Texas church shooting leaves at least 26 dead

[~WastelandSociety~]

Good thing there was a good guy with a gun to stop him.

 

[bajram]

Yo, America's a ****ing shithole my dudes.

 

[Lightbringer]

Good thing there was a good guy with a gun to stop him.

Bad thing there was a guy who managed to buy a gun and shoot up a church.

 

[Legendary Saiyan]

Recently the shooter is confirmed a militant atheist according to NY times. Now this is quite interesting.

 

[Fountain]

Bad thing there was a guy who managed to buy a gun and shoot up a church.

Good thing there was a good guy with a gun to stop him.

 

[Lightbringer]

Good thing there was a good guy with a gun to stop him.

Except he didn't. Don't know why you're saying he did when the shooter took his own life after killing 26 people.

No one stopped him. That's just fake news.

 

[Fountain]

Except he didn't. Don't know why you're saying he did when the shooter took his own life after killing 26 people.

No one stopped him. That's just fake news.

Fake news lmao. You mean like 90% of the news that come out of your favorite media outlets? Did you consider that that if the killer didn't get shot at (wich he did)* and chased he might've gotten away? And assuming he did took his own life, he more than likely wouldn't have? Why did he wore a bullet vest and tried to run away if he was going to take his life away anyway. Stop making excuses.

Excuse me for writing "fact" in the same sentence of "if the killer didn't get shot", that was a failboard and i corrected it. I'm kind of retarded like that sometimes >.>

 

[Lightbringer]

Fake news lmao. You mean like 90% of the news that come out of your favorite media outlets? Did you consider that fact that if the killer didn't get shot at and chased he might've gotten away? And assuming he did took his own life, he more than likely wouldn't have? Why did he wore a bullet vest and tried to run away if he was going to take his life away anyway. Stop making excuses.

We've been over this before. What media outlets and what fake news specifically have I spread? Please, provide me some evidence of this. I may have opinions you disagree with, but the stories I post are always verified.

Once again, what exactly did this hero gunslinger prevent? He didn't stop the shooter from killing 26 people nor did he stop the shooter himself.

There is nothing to assume about this killer's death. He shot himself as post-mortem reports show.

The only thing you're presenting me with is a hypothetical. You're the only one making excuses.

 

[Fountain]

We've been over this before. What media outlets and what fake news specifically have I spread? Please, provide me some evidence of this. I may have opinions you disagree with, but the stories I post are always verified.

Because being verified clearly changes everything.

Once again, what exactly did this hero gunslinger prevent? He didn't stop the shooter from killing 26 people nor did he stop the shooter himself.

More deaths possibly. And (or) the shooter getting away.

There is nothing to assume about this killers death.

Okay, let's not assume anything about the killer then at all. That he killed 26, that someone else shot him, that he tried to run away, that he killed himself for some reason. That's it, we're done. There's nothing to assume.

He shot himself as post-mortem reports show.

"As post-mortem reports show"

The only thing you're presenting me with is a hypothetical. You're the only one making excuses.

That's ironic, now you try to switch it around and say I'M the one making excuses, while also making another excuse in the same sentence. If you're going to try and deflect what i'm saying by calling it "hypothetical" then i guess i have no reason to give you any kind of credibility either do i? What makes what you're saying any different. I could just as easily call it hypothetical using the same logic and we wouldn't come to any conclusion because in the end none of us were there and this is all information coming from the internet and the media.

 

[Lightbringer]

Because being verified clearly changes everything.

Yeah, because it being verified means it's true. What fake stories have I been posting? You still haven't explained this to me.

More deaths possibly. And (or) the shooter getting away.

You can't verify that. 26 People were already killed.

Okay, let's not assume anything about the killer then at all. That he killed 26, that someone else shot him, that he tried to run away, that he killed himself for some reason. That's it, we're done. There's nothing to assume.

Do you know what an assumption is?

What you've just listed aren't assumptions; those are facts. There is a big difference.

"As post-mortem reports show"

A post-mortem report is a medical examination of a body....

He had a gun hole in his head from his own firearm.

What exactly are you disputing?

That's ironic, now you try to switch it around and say I'M the one making excuses, while also making another excuse in the same sentence. If you're going to try and deflect what i'm saying by calling it "hypothetical" then i guess i have no reason to give you any kind of credibility either do i? What makes what you're saying any different. I could just as easily call it hypothetical using the same logic and we wouldn't come to any conclusion because in the end none of us were there and this is all information coming from the internet and the media.

I'm calling it hypothetical because it is hypothetical. You're presenting me an argument that didn't happen and you're assuming what would have happened. That's a hypothetical scenario.

I didn't present a hypothetical; I gave you the facts of what happened:

• The killer legally obtained multiple firearms when he shouldn't have been able to due to a variety of reasons, such as being dishonorably discharged from the Air-force.
  
  
• He killed 26 people and no one stopped him from doing so.
  
  
• He killed himself.

 

[Fountain]

Yeah, because it being verified means it's true. What fake stories have I been posting? You still haven't explained this to me.

Not surprised you would say that of all people. Yes, being verified obviously means is 100% true. It changes absolutely everything.

Do you know what an assumption is?

That's what i'd like to ask you.

What you've just listed aren't assumptions; those are facts. There is a big difference.

They are facts... Okay, so why do you keep making excuses for the man who shot the killer?

A post-mortem report is a medical examination of a body....

He had a gun hole in his head from his own firearm.

Okay, so he killed himself. It's confirmed. Your point?

What exactly are you disputing?

What are YOU disputing? Are you that dense over the idea that it's possible to stop a criminal with a gun because you're so anti gun? Cause that's the only thing i'm gathering from from all of this.

I'm calling it hypothetical because it is hypothetical. You're presenting me an argument that didn't happen and you're assuming what would have happened. That's a hypothetical scenario.

You should be thankful that i'm not like you, otherwise i would've stopped talking to you at this point.

I didn't present a hypothetical; I gave you the facts of what happened:

• The killer legally obtained multiple firearms when he shouldn't have been able to due to a variety of reasons, such as being dishonorably discharged from the Air-force.
  
  
• He killed 26 people and no one stopped him from doing so.
  
  
• He killed himself.

Where is the fact that a guy saw what happened and had enough time to grab his rifle and shoot at him?

Or the fact that he was well armed and tried to get away?

Or the fact that he was being chased down and crashed?

That's what i thought. Just stop with the excuses dude. I get it that you're anti gun and the idea of a good guy stopping a bad guy with them is preposterous. That's the whole reason we're even arguing right now, cause you can't accept that and you're so dense that you're willing to go to these lengths.

 

[Lightbringer]

Not surprised you would say that of all people. Yes, being verified obviously means is 100% true. It changes absolutely everything.

So again, what fake stories have I been making threads about? You said 90% of them were fake.

That's what i'd like to ask you.

You just confused the definitions between facts and assumptions in your last comment. Are you really going to try to play it off now? It's literally for all to see.

They are facts... Okay, so why do you keep making excuses for the man who shot the killer?

I didn't make excuses, I just said he didn't stop him, which is true.

You were the one claiming that he did as an attempt to argue that more guns means more good people with guns that can stop bad people with guns.

Okay, so he killed himself. It's confirmed. Your point?

You didn't know who stopped the shooter as evidenced in your comment, which started this whole debate about fake news.

Spoiler

And assuming he did took his own life, he more than likely wouldn't have? Why did he wore a bullet vest and tried to run away if he was going to take his life away anyway. Stop making excuses.

What are YOU disputing? Are you that dense over the idea that it's possible to stop a criminal with a gun because you're so anti gun? Cause that's the only thing i'm gathering from from all of this.

My dispute was the fact that your account of what happened was wrong and I corrected you.

As for guns, well obviously that is not the case and we see that more guns only equate to more gun deaths. You're giving more people access to deadly weaponry which they use for mass shootings. How many more shootings will it take for you to realize that you can't fight fire with fire?

You should be thankful that i'm not like you, otherwise i would've stopped talking to you at this point.

I have no idea what you mean? Have I stopped talking to you?

Where is the fact that a guy saw what happened and had enough time to grab his rifle and shoot at him?

Ok, and what did that prevent as you previously stated? If you say more deaths, well then that's just an assumption. He already shot up the church.

Or the fact that he was well armed and tried to get away?

Or the fact that he was being chased down and crashed?

Which all took place after he killed 26 people. He was willing to take his own life; do you really think he was afraid to die?

He shot up a church in broad daylight; I'm pretty sure he already knew he wasn't getting away.

That's what i thought. Just stop with the excuses dude. I get it that you're anti gun and the idea of a good guy stopping a bad guy with them is preposterous. That's the whole reason we're even arguing right now, cause you can't accept that and you're so dense that you're willing to go to these lengths.

Seriously? You're the one making the excuse here.

Let me lay it out for you.

You're defending guns because this man was chased down a guy after he shot up a church and killed 26 people with a legally bought gun which he shouldn't have been able to obtain in the first place.

You find that aspect of the story more important than the fact that the killer shouldn't have been able to obtain a gun in the first place due to his record, yet he passed two separate background checks.

If this killer wasn't able to obtain those firearms, which he shouldn't of in the first place because of the dishonorable discharge, then the whole shooting could potentially have been avoided.

That is my point and yet you can't see that.

I honestly don't understand how you can delude yourself into believing that more guns means less violence. It's clearly not true.

We've had more firearm deaths since 1968 in the U.S. than all U.S. wars combined! That is an astonishing statistic.

The U.S. has the second highest amount of mass shootings in the world!

Gun violence increases almost every year.

And you're trying to argue that guns are not the problem? What exactly is there to even convince you?

 

[Fountain]

So again, what fake stories have I been making threads about? You said 90% of them were fake.

I was referring to your preferred sources of information. They aren't the most reliable, but whatever, you do you.

You just confused the definitions between facts and assumptions in your last comment. Are you really going to try to play it off now? It's literally for all to see.

Clueless uh. Yeah, i confused the definitions between facts and assumptions, that's what happened. Let's leave it all at that.

I didn't make excuses, I just said he didn't stop him, which is true.

How do you know the killer would've shot himself if he didn't get shot and chased?

You were the one claiming that he did as an attempt to argue that more guns means more good people with guns that can stop bad people with guns.

Right. Um, no. All i did was copy paste what someone else said, that thankfully there was another person with a gun to shoot him. Then you started making excuses because once again, you can't accept the idea of a good person stopping a bad person with a gun. It is simply impossible in your eyes.

You didn't know who stopped the shooter as evidenced in your comment, which started this whole debate about fake news.

What are you even talking about anymore. I said "assuming" because i wasn't there and i'm not a medic.

My dispute was the fact that your account of what happened was wrong and I corrected you.

You can't even correct yourself - _ -

As for guns, well obviously that is not the case and we see that more guns only equate to more gun deaths. You're giving more people access to deadly weaponry which they use for mass shootings. How many more shootings will it take for you to realize that you can't fight fire with fire?

And here goes your inevitable preachings about more guns more deaths we need gun control. It was only a matter of time. Like i said this is what is all about isn't it. This is why you're trying to dismiss and avoid everything about the man who shot the killer and act as if none of it mattered because the killer shot himself.

I have no idea what you mean? Have I stopped talking to you?

No you don't. You have no idea, at least that's what i hope. I'd hate it if you were just being ignorant for the sake of hammering down your ridiculous gun control ideals but that's what it looks like.

Ok, and what did that prevent as you previously stated? If you say more deaths, well then that's just an assumption. He already shot up the church.

Yeah, he shot up a church. What makes you think it isn't possible that more people could've died?

Oh, b b but assumption. Oh shut up dude. You're ridiculous. Seriously.

Which all took place after he killed 26 people. He was willing to take his own life; do you really think he was afraid to die?

Okay, so now it's that he was willing to take his own life. So tell me, why was he wearing a bulletproof vest and tried to get away?

He shot up a church in broad daylight; I'm pretty sure he already knew he wasn't getting away.

Do i have to repeat the same question?

Seriously? You're the one making the excuse here.

Of course. Typical. When someone is accused of something they always try to flip it on the other person. If you have a legitimate argument for me using excuses go ahead.

Let me lay it out for you.

You're defending guns because this man was chased down a guy after he shot up a church and killed 26 people with a legally bought gun which he shouldn't have been able to obtain in the first place.

I'm not defending guns, even though i would. I'm just using common sense here. Unlike you i can accept the possibility for man with a rifle to stop a psycho. That is all. But you're making a fuss acting like a pro anti guns and can't accept it. You're acting like the entire concept of guns being used for good is out of realm of possibilities and guns are inherently evil and the main problem in a country in wich you don't even live in.

You find that aspect of the story more important than the fact that the killer shouldn't have been able to obtain a gun in the first place due to his record, yet he passed two separate background checks.

If this killer wasn't able to obtain those firearms, which he shouldn't of in the first place because of the dishonorable discharge, then the whole shooting could potentially have been avoided.

Okay?

 

[Chikombo]

Good thing there was a good guy with a gun to stop him.

The police, yes, not a civilian.

Not surprised you would say that of all people. Yes, being verified obviously means is 100% true. It changes absolutely everything.



That's what i'd like to ask you.



They are facts... Okay, so why do you keep making excuses for the man who shot the killer?



Okay, so he killed himself. It's confirmed. Your point?



What are YOU disputing? Are you that dense over the idea that it's possible to stop a criminal with a gun because you're so anti gun? Cause that's the only thing i'm gathering from from all of this.



You should be thankful that i'm not like you, otherwise i would've stopped talking to you at this point.



Where is the fact that a guy saw what happened and had enough time to grab his rifle and shoot at him?

Or the fact that he was well armed and tried to get away?

Or the fact that he was being chased down and crashed?

That's what i thought. Just stop with the excuses dude. I get it that you're anti gun and the idea of a good guy stopping a bad guy with them is preposterous. That's the whole reason we're even arguing right now, cause you can't accept that and you're so dense that you're willing to go to these lengths.

So again, what fake stories have I been making threads about? You said 90% of them were fake.





You just confused the definitions between facts and assumptions in your last comment. Are you really going to try to play it off now? It's literally for all to see.





I didn't make excuses, I just said he didn't stop him, which is true.

You were the one claiming that he did as an attempt to argue that more guns means more good people with guns that can stop bad people with guns.





You didn't know who stopped the shooter as evidenced in your comment, which started this whole debate about fake news.






My dispute was the fact that your account of what happened was wrong and I corrected you.

As for guns, well obviously that is not the case and we see that more guns only equate to more gun deaths. You're giving more people access to deadly weaponry which they use for mass shootings. How many more shootings will it take for you to realize that you can't fight fire with fire?




I have no idea what you mean? Have I stopped talking to you?




Ok, and what did that prevent as you previously stated? If you say more deaths, well then that's just an assumption. He already shot up the church.






Which all took place after he killed 26 people. He was willing to take his own life; do you really think he was afraid to die?

He shot up a church in broad daylight; I'm pretty sure he already knew he wasn't getting away.




Seriously? You're the one making the excuse here.

Let me lay it out for you.

You're defending guns because this man was chased down a guy after he shot up a church and killed 26 people with a legally bought gun which he shouldn't have been able to obtain in the first place.

You find that aspect of the story more important than the fact that the killer shouldn't have been able to obtain a gun in the first place due to his record, yet he passed two separate background checks.

If this killer wasn't able to obtain those firearms, which he shouldn't of in the first place because of the dishonorable discharge, then the whole shooting could potentially have been avoided.

That is my point and yet you can't see that.

I honestly don't understand how you can delude yourself into believing that more guns means less violence. It's clearly not true.

We've had more firearm deaths since 1968 in the U.S. than all U.S. wars combined! That is an astonishing statistic.

The U.S. has the second highest amount of mass shootings in the world!

Gun violence increases almost every year.

And you're trying to argue that guns are not the problem? What exactly is there to even convince you?

I was referring to your preferred sources of information. They aren't the most reliable, but whatever, you do you.



Clueless uh. Yeah, i confused the definitions between facts and assumptions, that's what happened. Let's leave it all at that.



How do you know the killer would've shot himself if he didn't get shot and chased?



Right. Um, no. All i did was copy paste what someone else said, that thankfully there was another person with a gun to shoot him. Then you started making excuses because once again, you can't accept the idea of a good person stopping a bad person with a gun. It is simply impossible in your eyes.



What are you even talking about anymore. I said "assuming" because i wasn't there and i'm not a medic.



You can't even correct yourself - _ -



And here goes your inevitable preachings about more guns more deaths we need gun control. It was only a matter of time. Like i said this is what is all about isn't it. This is why you're trying to dismiss and avoid everything about the man who shot the killer and act as if none of it mattered because the killer shot himself.



No you don't. You have no idea, at least that's what i hope. I'd hate it if you were just being ignorant for the sake of hammering down your ridiculous gun control ideals but that's what it looks like.



Yeah, he shot up a church. What makes you think it isn't possible that more people could've died?

Oh, b b but assumption. Oh shut up dude. You're ridiculous. Seriously.



Okay, so now it's that he was willing to take his own life. So tell me, why was he wearing a bulletproof vest and tried to get away?



Do i have to repeat the same question?



Of course. Typical. When someone is accused of something they always try to flip it on the other person. If you have a legitimate argument for me using excuses go ahead.



I'm not defending guns, even though i would. I'm just using common sense here. Unlike you i can accept the possibility for man with a rifle to stop a psycho. That is all. But you're making a fuss acting like a pro anti guns and can't accept it. You're acting like the entire concept of guns being used for good is out of realm of possibilities and guns are inherently evil and the main problem in a country in wich you don't even live in.



Okay?

Christ...

 

[Fountain]

The police, yes, not a civilian.

Lol

Christ...

I know right. That's Lightbringer for you.

 

[Lightbringer]

Lol



I know right. That's Lightbringer for you.

Yeah, little old me who's just listing the facts of the story and statistics on gun deaths.

But apparently I was just making excuses and you were not, even though you were creating hypothetical scenarios that didn't happen based on an assumption of what would happen.

 

[Multiply]

I know right. That's Lightbringer for you.

You're getting washed in this debate and that's all you had to say? Just pretend like you didn't post here and stay off the base for a few days dog. Everyone will forget by then.

 

[Fountain]

Yeah, little old me who's just listing the facts of the story and statistics on gun deaths.

But apparently I was just making excuses and you were not, even though you were creating hypothetical scenarios that didn't happen based on an assumption of what would happen.

Hey, you're back again with your excuses. You just have to win no matter what don't you? Why don't you scroll back up and reply to everything i said.

 

[Lightbringer]

Hey, you're back again with your excuses. You just have to win no matter what don't you? Why don't you scroll back up and reply to everything i said.

You're the one who attacked me and assumed the commenter sided with you. It's uncalled for considering I showed you respect when you haven't.

So I didn't list facts of what happened and didn't list gun statistics? Please answer this.

What's the point? Nothing I say will matter to you.

 

[Fountain]

You're the one who attacked me and assumed the commenter sided with you. It's uncalled for considering I showed you respect when you haven't.

Oh and now you're gonna try and act like the victim, perfect. Typical.

Except he didn't. Don't know why you're saying he did when the shooter took his own life after killing 26 people.

No one stopped him. That's just fake news.

As you can see, you're the one who started this pointless debate. Because once again, for the 100th time (And this is an expression by the way, not literally the 100th time, hopefully you understand what that means. Pointing it out before you start with your childish assumption this assumption that) you are incapable to processing the idea of a man using his gun to stop a bad guy. If you knew better, you wouldn't be repeatedly making excuses for everything and avoiding questions like why was he wearing a bulletproof vest and tried to get away if according to YOUR own hypothesis he knew he was going to die.

So I didn't list facts of what happened and didn't list gun statistics? Please answer this.

You did bring some gun statistics, wich i don't know what they have to do with anything relevant to what we were originally talking about, wich was the shooter. If anything it's just you further pushing your ideal of look at the guns statistics, they kill people, guns bad, lots of guns over there in america. Kindergarten stuff. If you wanted to have a debate about guns you should've said so.

What's the point? Nothing I say will matter to you.

As if anything i say matters to you. Yet here i am like a moron still trying to reason with you.