Nine killed in Dayton, Ohio

[onlinebiker]

Wouldnt matter either way.

Nor would the 100 round mag.

He only got off 26 rounds.

It's entirely llikely he had a missfeed - as those drum mags are notoriously unreliable.

Not that it matters much at this point, but he got off 41 rounds, not 26. 

Boru

I stand corrected. Prolly got nutters mixed up again.

Still - those 100 rounders are junk for the most part.

I like the old 20 round the best. Very reliable - and allow for easier prone shooting t han a 30 bround.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Too subtle.

[Amarok]

How about we disagree with people based on the merit of their points rather than worrying about whose "talking points" they're "repeating?" And, also, how about we start quoting each other or mentioning one another, directly? It makes for more honest discussions.

You went out of your way to take OLB's name out of his quote, which just seems like you're trying to slip a response in without him noticing. Either way, it comes off as disingenuous.

@Amarok

Speaking of doing nothing for honest discussion, I love how the media is ignoring that the shooter in Dayton was a leftist who supported gun control. Interesting.

1. Funny you insist on us quoting people while not quoting me.And yes we should worry about talking points being repeated is relivant in the context of the response .

2.The reason I left his name out is technical not duplicity and your not the first to falsely accuse me of this . Plus it's unlikely he was going to respond anyway so why would i need to slip it past him ?

3. Maybe they aren't because it his views on gun control had fuck all to do with why he gunned down a bunch of people . His anti immigrant views did .

[Gawdzilla Sama]

3. Maybe they aren't because it his views on gun control had fuck all to do with why he gunned down a bunch of people . His anti immigrant views did .

And the guns just made it easier.

[EgoDeath]

How about we disagree with people based on the merit of their points rather than worrying about whose "talking points" they're "repeating?" And, also, how about we start quoting each other or mentioning one another, directly? It makes for more honest discussions.

You went out of your way to take OLB's name out of his quote, which just seems like you're trying to slip a response in without him noticing. Either way, it comes off as disingenuous.

@Amarok

Speaking of doing nothing for honest discussion, I love how the media is ignoring that the shooter in Dayton was a leftist who supported gun control. Interesting.

1. Funny you insist on us quoting people while not quoting me.And yes we should worry about talking points being repeated is relivant in the context of the response .

2.The reason I left his name out is technical not duplicity and your not the first to falsely accuse me of this . Plus it's unlikely he was going to respond anyway so why would i need to slip it past him ?

3. Maybe they aren't because it his views on gun control had fuck all to do with why he gunned down a bunch of people . His anti immigrant views did .

1. I directly mentioned you using the site's mention feature, which I also suggested to you.

2. You can use whatever explanation you like, it just comes off as sneaky, or at least dismissive and condescending. It's not like we're having one on one convos here, it's a "public" board. Quote or mention who you're talking to. It's not difficult. Use some common sense.

3. So a mass shooters views on gun control aren't relevant?

[Amarok]

1. Funny you insist on us quoting people while not quoting me.And yes we should worry about talking points being repeated is relivant in the context of the response .

2.The reason I left his name out is technical not duplicity and your not the first to falsely accuse me of this . Plus it's unlikely he was going to respond anyway so why would i need to slip it past him ?

3. Maybe they aren't because it his views on gun control had fuck all to do with why he gunned down a bunch of people . His anti immigrant views did .

1. I directly mentioned you using the site's mention feature, which I also suggested to you.

2. You can use whatever explanation you like, it just comes off as sneaky, or at least dismissive and condescending. It's not like we're having one on one convos here, it's a "public" board. Quote or mention who you're talking to. It's not difficult. Use some common sense.

3. So a mass shooters views on gun control aren't relevant?

1.But you did not quote me as you suggested I do .Last I checked that function doesn't quote people .

2.I used the explanation that's the case and frankly I don't care how it "comes off" to you . As for it not being difficult speak for yourself thank you .But I assure you it has nothing to do with lacking "commonsense "

3. Relevant to why he killed a bunch of people ? No it's not , And hell even beyond that it's not .

[EgoDeath]

1. I directly mentioned you using the site's mention feature, which I also suggested to you.

2. You can use whatever explanation you like, it just comes off as sneaky, or at least dismissive and condescending. It's not like we're having one on one convos here, it's a "public" board. Quote or mention who you're talking to. It's not difficult. Use some common sense.

3. So a mass shooters views on gun control aren't relevant?

1.But you did not quote me as you suggested I do .Last I checked that function doesn't quote people .

2.I used the explanation that's the case and frankly I don't care how it "comes off" to you . As for it not being difficult speak for yourself thank you .But I assure you it has nothing to do with lacking "commonsense "

3. Relevant to why he killed a bunch of people ? No it's not , And hell even beyond that it's not .

1. I suggested you quote or directly mention. Are you having trouble reading my original post? Need me to quote it for you? Using the sites mention feature would be a start. Use your brain a bit.

2. I'm starting to doubt you possess any common sense. Do you just speak out into the open room at a party, or do you look someone in the eyes when talking to them or maybe use their name so they know theyre being addressed?

Maybe that's the problem here. Your lack of social skills is translating to the internet.

3. How is a mass shooters view on guns NOT a factor? Huh?

[Amarok]

1. I suggested you quote or directly mention. Are you having trouble reading my original post? Need me to quote it for you? Using the sites mention feature would be a start. Use your brain a bit.

And as i just said you didn't quote me weither you also suggested using another function doesn;t refute my point ,And my brians fine thank you 

2. I'm starting to doubt you possess any common sense. Do you just speak out into the open room at a party, or do you look someone in the eyes when talking to them or maybe use their name so they know theyre being addressed?

Or maybe the reason i already gave is the reason maybe you should consider that 

Maybe that's the problem here. Your lack of social skills is translating to the internet.

Or maybe the problem is problem clearly mentioned . But can't be that can it .

3. How is a mass shooters view on guns NOT a factor? Huh?

Did his opinion on gun control compel him to shoot 9 people ? Not that i'm aware .

[EgoDeath]

1. I suggested you quote or directly mention. Are you having trouble reading my original post? Need me to quote it for you? Using the sites mention feature would be a start. Use your brain a bit.

And as i just said you didn't quote me weither you also suggested using another function doesn;t refute my point ,And my brians fine thank you 

2. I'm starting to doubt you possess any common sense. Do you just speak out into the open room at a party, or do you look someone in the eyes when talking to them or maybe use their name so they know theyre being addressed?

Or maybe the reason i already gave is the reason maybe you should consider that 

Maybe that's the problem here. Your lack of social skills is translating to the internet.

Or maybe the problem is problem clearly mentioned . But can't be that can it .

3. How is a mass shooters view on guns NOT a factor? Huh?

Did his opinion on gun control compel him to shoot 9 people ? Not that i'm aware .

I suggested you quote OR mention. So yes, that does refute your point as I clearly mentioned you when I replied, so quoting wasn't necessary.

As for your other two points, the conversation's going nowhere.

Not sure how hard the quote OR mention thing is to grasp, you seem to be getting hung up on quote, when clearly either is fine.

It's one thing when replying to the original post in a thread with four replies.... Nine, ten pages later? Good idea to start addressing people directly.

[Amarok]

I suggested you quote OR mention. So yes, that does refute your point as I clearly mentioned you when I replied, so quoting wasn't necessary.

I conced this point 

As for your other two points, the conversation's going nowhere.

True but only because explaining why i can't 

Not sure how hard the quote OR mention thing is to grasp, you seem to be getting hung up on quote, when clearly either is fine.

It's technical as i said 

It's one thing when replying to the original post in a thread with four replies.... Nine, ten pages later? Good idea to start addressing people directly.

Easier said then done at least consistently