Off Topic

Active shooter on the Vegas strip

  • Last Updated:
  • Nov 10th, 2017 10:47 am
Deal Addict
Aug 2, 2017
1204 posts
120 upvotes
Logtown
maddawg wrote:
Oct 8th, 2017 3:59 pm
Fully awre of the SCOTUS ruling regarding the 2nd Amendment. In the last few years, that court is now filled with political hacks. So I would take their ruling with a grain of salt. Talking about shoveling nonsense, perhaps you can take your own advice on that matter.
.. in the last few years, where there's been no SCOTUS cases related to the 2nd amendment, and the only changes are one conservative judge (Scalia) to another (Gorsuch).

I guess you can spew just about anything and believe it.

Btw, 2 years ago, gay marriage legal, through SCOTUS. Hate them political hacks. Face With Tears Of Joy
Deal Addict
Apr 25, 2001
1450 posts
138 upvotes
Pickering
AndySixx wrote:
Oct 8th, 2017 4:16 pm
.. in the last few years, where there's been no SCOTUS cases related to the 2nd amendment, and the only changes are one conservative judge (Scalia) to another (Gorsuch).

I guess you can spew just about anything and believe it.

Btw, 2 years ago, gay marriage legal, through SCOTUS. Hate them political hacks. Face With Tears Of Joy
Gotta admit, you are the best right fighter I have come across. Never said there was a recent SCOTUS ruling on the 2nd amendment. Justice Roberts was the swing vote on gay marriage. So not sure what you are referring to political hacks. It always amazes me how little nuggets of information is left. Gorsuch is an extreme right justice and corporate hack. So selective information gathering seems to be your MO. Back to the main discussion, a terrorist killed 58 Americans and waiting for the next mass shooting. Wondering if someone will top those numbers.
Deal Addict
Aug 2, 2017
1204 posts
120 upvotes
Logtown
maddawg wrote:
Oct 8th, 2017 4:24 pm
Gotta admit, you are the best right fighter I have come across. Never said there was a recent SCOTUS ruling on the 2nd amendment. Justice Roberts was the swing vote on gay marriage. So not sure what you are referring to political hacks. It always amazes me how little nuggets of information is left. Gorsuch is an extreme right justice and corporate hack. So selective information gathering seems to be your MO. Back to the main discussion, a terrorist killed 58 Americans and waiting for the next mass shooting. Wondering if someone will top those numbers.
Everything I don't agree with is a righty-tighty-whitey.

"Nuggets of information left.."
Deliberately omits that Gorsuch replaced Scalia.. who was he again? Social justice leftist?

Wouldn't change any vote made in the last two decades. Especially on this issue. If you believe otherwise, prove it.

"Selective"

Yes, back to the original discussion. Smiling Face With Open Mouth And Smiling Eyes These horribly made arguments aren't getting you anywhere. Even if Americans listened to Canadians (they don't), you'd be helping 2nd amendment supporters far more than hurting.
Last edited by AndySixx on Oct 8th, 2017 4:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Deal Addict
Apr 25, 2001
1450 posts
138 upvotes
Pickering
AndySixx wrote:
Oct 8th, 2017 4:29 pm
Everything I don't agree with is a righty-tighty-whitey.

"Nuggets of information left.."
Deliberately omits that Gorsuch replaced social justice leftist Scalia (lol?) and wouldn't change any vote made in the last two decades.

"Selective"

Yes, back to the original discussion. Smiling Face With Open Mouth And Smiling Eyes
Fully aware Scalia was never leftist, but wow you are dense. Gorsuch was nominated after the republicans stone walled Obama's nominee. Again, nuggets of information from you. I'm sure Scalia did not want to meet his maker down below. Also, if you are righty-tightey-whitey, then all power to you.
Deal Addict
Aug 2, 2017
1204 posts
120 upvotes
Logtown
maddawg wrote:
Oct 8th, 2017 4:34 pm
Fully aware Scalia was never leftist, but wow you are dense. Gorsuch was nominated after the republicans stone walled Obama's nominee. Again, nuggets of information from you. I'm sure Scalia did not want to meet his maker down below. Also, if you are righty-tightey-whitey, then all power to you.
All SCOTUS nominees go through the Senate -- it never even made it to committee so Obama never had a pick. Much akin to the stonewalling of GWB federal court nominees for his entire first term. I don't like it, but the rules are the rules and they've been utilized the same both ways. And again, it would have absolutely no impact on the 3 cases I cited in this thread (i.e. relevant to the discussion) as Gorsuch was not around for them, nor would the imaginary Obama pick have been. So not only do you skirt the historical constitutional rationale provided in each of these cases, but you invent political theories to justify clearly overt tantrums. Overall, not a good day for you. Better luck in the future.
Deal Addict
User avatar
Feb 19, 2010
4656 posts
1579 upvotes
i6s1 wrote:
Oct 7th, 2017 12:49 pm

Well, we use labels and terms to describe things. In order to communicate effectively, we agree on definitions. When one person starts referring to their car as a potato, that confuses our communication. So it's good to use words right.

The word "terrorism" is defined as violence or threats of violence in order to achieve a political or societal goal. So when using the word terrorism, reasons do matter. We can use words like "murderer" before we know a person's motivation, but we can't refer to him as a terrorist until the motive becomes known, and fits the definition.

Hope that helps.
The definition of terrorism is also broad enough to include:
- the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization.
Pretty sure those people running out of that concert with bullets whistling by them were in "a state of fear produced by terrorization". It therefore follows logically that this guy is a terrorist irrespective of his motives.
Deal Addict
Apr 25, 2001
1450 posts
138 upvotes
Pickering
AndySixx wrote:
Oct 8th, 2017 4:40 pm
All SCOTUS nominees go through the Senate -- it never even made it to committee so Obama never had a pick. Much akin to the stonewalling of GWB federal court nominees for his entire first term. I don't like it, but the rules are the rules and they've been utilized the same both ways. And again, it would have absolutely no impact on the 3 cases I cited in this thread (i.e. relevant to the discussion) as Gorsuch was not around for them, nor would the imaginary Obama pick have been. So not only do you skirt the historical constitutional rationale provided in each of these cases, but you invent political theories to justify clearly overt tantrums. Overall, not a good day for you. Better luck in the future.
If it makes you feel better....I bow to the king of all information. We try not to post a tantrum in the future. Sorry for offending the true RFD right fighter.
Deal Guru
User avatar
Mar 14, 2005
11021 posts
1520 upvotes
City of Vancouver
I am predicting the victims of the Vegas shooting will be going after the money that the shooter wired to his gf in the Philippines. If this will happen, I think she should be able to keep what he gave her.
De gustibus non est disputandum
Crazy people will make even sane people crazy.
Deal Addict
Aug 2, 2017
1204 posts
120 upvotes
Logtown
Becks wrote:
Oct 9th, 2017 4:09 pm
I am predicting the victims of the Vegas shooting will be going after the money that the shooter wired to his gf in the Philippines. If this will happen, I think she should be able to keep what he gave her.
Depends on the intent with the money. It can very well turn out to be collateral for victims in civil cases. And there's lots of victims.. so.. I'd imagine good odds.
Deal Addict
Nov 15, 2008
3884 posts
1256 upvotes
The guy is worth millions; I doubt victims will persecute the gf for thousands.
Newbie
Sep 20, 2015
88 posts
13 upvotes
Burnaby, BC
lecale wrote:
Oct 9th, 2017 4:39 pm
The guy is worth millions; I doubt victims will persecute the gf for thousands.
I doubt that guy has much money left, video poker suck millions easily. all those " professional gamblers " are idiots.
Deal Addict
Nov 15, 2008
3884 posts
1256 upvotes
bcroger wrote:
Oct 9th, 2017 5:44 pm
I doubt that guy has much money left, video poker suck millions easily. all those " professional gamblers " are idiots.
He had government jobs for 10 years and good jobs for a few years thereafter, and he put his money into real estate. He had an apartment building that brought in a half million dollars in rent a year for a decade. Then he sold it for $5-6M.
Deal Guru
User avatar
Nov 5, 2001
10756 posts
1275 upvotes
Edmonton
bcroger wrote:
Oct 9th, 2017 5:44 pm
I doubt that guy has much money left, video poker suck millions easily. all those " professional gamblers " are idiots.

Between real estate investments and gambling winnings he lived a pretty comfortable lifestyle. He declared gambling winnings of $5 million in 2015 alone.

Im guessing he either had a bad luck streak that exhausted his bankroll or maybe was undiagnosed with depression or as a sociopath and realized how empty his life was.
Deal Addict
Aug 2, 2017
1204 posts
120 upvotes
Logtown
lecale wrote:
Oct 9th, 2017 4:39 pm
The guy is worth millions; I doubt victims will persecute the gf for thousands.
And lots of lives.. which tend to be worth millions too.
Deal Addict
Nov 15, 2008
3884 posts
1256 upvotes
blainehamilton wrote:
Oct 9th, 2017 6:30 pm
He declared gambling winnings of $5 million in 2015 alone.
I read that too (NBC) but the real (later) story seems to be that he sold off that apartment building in 2015, but apparently he was already worth $2M before the sale.

Top