12-28-2018, 01:12 PM
montana Wrote:What I believe is irrelevant to what can be proved. If she is not wrong, then why withhold provable evidence? The Randy Weaver debacle made me very cautious when believing the "official explanation". I have worked with government most of my life and the truth vs government truth can be light years apart. Call me a skeptic, but shall not infringe should have ended most restrictions on guns right there IMO. Discussing such things can emotionally compromise some people ,so I'll end it here.
So far what can be proved is that the shooter used bump stocks on the semi automatic rifles that he used to slaughter innocent people.
If there were no restrictions on gun rights, the shooter would have probably used a M-240 or two.
Yes, getting emotional loses arguments and makes someone look like a complete lunatic. Living proof is the woman in the video.
LR55