AmberCutie's Forum
An adult community for cam models and members to discuss all the things!

The Glamorization of Murder

  • ** WARNING - ACF CONTAINS ADULT CONTENT **
    Only persons aged 18 or over may read or post to the forums, without regard to whether an adult actually owns the registration or parental/guardian permission. AmberCutie's Forum (ACF) is for use by adults only and contains adult content. By continuing to use this site you are confirming that you are at least 18 years of age.
Status
Not open for further replies.
This is why people who aren't knowledgeable about guns, or come from countries not in a gun culture, should stay out of gun debates. They generally don't have a clue what they are talking about. You can fire just as many bullets, and just as fast, from a pistol that carries 6 bullets as a so called assault weapon. (even using that name shows lack of knowledge on the subject).

Magazine size, reloading times, pistols, rifles, AR-15's... a dedicated person can kill the same number of people with any of them.

This video is primarily showing why magazine size limitations are incredibly stupid. But notice at one point they demonstrate how to fire 30 rounds from a 6 shot revolver in 18.8 seconds. And if you pay attention you'll notice the 6 shot revolvers fired faster than a semi automatic with higher magazine capacity. They also show a 100+ year old designed pistol shooting 21 rounds in under 10 seconds. And that was with 3 reloads. Assault weapons weren't close to being invented yet.




I put "assault weapon" in quotation marks because I was quoting Bocefish (who posted that very same video). With the AR-15, you can legally purchase a 100 round magazine. I'm going on the assumption here that you can't just walk in to a shop and purchase 20+ 6-bullet cartridges (I would hope that's true or things are even crazier than I imagined). I just don't see an argument for the AR-15 and other guns like it being remotely necessary or less dangerous than the average pistol. The other argument here is that the average person will be able to do more damage with something like the AR-15 than with a pistol they will have to reload every 6 shots.
 
Kind of fucked to say the least. If that many people missed the signs, that many people need to lose their jobs.

Honestly, i don't think that's a fair statement...

Inevitably so, there's always some discussion of "missed warning signs" after so many of these mass shootings. It's easy to look at things in hindsight yet so hard to predict accurately in foresight. I think if we start to be more sensitive toward warning signs, i can imagine people becoming hyper sensitive to a fault. Suddenly a lot of people are (unfairly) placed on high alert of who can potentially be a killer; whether we should target all Muslims as potential threats or all individuals secluded in their rooms that play violent games (i.e. Adam Lanza / Connecticut school shooting). It's such a fine line, not to mention double-edged sword.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Helpful!
Reactions: Gen and fandango
I know better than respond to topics like this, but here I go again #WhiteSnakeSaidThere'dBeDaysLikeThis

There were 202 shots fired in total, and a great majority of those were in the final moments. This murderous shitbird wasn't a skilled shooter using a high performance weapon. He was an asshole who took a few minutes to figure out where he could kill the most.

He learned from past tragedies that nightclubs are a great place to kill a lot of people, and he still came up well short. Look at Happy Land, want a real shock? An accident that killed more at the Beverly Hills Supper Club than the terrorist attack at the Oklahoma City Federal Building. 63 died in the Gothenburg discothèque arson. And the Ozone Disco Club

And so on... Heck even the accidental fire at The Station in 2003 harvested twice as many souls.

I'm glad terrorists are daft as new born ducks and figure guns are the best way to kill others. Let's hope they never master fire
 
Last edited:
For anyone curious to learn more about the evil black rifle and the previous assault weapons ban, this is a rather informative and brief slide show: http://www.assaultweapon.info/

Additionally, I just heard AR15 type rifles are flying off the shelves at a rate of 15 per hour at just one store in Smyrna, Georgia. It's hard to imagine all the sales going on nationwide.
 
This is why people who aren't knowledgeable about guns, or come from countries not in a gun culture, should stay out of gun debates. They generally don't have a clue what they are talking about. You can fire just as many bullets, and just as fast, from a pistol that carries 6 bullets as a so called assault weapon. (even using that name shows lack of knowledge on the subject).

Magazine size, reloading times, pistols, rifles, AR-15's... a dedicated person can kill the same number of people with any of them.

This video is primarily showing why magazine size limitations are incredibly stupid. But notice at one point they demonstrate how to fire 30 rounds from a 6 shot revolver in 18.8 seconds. And if you pay attention you'll notice the 6 shot revolvers fired faster than a semi automatic with higher magazine capacity. They also show a 100+ year old designed pistol shooting 21 rounds in under 10 seconds. And that was with 3 reloads. Assault weapons weren't close to being invented yet.



Yeah, mass murderers always have a steel drum they carry to the murder site to place in front of themselves to make extra magazines handy...rather than fiddle with bulky overcoat pockets.

Not to mention that statistically, this demonstration is nonsense...only two main samples (people) both of whom were trained.

Oh, and nice use of the "authority fallacy"--"people who aren't knowledgable...". Ok, everyone! Let's show our credentials before we post! :)
 
Honestly, i don't think that's a fair statement...
I'm trying to stay out of this and stick to being cute!!:muted: but I'll elaborate on my point.
I'm not talking increasing paranoia on regular citizens or whatever, I'm saying it's bull because that already exists.

To me it's absolutely fair given the harassment of people who are genuinely innocent already receive. People get harassed through airport security every time they go somewhere, for no reason other than they're mouthy. People already put up with a lot in the name of national security.

If this guy is guilty, and the FBI has been trailing him for years, and this many people died? Boohoo if a couple lose their jobs over it, if it'll save other lives one day. They already are hyper sensitive, and yet somehow...

I pointed out G4S for a reason. They're a company that does everything from local bank security, to private politician guards, oil and gas security, international logistics etc.. It's not about a guy who worked for mcdonalds and went crazy. It's about someone already under scrutiny by the FBI for several years, and working for a company that works closely with government agencies. Inexcusable.

If a bomb went off downtown in the trains in NY when there's bomb sniffing dogs and armed soldiers all over the place daily, wouldn't you also be pissed at the people working that day? Try and see what went wrong to somehow keep it from happening again? Of course, otherwise what is the point of it all? (not sure if it's still like that but I assume so. When I commuted around the city during WTC re-construction it looked like a war zone while you're just trying to get to your job. It has a psychological impact on the people for sure, but I'd like to think there's a functioning purpose to it beyond intimidation)
 
If this guy is guilty, and the FBI has been trailing him for years, and this many people died? Boohoo if a couple lose their jobs over it, if it'll save other lives one day. They already are hyper sensitive, and yet somehow...

The FBI was forced to close their investigation on him because he didn't break any laws and they don't have the money or manpower to keep active investigations open endlessly. They are also bound by the guidelines Obama's DOJ sets for them.

Good article here explaining it some more if interested: http://time.com/4368439/orlando-shooting-omar-mateen-fbi-investigation-dropped/

In terms of how he was legally able to purchase guns, the way I understand it is that people can be placed on the terrorist watch list merely for suspicious reasons, yet are still allowed to purchase firearms if they have not broken any laws. Congress is working on changing that to at least delay the sale of firearms until the person on the watchlist is further vetted.
 
I'm a gun-owner, but I also am a huge supporter of reformation towards our gun laws. Starting with something as simple as forcing all gun purchases to be registered.

However, stating seemingly-innocuous things like
evil black rifle
repeatedly will only force the people that you're trying to educate/convince/etc to balk further away and be even more resistant to listen to you. It's kinda condescending and makes them immediately get defensive.
 
It wasn't meant to be condescending, it was, however, an attempt to bring some levity to the issue. If people choose to remain ignorant on the subject because I refer to it as the evil black rifle, then so be it. Maybe I'll start calling it the Hello Kitty gun :)

hk15.jpg

Dems admitted the last Assualt Weapons Ban (AWB) was meant to be a stepping stone for further, more restrictive gun legislation but it failed miserably. The facts proved the previous AWB accomplished nothing and SCOTUS has since ruled in favor of our 2A rights, further cementing them.

Despite millions upon millions of AR15 type rifles flooding the U.S. market since the ban was lifted, homicide rates are at record lows.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-06-16/fbi-us-homicide-rate-51-year-low

FBI: US Homicide Rate At 51-Year Low

By Tyler Durden
Jun 16, 2016 6:30 PM
Submitted by Ryan McMaken via The Mises Institute, [2]

The US homicide rate in 2014, the most recent year available [3], was 4.5 per 100,000. The 2014 total follows a long downward trend and is the lowest homicide rate recorded since 1963 when the rate was 4.6 per 100,000. To find a lower homicide rate, we must travel back to 1957 when the total homicide rate hit 4.0 per 100,000.

Homicide rates were considerably higher in the United States during the 1970s, 80s, and 90s, but over the past 25 years, have fallen nearly continuously:

homicide_51yr.JPG
 
Yeah, mass murderers always have a steel drum they carry to the murder site to place in front of themselves to make extra magazines handy...rather than fiddle with bulky overcoat pockets.

Not to mention that statistically, this demonstration is nonsense...only two main samples (people) both of whom were trained.

Come on Nordling, you can do better than that.

The Virginia Tech shooter carried 19 extra mags in his backpack and fired 170 rounds from two pistols before killing himself. Shorts or pants with large cargo pockets are one option, not to mention vests, belts, and harnesses specifically designed for rapid reloads are available on Amazon FFS.

Nor is it rocket science to depress a button releasing the empty mag while simultaneously reaching for a new one in your cargo pocket, vest, or belt to reload with the other hand. A novice could learn to be semi-proficient in less than a day providing they have decent hand-eye coordination.
 
Come on Nordling, you can do better than that.

The Virginia Tech shooter carried 19 extra mags in his backpack and fired 170 rounds from two pistols before killing himself. Shorts or pants with large cargo pockets are one option, not to mention vests, belts, and harnesses specifically designed for rapid reloads are available on Amazon FFS.

Nor is it rocket science to depress a button releasing the empty mag while simultaneously reaching for a new one in your cargo pocket, vest, or belt to reload with the other hand. A novice could learn to be semi-proficient in less than a day providing they have decent hand-eye coordination.

Actually the woman in that timing video i posted wasn't an expert. But that part was glanced over evidently.
 
This seems like a good time to advertise Scot-E-vest! For the gadget lover or the murderous, Scot-E-vest has the pockets you'll need!
 
T'was in jest regarding big brother watching our Google searches... Methinks we really need a razz emoticon.
Ohhhhhh I thought my joke was just too obscure to be funny, which is still probably true for anyone who hasn't heard the ads. Lol
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bocefish
https://www.gapminder.org/tools/bub...per/_100000/_people&domainMin:0&domainMax:131

Here is an example of murder statistics around the world. I chose women murdered and food supply due to their impact on society. The size of the bubble is the murder rate.
The US has some pretty bad stats for places where you find enough food, but there are far worse places (Jamaica for instance). Play around with some of the other stats such as switching to total murder deaths for bubble size, or something like income per person, or suicide rates, and it gives a bit more perspective about where the US fits.

Run the animations and you will find that murders go up and down in many places, even those with low rates. I suspect we all get lax with protecting people from murder when things go well and can't always maintain a lower rate when it does fall. The late 80's/ early 90's seemed bad for murder in many places for some reason.
 
Freedom of speech.... I don't think violence, gore and things like that should be illegal, is like ignoring something that happen every day around the world, We can't just start banning horror movies, news, etc just because someone or a group of people don't like it.

Most (this is a very basic and shitty interpretation of facts, there's way more evidence, just lurk around) of the violence is a result of a shitty childhood, mental illnesses that develop over the years thanks to traumas (even physical dysfunction might be part and affected by it, there's violent people that are successfully rehabilitated), people keep forgetting killers are victims too, ethically humans are good intentioned, there's science behind that.

If we were to fix that, society must focus on improving education for parents, being able to pinpoint risk groups and have medical help there. Especially mental health services... That's my point of view, I did a one year research about violence when dating which used a model about the cycle of violence and was very involved with patients with mental illnesses.

There.

:)
 
Come on Nordling, you can do better than that.

The Virginia Tech shooter carried 19 extra mags in his backpack and fired 170 rounds from two pistols before killing himself. Shorts or pants with large cargo pockets are one option, not to mention vests, belts, and harnesses specifically designed for rapid reloads are available on Amazon FFS.

Nor is it rocket science to depress a button releasing the empty mag while simultaneously reaching for a new one in your cargo pocket, vest, or belt to reload with the other hand. A novice could learn to be semi-proficient in less than a day providing they have decent hand-eye coordination.
Oh, not totally disagreeing. Just saying the setup in the video was not a true simulation of the conditions at a mass murder scene. Yeah, someone can become more proficient, but I haven't seen any stories that talked about how "efficient" these scumbags are.
 
I realized recently how shockingly numb I am to the whole violent death thing. Someone was shot in front of my apartment building last week. My immediate reaction was two-fold:

Well, at least it wasn't another meth lab explosion!

Hmmm, only one attempted murder in the 2.5 years I've lived here? Not bad at all, that's pretty good.


I shouldn't react that way. I live in a state that gets laughed at when we mention that we do have actual gangs here (but for real, Iowa has Cryps, Bloods, and Latin Kings). We're perceived as safe and not remotely dangerous, which means that I should be a sheltered person who isn't used to violence. I should be horrified. I should be genuinely upset that this happened in my front yard. I should be worried about my safety. Instead, I shrug it off with a "meh, could be so much worse" and go on with my day.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nordling
Actually the woman in that timing video i posted wasn't an expert. But that part was glanced over evidently.
He didn't say she wasn't trained or an "expert," he compared her to the other shooter, and implied she wasn't nearly as proficient as him. Whatever her creds, she was no slouch. :)
 
As I live in Orlando and am a very strong supporter of the 2nd Amendment, I've spent way too much time and burned out too many friendships this last week to diatribe about gun rights and definitions. So I'm going to talk about vests and pouches.

As a few people in Iris's cam room know this past January I got into Airsoft. Because of that I've been spending a lot of time in the Army Surplus stores and on Amazon.

Depending on whether you want used or not, the most basic tactical vest, the Fighting Load Carrier, can be had for $25. A magazine pouch for two magazines is like $8. A pouch for three is $12-15. The triple pouch can be stacked on top of each other, 3-6-9, etc. and you can do that on both sides of that vest. For standard 30 round magazines that's, 90-180-270 rounds.

If you want body armor? Real body armor, my local Army/Navy will sell you a used one for starting at $400, perfectly legal, no background checks required, it's just kevlar, ceramics, or steel plates. And weighs about thirty pounds.

I do think some things can be done to aleve fears and address concerns. Registration of guns is a non-starter, banning semi-autos is a non-starter. Radically improving the background check system from the antiquated 1990's tech it currently runs on would be a major improvement. If you want everyone to do background checks, you're going to have to make the system portable, I should be able to run a check wherever I am 24/7 best effort. It should be low cost, I shouldn't have to go to a gun store and pay a dealer $100 for the privilege of doing all the hard work for him. It should be tied into every states' mental health, corrections, convictions, domestic abuse, and drug abuse databases: every database currently used to limit or deny a gun purchase should automatically update the master roll. It should be computerized/app enabled, I should be able to use my laptop or cell phone, like square or paypal. It should give you one of three responses, "Yes", "No", or "Hold". "No" and "Hold" should give you an error code and contact number for clarification of what the error is based on.

And most of all, it should be a background check, not a registration, just because I had a check done doesn't mean a sale happened. If you want to make sure people are legally allowed to purchase a gun, make the system that. A registration is b.s. and has always led to crack downs, confiscations, and calls for more gun control. FFS several years ago the registration list for all CCW holders in a northern state were maliciously released by a newspaper to embarrass the gun owners and frighten their neighbors. The Connecticut assault weapons database is a joke, so many guns turned up "missing" or "lost on a fishing trip"
 
  • Helpful!
Reactions: SaffronBurke
t should be tied into every states' mental health, corrections, convictions, domestic abuse, and drug abuse databases: every database currently used to limit or deny a gun purchase should automatically update the master roll. It should be computerized/app enabled, I should be able to use my laptop or cell phone, like square or paypal. It should give you one of three responses, "Yes", "No", or "Hold". "No" and "Hold" should give you an error code and contact number for clarification of what the error is based on.

Seems like a big privacy concern -- if you run my name and they say "sorry, Gen has mental health restrictions". It'd be tough to balance privacy with safety in that case. Just a yes or no might be better than disclosing the reason?
 
Seems like a big privacy concern -- if you run my name and they say "sorry, Gen has mental health restrictions". It'd be tough to balance privacy with safety in that case. Just a yes or no might be better than disclosing the reason?

The only way I could run your name is if I had your full name, DOB, SSN, and other identifiers already: and if I had those, I could do much worse than look your name up in a database.

Perhaps I explained it badly; we're not talking mundane mental illness like anorexia, bipolar, phobias, etc. We're talking somebody who has worried people enough to force them to go to court and have an adjudication placed against them forbidding them from having a gun, people with suicidal or homicidal ideation, paranoid schizophrenics with a bent toward violence, people subject to the term "a danger to themselves or others". But a court hearing would be important to have happen first.

The current telephone based system already gives three responses: yes, no, and hold. The hold is for a maximum three day wait for the FBI to do a more comprehensive search, and then give a yes or no (or a timed out yes). What I was suggesting is an error code for the person being told "hold or no", to investigate and correct potential errors in the database, to find out what they may have done to be denied.
 
And most of all, it should be a background check, not a registration,

I agree with this. A background check on the person is fine. But it doesn't need to be done every single time a gun is purchased.

When I lived in Minnesota they had a simple system that worked fine. If you were interested in buying a gun you would go to your county sheriff's office and have them do a background check on you. They take up to 3 days to do that and call you in when it's done. If you've passed they give you a card you could show to any gun dealer to buy a gun. It was good for one year before you had to have another check done. You could buy as many as you wanted during that year without bothering to do another check for each one at the gun shop.

Much less annoying that way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Entertainer33
Status
Not open for further replies.