Shooting in Florida

theBearJewCant conceal carry inside a bar.

The state statute that covers the license to carry a weapon, Title XLVI Chapter 790, clearly states that guns are not permitted in bars.

Section (12)(a) tells concealed carry license holders that “A license issued under this section does not authorize any person to openly carry a handgun or carry a concealed weapon or firearm into: Any portion of an establishment licensed to dispense alcoholic beverages for consumption on the premises, which portion of the establishment is primarily devoted to such purpose.”.

skiermanOK, so show me any mass shooting that was prevented by someone who was carrying. I remember the mass shooting in Trolley Square in SLC years ago but still multiple were dead by the time it ended. Aside from that, nothing. Its a stupid, well fucking retarded point, to state that stricter gun laws would prevent those from protecting themselves from mass shootings or gun violence in general. There is zero evidence to support this. Gun nuts are called nuts for a reason. The USA is full of idiots.

.MASSHOLE.That is a logical fallacy is it not? You're asking someone to prove that a mass shooting was prevented by someone carrying, when it fact, it did not have happen, thereby making it impossible for anyone to know the outcome.

fuckmekevinBad guys get guns legally and it is a fact that most shootings happen in areas were concealed carry is ALLOWED! If we banned all guns and bullets, only the government and police would have them, which would make every law abiding citizen safer. It is hard for criminals to get guns when they are illegal.

skiermanOK, so show me any mass shooting that was prevented by someone who was carrying. I remember the mass shooting in Trolley Square in SLC years ago but still multiple were dead by the time it ended. Aside from that, nothing. Its a stupid, well fucking retarded point, to state that stricter gun laws would prevent those from protecting themselves from mass shootings or gun violence in general. There is zero evidence to support this. Gun nuts are called nuts for a reason. The USA is full of idiots.

.MASSHOLE.That is a logical fallacy is it not? You're asking someone to prove that a mass shooting was prevented by someone carrying, when it fact, it did not have happen, thereby making it impossible for anyone to know the outcome.

skiermanOK, so show me any mass shooting that was prevented by someone who was carrying. I remember the mass shooting in Trolley Square in SLC years ago but still multiple were dead by the time it ended. Aside from that, nothing. Its a stupid, well fucking retarded point, to state that stricter gun laws would prevent those from protecting themselves from mass shootings or gun violence in general. There is zero evidence to support this. Gun nuts are called nuts for a reason. The USA is full of idiots.

.MASSHOLE.Interesting read on the guns used during recent mass shootings.


http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/10/03/us/how-mass-shooters-got-their-guns.html?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur&_r=0

SkiBum.Why? Did the bullet and the gun kill people? No, a crazy dude did. Fuck off with your gun shit you know nothing about.

Bushdid9_11Fucking idiots like this guy think that a once a year hunting trip is more important than peoples lives. Your guns aren't that important dude, you can find a new hobby.

TingaThere are a lot of people who own guns to protect themselves and their families from the "tyranny of government" which is kind of a constitutional right. However when the constitution was written they didn't have or couldn't imagine a gun that can shoot 800 rounds a minute.

Bushdid9_11Australia had one mass shooting in its history, immediately banned almost all guns and has super strict laws regulating it. That literally solved the problem, and there hasn't been anything like that since. Why hasn't America done the same thing? Fucking idiots like this guy think that a once a year hunting trip is more important than peoples lives. Your guns aren't that important dude, you can find a new hobby.

jblaskiWhen the constitution was written, the people had the exact same guns as the military. It seems like the government has an unfair advantage right now.

TingaThere are a lot of people who own guns to protect themselves and their families from the "tyranny of government" which is kind of a constitutional right. However when the constitution was written they didn't have or couldn't imagine a gun that can shoot 800 rounds a minute.

PachankzStick to boots . You sound like every libtard that ever repeated the Christian argument protecting the scourge of the earth that is Islam .

BombogenesisA us citizen can't own a gun capable of 800 RPM .. Or even really 1/10 of that

buzzedThere has been far more cons since the assault weapons ban was lifted. More mass killings than ever before. Please list one pro that has happened since the ban has been lifted. Just one.

Bushdid9_11Australia had one mass shooting in its history, immediately banned almost all guns and has super strict laws regulating it. That literally solved the problem, and there hasn't been anything like that since. Why hasn't America done the same thing? Fucking idiots like this guy think that a once a year hunting trip is more important than peoples lives. Your guns aren't that important dude, you can find a new hobby.

SkiBum.That's why I'm a proud American and you drink shit Fosters and fuck kangaroos. Don't try to talk shit on stuff you don't know on the other side of the world.

Bushdid9_11Australia had one mass shooting in its history, immediately banned almost all guns and has super strict laws regulating it. That literally solved the problem, and there hasn't been anything like that since. Why hasn't America done the same thing? Fucking idiots like this guy think that a once a year hunting trip is more important than peoples lives. Your guns aren't that important dude, you can find a new hobby.

skiermanNot at all, actually. A psycho with tons of arms and ammunition starts firing on a public crowd and according to the gun nuts, if everyone was armed (that alone is insane), it could be prevented by a "good guy with a gun". This is their reason as to why any kind of gun regulation is not appropriate. However this theoretical situation has NEVER HAPPENED. THERE IS NO PROOF OF THIS HAPPENING. THEREFOR IT MAKES THESE GUN NUTS FUCKING IDIOTS.

Get it? If you don't then count yourself among those idiots.

jblaskiBy this logic, we should just ban murder. If we do that, the criminals won't kill anyone, because they don't want to break the law. This way we will be able to live in peace and the bad guys won't be able to murder people.

BombogenesisA us citizen can't own a gun capable of 800 RPM .. Or even really 1/10 of that

japanadaLol, all it takes is about 6 months and 5k plus.

Also my ar can easily do 80RPMs.

cobra_commanderYes, but the President went on air and said someone could walk in a gun shop and come out with an Assault Rifle. That is not true.

Also 800rpm is a belt fed on cyclic. You are not getting one of those for $5k.

whiteboiYou can walk into a gun shop and get a semi-automatic assault rifle (AR15, AK-47, etc.), but not one that is full-auto. In order to get a full-auto you need a class 3 FFL and pay the NFA tax.

BombogenesisI am entertained by Hillary today. First off, I agree with her saying that someone on the FBIs radar should not be allowed to purchase a firearm. However... holy irony. She's trying to become the fucking president and is under investigation herself. Someone seeking the most powerful office in the world with access to nuclear weapons just being incredibly ironic. It's hilarious.

californiagrownI guess I missed the part where Hilary was on the radar as a possible terrorist...

Cause otherwise I don't see the irony. Just blind bias from your end.

BombogenesisSo now politicians get to pick and choose what kind of FBI investigations get ones rights revoked in a way that suits them? That's not scary at all.

californiagrownHmmm common sense rules in this case lol. The lady used a private phone for business purposes vs a guy who made inflammatory remarks in support of terrorists.

You're putting the two on equal footing. Fox News would even be ashamed of you lol.


Maybe you're trolling? I honestly am 50/50 on that haha

THEDIRTYBUBBLEPerfect fucking logic dude. "Well if Australia did it than we can totally do it to!!"

First of all, Australia didn't ban civillians from owning all guns. They just began to regulate them

Secondly, Australia is more economically stable and has significantly lower crime rates than the US. They also have a lower population than the US. Youre comparing apples to oranges.





Guns are not the issue. Do we have room to improve? Absolutely. Say there was a complete gun ban in the US. Omar could've easily obtained a weapon off of the blackmarket. Or he could have constructed a bomb.

Re-evaluate the issues at hand

-RobertBad guys will always find ways to get guns or other means of hurting people. That doesn't mean I'm against stronger background checks and what not.

Why put all these restrictions on guns when the vast majority are law abiding citizens? Because you're scared of the few that will use guns to harm others? Sounds alot like Trumps plan to temporarily ban Muslims from entering the US. Even tho the vast majority are law abiding, we're scared of the few that will harm us.

The quote below is something I've seen before.

"If the shooting in South Carolina is cause for banning the confederate battle flag, removing statues of confederate soldiers and erasing southern history, then the shooting by the Muslim in San Bernardino is cause for banning the Hijab, the Quran, Muslim symbols and all mosques on American soil."

BombogenesisWoman running for POTUS (arguably most powerful position in world) while being investigated by FBI for putting country at risk suggests man being investigated by FBI should have his rights stripped. Sorry if ya don't see it my man.

californiagrownHoly cow you aren't trolling. Wow. Just wow.


In any case, what does Hilary have to do with this? Or were you just taking advantage of this tragedy to push your unrelated opinions?

BombogenesisYes we get it anyone who doesn't have the same opinion you do is an idiot you've made this very clear with your immature track record over literally years. It's all good dude.

BombogenesisYes we get it anyone who doesn't have the same opinion you do is an idiot you've made this very clear with your immature track record over literally years. It's all good dude.

californiagrownSo you are an opportunistic attention whore who preys upon tragedies to gain attention so you can pivot and start talking about unrelated opinions?

Cause that is exactly what you did here.


What is my opinion on Hilary? You dont know it lol. You just know I think you're an idiot who will grasp at the most tenuous of connections that have magnitudes of order difference in order to argue your opinions.

BombogenesisDude we get it. You're an angry person who is bitter about something in life. I don't think any of us know why you're filled with such hate and constantly have to combat people on the Internet, but there are people you can talk to to unpack it and try to figure out how to move on. I wish you the best of luck brother!!

VinnieFJust to point out a couple obvious flaws in your argument :

If guns are illegal the blackmarket price in a first world country, especially for guns that are more desirable for crime, would be prohibitive for many shooter.

So then you say they'd build a bomb. Totally possible, but to build an effective bomb that can easily be walked in somewhere that has the capability of as many casualties as this shooting would take both know-how and would be difficult to do without alerting any authorities making the chance of getting caught before it even happens far higher.


I'm in no way saying to ban guns. Just pointing out flaws in your argument.