. That Trump was at fault and so we're his supporters. How many Americans do you think placed blame on Roosevelt on December 7, 1941?

Religion is part of our very DNA in a way that it isn't for other cultures, so taking it away and having nothing to replace it with is far more devastating to our society than it might be to others.
 
I honestly believe that we need to take a step back, and take a new approach on the issue, to accomplish this we must first take a look at what I refer to as the big picture. First and foremost we need to identify the problem before we search for solutions. Currently there are many different opinions as to what the problem is.

Many believe this is a gun control issue while others point out social issues and others mental health. First, we need to look at the shooter and attempt to identify commonalities these shooters shared. While they all committed these atrocities with firearms, a common factor, when you look deeper you find disturbing similarities in the personalities of these individuals. For starters, the majority of the shooters were anti social, loners who displayed difficulty relating to others. Many demonstrated anger issues and spent considerable time plotting against others who they viewed as responsible for their problems.

In short, these mass shooters were identifiable well before they acted out. Some had a history of engaging in antisocial, often criminal behavior. Others demonstrated irrational views of society, mental instability and ongoing actions that demonstrated psychological issues. In hindsight these people left a trail of warning signs that they were serious threats, emotionally damaged individuals that were literal time bombs. In spite of these signs, they were all allowed to purchase firearms.

Additional gun controls won't solve this issue because the issue isn't firearms or the type of firearm used. We have a mental health epidemic in a society that lacks the tools to currently identify these people as well as treat them. Background checks designed to identify these individuals and restrict them from firearm ownership is a start. The establishment of readily available mental health treatment is critical to curtailing this epidemic. Training in our schools to identify mental health problems early on is essential.

Instead of calling for additional gun control we need to take a step back and analyze how we as a society manage and treat mental health. When we begin to train schools on how to identify mental health issues and direct the necessary funds to properly treat those afflicted with these issues, we'll begin to heal as a society.
 
Agree and as time goes by, in theWestern world, agnosticism seems to be more prevalent than in the past.
That is a commonly held belief, but it is not really true. Following the enlightenment and French revolution, religious activity was virtually outlawed in France, and Wellington and Blucher's Army's hardly had a chaplain. Our own founding fathers, during the same period, were at best, Deists, with little time or patience for organized religion. The great religious reawakening occurred in this country in the mid to late nineteenth century, and seems to about have run its course. The rebound in Europe was much less dramatic. This tends to be cyclic.

What we do have is a general corruption of the cultural contract that forms the basis of a functioning society. The destruction of the nuclear family unit is probably the most serious. We have uncivilized creatures running in packs in our inner cities - but that is more a difference of scale than anything - London and New York were dangerous places in the late 19th century - I am sure most have seen Gangs of New York. I even suspect the per-capita number of crazies within the population is about the same - it's just that the gross numbers are much higher.

What has changed dramatically, and it is the 800lb gorilla in the room no one on our side wants to discuss, is the technology. We are lying to ourselves and are not credible to the great middle of this debate when we say access to a semi-automatic firearm and high capacity magazines doesn't matter. Yes, you can create mass casualties with a fertilizer bomb, but it does matter that Sandy Hook and Broward County were enabled by modern weapons' technology. It is one reason we find ourselves so thoroughly on the defensive right now.
 
I honestly believe that we need to take a step back, and take a new approach on the issue, to accomplish this we must first take a look at what I refer to as the big picture. First and foremost we need to identify the problem before we search for solutions. Currently there are many different opinions as to what the problem is.

Many believe this is a gun control issue while others point out social issues and others mental health. First, we need to look at the shooter and attempt to identify commonalities these shooters shared. While they all committed these atrocities with firearms, a common factor, when you look deeper you find disturbing similarities in the personalities of these individuals. For starters, the majority of the shooters were anti social, loners who displayed difficulty relating to others. Many demonstrated anger issues and spent considerable time plotting against others who they viewed as responsible for their problems.

In short, these mass shooters were identifiable well before they acted out. Some had a history of engaging in antisocial, often criminal behavior. Others demonstrated irrational views of society, mental instability and ongoing actions that demonstrated psychological issues. In hindsight these people left a trail of warning signs that they were serious threats, emotionally damaged individuals that were literal time bombs. In spite of these signs, they were all allowed to purchase firearms.

Additional gun controls won't solve this issue because the issue isn't firearms or the type of firearm used. We have a mental health epidemic in a society that lacks the tools to currently identify these people as well as treat them. Background checks designed to identify these individuals and restrict them from firearm ownership is a start. The establishment of readily available mental health treatment is critical to curtailing this epidemic. Training in our schools to identify mental health problems early on is essential.

Instead of calling for additional gun control we need to take a step back and analyze how we as a society manage and treat mental health. When we begin to train schools on how to identify mental health issues and direct the necessary funds to properly treat those afflicted with these issues, we'll begin to heal as a society.

In the case of Cruz, mental health initiatives failed. The abolishment by the academia eggheads of the school to prison philosophy showed it's fallacies.

THE SCHOOL-TO-MASS-MURDER PIPELINE
February 28, 2018

Nikolas Cruz's psychosis ended in a bloody massacre not only because of the stunning incompetence of the Broward County Sheriff's Department. It was also the result of liberal insanity working exactly as it was intended to.

School and law enforcement officials knew Cruz was a ticking time bomb. They did nothing because of a deliberate, willful, bragged-about policy to end the "school-to-prison pipeline." This is the feature part of the story, not the bug part.

If Cruz had taken out full-page ads in the local newspapers, he could not have demonstrated more clearly that he was a dangerous psychotic. He assaulted students, cursed out teachers, kicked in classroom doors, started fist fights, threw chairs, threatened to kill other students, mutilated small animals, pulled a rifle on his mother, drank gasoline and cut himself, among other "red flags."

Over and over again, students at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School reported Cruz's terrifying behavior to school administrators, including Kelvin Greenleaf, "security specialist," and Peter Mahmood, head of JROTC.

At least three students showed school administrators Cruz's near-constant messages threatening to kill them -- e.g., "I am going to enjoy seeing you down on the grass," "Im going to watch ypu bleed," "iam going to shoot you dead” — including one that came with a photo of Cruz’s guns. They warned school authorities that he was bringing weapons to school. They filed written reports.

Threatening to kill someone is a felony. In addition to locking Cruz away for a while, having a felony record would have prevented him from purchasing a gun.

All the school had to do was risk Cruz not going to college, and depriving Yale University of a Latino class member, by reporting a few of his felonies -- and there would have been no mass shooting.




But Cruz was never arrested. He wasn't referred to law enforcement. He wasn't even expelled.

Instead, Cruz was just moved around from school to school -- six transfers in three years. But he was always sent back to Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, in order to mainstream him, so that he could get a good job someday!

The moronic idea behind the "school-to-prison pipeline" is that the only reason so many "black and brown bodies" are in prison is because they were disciplined in high school, diminishing their opportunities. End the discipline and ... problem solved!

It's like "The Wizard of Oz" in reverse. The Wizard told the Scarecrow: You don't need an education, you just need a diploma! The school-to-prison pipeline idiocy tells students: You don't need to behave in high school, you just need to leave with no criminal record!

Of course, killjoys will say that removing the consequences of bad behavior only encourages more bad behavior. But that's not the view of Learned Professionals, who took summer courses at Michigan State Ed School.

In a stroke of genius, they realized that the only problem criminals have is that people keep lists of their criminal activities. It's the list that prevents them from getting into M.I.T. and designing space stations on Mars. Where they will cure cancer.

This primitive, stone-age thinking was made official Broward County policy in a Nov. 5, 2013, agreement titled "Collaborative Agreement on School Discipline."

The first "whereas" clause of the agreement states that "the use of arrests and referrals to the criminal justice system may decrease a student's chance of graduation, entering higher education, joining the military and getting a job."

Get it? It's the arrest -- not the behavior that led to the arrest -- that reduces a student's chance at a successful life. (For example, just look at how much the district's refusal to arrest Nikolas Cruz helped him!)

The agreement's third "whereas” clause specifically cites "students of color" as victims of the old, racist policy of treating criminal behavior criminally.

Say, in the middle of a drive to cut back on the arrest or expulsion of "students of color," how do you suppose the school dealt with a kid named "Nikolas Cruz"? Might there be some connection between his Hispanic last name and the school's abject refusal to do anything about Cruz's repeated criminal behavior?

Just a few months ago, the superintendent of Broward County Public Schools, Robert W. Runcie, was actually bragging about how student arrests had plummeted under his bold leadership.

When he took over in 2011, the district had "the highest number of school-related arrests in the state." But today, he boasted, Broward has "one of the lowest rates of arrest in the state." By the simple expedient of ignoring criminal behavior, student arrests had declined by a whopping 78 percent.

FOOTBALL COACH: "When I took over this team a year ago, we were last in the league in pass defense. Today, we no longer keep that statistic!"

When it comes to spectacular crimes, it's usually hard to say how it could have been prevented. But in this case, we have a paper trail. In the pursuit of a demented ideology, specific people agreed not to report, arrest or prosecute dangerous students like Nikolas Cruz.

These were the parties to the Nov. 5, 2013, agreement that ensured Cruz would be out on the street with full access to firearms:

Robert W. Runcie, Superintendent of Schools

Peter M. Weinstein, Chief Judge of the 17th Judicial Circuit

Michael J. Satz, State Attorney

Howard Finkelstein, Public Defender

Scott Israel, Broward County Sheriff

Franklin Adderley, Chief of the Fort Lauderdale Police Department

Wansley Walters, Secretary of the Florida Department of Juvenile Justice

Marsha Ellison, President of the Fort Lauderdale Branch of the NAACP and Chair of the Juvenile Justice Advisory Board

Nikolas Cruz may be crazy, but the parties to that agreement are crazy, too. They decided to make high school students their guinea pigs for an experiment based on a noxious ideology. The blood of 17 people is on their hands.
 
In the case of Cruz, mental health initiatives failed. The abolishment by the academia eggheads of the school to prison philosophy showed it's fallacies.

THE SCHOOL-TO-MASS-MURDER PIPELINE
February 28, 2018

Nikolas Cruz's psychosis ended in a bloody massacre not only because of the stunning incompetence of the Broward County Sheriff's Department. It was also the result of liberal insanity working exactly as it was intended to.

School and law enforcement officials knew Cruz was a ticking time bomb. They did nothing because of a deliberate, willful, bragged-about policy to end the "school-to-prison pipeline." This is the feature part of the story, not the bug part.

If Cruz had taken out full-page ads in the local newspapers, he could not have demonstrated more clearly that he was a dangerous psychotic. He assaulted students, cursed out teachers, kicked in classroom doors, started fist fights, threw chairs, threatened to kill other students, mutilated small animals, pulled a rifle on his mother, drank gasoline and cut himself, among other "red flags."

Over and over again, students at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School reported Cruz's terrifying behavior to school administrators, including Kelvin Greenleaf, "security specialist," and Peter Mahmood, head of JROTC.

At least three students showed school administrators Cruz's near-constant messages threatening to kill them -- e.g., "I am going to enjoy seeing you down on the grass," "Im going to watch ypu bleed," "iam going to shoot you dead” — including one that came with a photo of Cruz’s guns. They warned school authorities that he was bringing weapons to school. They filed written reports.

Threatening to kill someone is a felony. In addition to locking Cruz away for a while, having a felony record would have prevented him from purchasing a gun.

All the school had to do was risk Cruz not going to college, and depriving Yale University of a Latino class member, by reporting a few of his felonies -- and there would have been no mass shooting.




But Cruz was never arrested. He wasn't referred to law enforcement. He wasn't even expelled.

Instead, Cruz was just moved around from school to school -- six transfers in three years. But he was always sent back to Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, in order to mainstream him, so that he could get a good job someday!

The moronic idea behind the "school-to-prison pipeline" is that the only reason so many "black and brown bodies" are in prison is because they were disciplined in high school, diminishing their opportunities. End the discipline and ... problem solved!

It's like "The Wizard of Oz" in reverse. The Wizard told the Scarecrow: You don't need an education, you just need a diploma! The school-to-prison pipeline idiocy tells students: You don't need to behave in high school, you just need to leave with no criminal record!

Of course, killjoys will say that removing the consequences of bad behavior only encourages more bad behavior. But that's not the view of Learned Professionals, who took summer courses at Michigan State Ed School.

In a stroke of genius, they realized that the only problem criminals have is that people keep lists of their criminal activities. It's the list that prevents them from getting into M.I.T. and designing space stations on Mars. Where they will cure cancer.

This primitive, stone-age thinking was made official Broward County policy in a Nov. 5, 2013, agreement titled "Collaborative Agreement on School Discipline."

The first "whereas" clause of the agreement states that "the use of arrests and referrals to the criminal justice system may decrease a student's chance of graduation, entering higher education, joining the military and getting a job."

Get it? It's the arrest -- not the behavior that led to the arrest -- that reduces a student's chance at a successful life. (For example, just look at how much the district's refusal to arrest Nikolas Cruz helped him!)

The agreement's third "whereas” clause specifically cites "students of color" as victims of the old, racist policy of treating criminal behavior criminally.

Say, in the middle of a drive to cut back on the arrest or expulsion of "students of color," how do you suppose the school dealt with a kid named "Nikolas Cruz"? Might there be some connection between his Hispanic last name and the school's abject refusal to do anything about Cruz's repeated criminal behavior?

Just a few months ago, the superintendent of Broward County Public Schools, Robert W. Runcie, was actually bragging about how student arrests had plummeted under his bold leadership.

When he took over in 2011, the district had "the highest number of school-related arrests in the state." But today, he boasted, Broward has "one of the lowest rates of arrest in the state." By the simple expedient of ignoring criminal behavior, student arrests had declined by a whopping 78 percent.

FOOTBALL COACH: "When I took over this team a year ago, we were last in the league in pass defense. Today, we no longer keep that statistic!"

When it comes to spectacular crimes, it's usually hard to say how it could have been prevented. But in this case, we have a paper trail. In the pursuit of a demented ideology, specific people agreed not to report, arrest or prosecute dangerous students like Nikolas Cruz.

These were the parties to the Nov. 5, 2013, agreement that ensured Cruz would be out on the street with full access to firearms:

Robert W. Runcie, Superintendent of Schools

Peter M. Weinstein, Chief Judge of the 17th Judicial Circuit

Michael J. Satz, State Attorney

Howard Finkelstein, Public Defender

Scott Israel, Broward County Sheriff

Franklin Adderley, Chief of the Fort Lauderdale Police Department

Wansley Walters, Secretary of the Florida Department of Juvenile Justice

Marsha Ellison, President of the Fort Lauderdale Branch of the NAACP and Chair of the Juvenile Justice Advisory Board

Nikolas Cruz may be crazy, but the parties to that agreement are crazy, too. They decided to make high school students their guinea pigs for an experiment based on a noxious ideology. The blood of 17 people is on their hands.

I had missed this (how surprising). Thank you.
 
Being free doesn’t involve restrictions. Therefore My guns will never be controlled except for by me. Infringing on my rights will mean fight to the death. That is my answer for government ect discussion on gun control. No deals. Not a conversation topic to be discussed. Ever. period.

The cultural differences now vs 50 years ago is a big problem. Put God first and listen to his rules and do right is now not the normal taught to our youngsters.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Just saw Gov. Mike Huckabee on Fox news. He had an interesting comment on the gun debate: What if the government required Hollywood to quit using guns in movies or television. Wonder how that would go over?
 
I imagine a lot like the war on drugs and prohibition...movies would be make in China or elsewhere so via streaming or some other mechanism, while we waste millions of dollars trying to enforce something that makes no sense.
 
Just to draw a parallel or 2.

Sky Marshals are few and far between but potential hijackers won't take the risk one is on board
same for concealed carry muggers and thieves don't know which granny with a walker is packing

The deterrent factor will be enough to discourage all but the craziest and nothing but a bullet will work on those nutters
 
What has changed dramatically, and it is the 800lb gorilla in the room no one on our side wants to discuss, is the technology. We are lying to ourselves and are not credible to the great middle of this debate when we say access to a semi-automatic firearm and high capacity magazines doesn't matter. Yes, you can create mass casualties with a fertilizer bomb, but it does matter that Sandy Hook and Broward County were enabled by modern weapons' technology. It is one reason we find ourselves so thoroughly on the defensive right now.

I do not disagree with your point.

But, if the 2A is still relevant (ie the people bearing arms in order to form a well-regulated militia in order to secure the free state), why would we want the people to fall even further behind the standing armies that our founders seemed to see as a threat to liberty?

Taking the argument to the extreme...shouldn't we just delete the 2A as it is no longer needed? We have all the protection we need in the form of the military and police?

I think this is where some (many?) in power would like to go. It suits their purposes.

And this is why so many in our country are pushing back. They've seen the movie and it doesn't end well.


Tim
 
I do not disagree with your point.

But, if the 2A is still relevant (ie the people bearing arms in order to form a well-regulated militia in order to secure the free state), why would we want the people to fall even further behind the standing armies that our founders seemed to see as a threat to liberty?

Taking the argument to the extreme...shouldn't we just delete the 2A as it is no longer needed? We have all the protection we need in the form of the military and police?

I think this is where some (many?) in power would like to go. It suits their purposes.

And this is why so many in our country are pushing back. They've seen the movie and it doesn't end well.


Tim

Look to Canada and that is your future if you let the gun grabbers win. We are nervously waiting to see what new draconian gun control measures our leftist government will inflict on the law abiding. I see yet another round of confiscation without compensation
 
Look to Canada and that is your future if you let the gun grabbers win. We are nervously waiting to see what new draconian gun control measures our leftist government will inflict on the law abiding. I see yet another round of confiscation without compensation
And Australia,
And Great Britain,
And, and, and...
 
I believe @reedy0312 said it was one of the major causes, not the primary or sole cause. And I don't think it is the same as blaming the gun (an inanimate object) - religion (regardless of which one believes in) influences a person's thoughts and behavior.

Edit: I also don't believe that 60% number - there are many folks I know who say they are religious and don't go to church except Christmas, don't read the bible, and in general just don't live as what they claim to be.

Yes it is true that religion or lack thereof can influence a person's thoughts or behaviours. However, if you look at the crime rates of the countries cited in that study- it is pretty clear that a lack of religious beliefs does not lead to violent or increased behaviour. Most of these irreligious western countries are pretty safe...

As far as your second point the same argument could be made about any of the other countries in the study. I don't see how that negates the fact that the US is more religious than any of them... I could make the same anecdotal observation about people I know in Canada and claim that no way 30% of them are religious. Plus the question isn't necessarily do you go to church often, do you read the bible etc... its just is religion an important part of your life/ or important to you. Methods of practice were not questioned...

I think another difference between the US in the "we are more religious than the other countries who don't have this issue so it isn't religion* and other countries argument is purpose. The United States has lost it's purpose. We've lost our unity. We are divided in a way that we haven't been since the civil war.

What if the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor today? I'd wager there would be a large group of people that would say that we had it coming and had done something to deserve it. That Trump was at fault and so we're his supporters. How many Americans do you think placed blame on Roosevelt on December 7, 1941?

Religion is part of our very DNA in a way that it isn't for other cultures, so taking it away and having nothing to replace it with is far more devastating to our society than it might be to others.

I am not sure what you mean by "purpose", could you please expand on that point ?

As far as the Pearl Harbour today example goes, a similar kind of example would be just as relevant to Canada. Nationalism is a far weaker political force in Canada than it is in the States.

I personally have a hard time believing that religion is more of a part of American DNA than it is Italian DNA. Italy was for much of its history a devotedly Catholic country- heck the Vatican is in the Italian peninsula- most popes were Italians. Yet today religion is not so important in Italy.

100 years ago Canada was a very religious country. Today that is not the case. So I really don't see how religion is a more integral part of American DNA than it is in that of other countries? Not to mention, a case could certainly be made that certain parts of the US are culturally closer to certain parts of Canada than they are to more distant parts of the US. Vice versa as well.

Another example-New Hampshire is the least religious state in the US, it also has relatively lax gun laws and yet is among the safest states. Seems like neither guns or religion are all that important when it comes to crime/criminal activities...
 
I am not sure what you mean by "purpose", could you please expand on that point ?

Perhaps a better way to have said it would have been "single purpose." We are much more divided than we used to be was the point. We are losing our morals, leading to a lack of cohesiveness as a society.
 
Yes it is true that religion or lack thereof can influence a person's thoughts or behaviours. However, if you look at the crime rates of the countries cited in that study- it is pretty clear that a lack of religious beliefs does not lead to violent or increased behaviour. Most of these irreligious western countries are pretty safe...

As far as your second point the same argument could be made about any of the other countries in the study. I don't see how that negates the fact that the US is more religious than any of them... I could make the same anecdotal observation about people I know in Canada and claim that no way 30% of them are religious. Plus the question isn't necessarily do you go to church often, do you read the bible etc... its just is religion an important part of your life/ or important to you. Methods of practice were not questioned...
Fair enough. I think my main point is that blaming a gun is not a valid argument, while saying a decline in religion (not as a sole reason, but part of it) is a valid argument. I think @Royal27 and @Red Leg have some good insights - it has more to do with some larger societal issues.

Also there are several countries that have higher instances mass shootings than the US even though the have a lower % of folks that see religion as important - France being the prime example
upload_2018-3-4_16-24-9.png
 

Forum statistics

Threads
53,624
Messages
1,131,374
Members
92,681
Latest member
Charlessdiuse
 

 

 

Latest posts

Latest profile posts

Impact shots from the last hunt

Early morning Impala hunt, previous link was wrong video

Headshot on jackal this morning

Mature Eland Bull taken in Tanzania, at 100 yards, with 375 H&H, 300gr, Federal Premium Expanding bullet.

20231012_145809~2.jpg
 
Top