Politics

You are missing the point entirely. Look at every mass shooter in the last 30 years….. he intended to take out Trump and pretty positive he wasn’t going to stop shooting once he hit Trump. There is a huge difference between shooting animals and murdering people at random. This guy was intent on killing as many people as he could.
My follow up post better understands your point of view.
However I would counter there is a difference in assassination attempt (specific target) and mass shooting (indiscriminate targets). Since the guy is dead, we will never know his motives or intent fully, only be able to speculate. If it was supposed to be a goal of assassination, every round should be fired at Trump or into the SS who cover him. I did find and re-watch the video. Trump does not substantially move from his upright position during the initial 3 shots. There is then a pause before the next volley of 4-6 shots, which are likely the counterfire but possibly he fired a couple more times while being fired upon. I'd like to get a count on the brass/rounds fired by shooter to get a better sense of how it happened. The final shot, several seconds later, is presumably the coup de Gras on would-be assassin. All of this would indicate the shooter did miss 2/3 shots entirely and the 3rd grazed Trump's ear. Unfortunately for those in the line of fire behind Trump, all 3 of the shots connected on unintended targets. I'd also like to know the positions of where bystanders were when hit.

If it was a goal of mass shooting, with first shot at Trump then just go for body count, there is an odd stoppage to his firing. IF my above shot count and presumed order of fire is correct, he shot 3 rounds then stopped. Possibly he shot again in the secondary volley, perhaps it was all shots from counter sniper teams. Unless his gun jammed, he should have had time to get off at least 2 more rounds in the pause between shots you can hear in the video. All of these details, to me, say it was purely assassination attempt by a sub-par shooter (or with a case of buck fever) and not an intentional mass shooting.
 
Explosives could be for any number of things. IED's are specific explosive. Don't think he was smart enough to build or place an IED. As a side note there is usually enough products under the average household kitchen sink to build a explosive!
All of us who reload have explosives on hand...
 
Explosives could be for any number of things. IED's are specific explosive. Don't think he was smart enough to build or place an IED. As a side note there is usually enough products under the average household kitchen sink to build an explosive!
House of his parents the fbi found bomb making materials, aka: improvised explosive device, isn’t a “specific “ type of bomb, it’s a bomb made by Improvised materials…… yep all kinds of fun stuff to make bombs with, which he did……
 
My follow up post better understands your point of view.
However I would counter there is a difference in assassination attempt (specific target) and mass shooting (indiscriminate targets). Since the guy is dead, we will never know his motives or intent fully, only be able to speculate. If it was supposed to be a goal of assassination, every round should be fired at Trump or into the SS who cover him. I did find and re-watch the video. Trump does not substantially move from his upright position during the initial 3 shots. There is then a pause before the next volley of 4-6 shots, which are likely the counterfire but possibly he fired a couple more times while being fired upon. I'd like to get a count on the brass/rounds fired by shooter to get a better sense of how it happened. The final shot, several seconds later, is presumably the coup de Gras on would-be assassin. All of this would indicate the shooter did miss 2/3 shots entirely and the 3rd grazed Trump's ear. Unfortunately for those in the line of fire behind Trump, all 3 of the shots connected on unintended targets. I'd also like to know the positions of where bystanders were when hit.

If it was a goal of mass shooting, with first shot at Trump then just go for body count, there is an odd stoppage to his firing. IF my above shot count and presumed order of fire is correct, he shot 3 rounds then stopped. Possibly he shot again in the secondary volley, perhaps it was all shots from counter sniper teams. Unless his gun jammed, he should have had time to get off at least 2 more rounds in the pause between shots you can hear in the video. All of these details, to me, say it was purely assassination attempt by a sub-par shooter (or with a case of buck fever) and not an intentional mass shooting.
I think it was an intentional attempt at an assassination that morphed into a mass shooting. Either way, we will probably never know the truth.
 
Why are all of the arm chair quarterbacks coming out to presume the shooters motives? Obviously he wanted Trump dead. I haven’t met a registered Republican voter that has tried to kill the Republican nominee, but I digress.

Where is his cell phone records, social media/internet histories, family remarks, etc.? Disturbing that information wasn’t made immediately and fully available. This isn’t a trial. The perpetrator is dead. This is being silenced by either the media or the bureaucracy, but I repeat myself.

Do I believe the secret service just had one bad day? I rather doubt it. They should’ve had the same standard of protection for Trump and RFK as they do Biden. This wasn’t just a department being lazy, they were inept. Very similar to many other of the intelligence/federal law enforcement organizations. Unfortunately, this is the standard that is now defended by a shockingly high percentage of citizens.
 
Why so? It boils down to simple politics.
I understand why she did it, and honestly I cannot blame her, but I was hoping that she would make the improbable yet bold choice not to endorse. If Biden were not such a weak candidate, she would have had more room to do so.
 
Ridiculous - according to the Hickok45 channel, as of June 18th, no YT videos can have sponsorships from firearms or firearms-related companies; and any content creator who violates this will be at risk of having their channel taken down, and any individual videos violating this policy that were made prior to June 18th will still be taken down. YT was such a great platform, but has become progressively worse over many years due to Draconian content rules and Google's woke-ism run amok.

 
Ridiculous - according to the Hickok45 channel, as of June 18th, no YT videos can have sponsorships from firearms or firearms-related companies; and any content creator who violates this will be at risk of having their channel taken down, and any individual videos violating this policy that were made prior to June 18th will still be taken down. YT was such a great platform, but has become progressively worse over many years due to Draconian content rules and Google's woke-ism run amok.


Saw this earlier this afternoon.
Hickok45 was one of my favorite of the few YT channels I liked to watch. His videos are straight forward with only a hint of bias toward some of his favorite personally owned or preferred firearms. Always objective.
 
Saw this earlier this afternoon.
Hickok45 was one of my favorite of the few YT channels I liked to watch. His videos are straight forward with only a hint of bias toward some of his favorite personally owned or preferred firearms. Always objective.
TBH, I felt like he never really said much negative about any guns; however, I do not use YouTube very often.
 
Saw this earlier this afternoon.
Hickok45 was one of my favorite of the few YT channels I liked to watch. His videos are straight forward with only a hint of bias toward some of his favorite personally owned or preferred firearms. Always objective.
I've been an occasional watcher of his channel for several years, and passed by him twice on the exhibit floor at this year's DSC convention. He is one of the good ones.
 
TBH, I felt like he never really said much negative about any guns; however, I do not use YouTube very often.

Hickok45 would give his personal likes and dislikes about firearms but nothing derogatory why a person should or should not buy that particular firearm. Same for those companies that sponsored him.

IIIRC,he was comparing lever action rifles and he liked a certain Marlin or Winchester to a Henry but he couldn't deny the Henry was a good rifle as they are one of his sponsors.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
58,212
Messages
1,251,614
Members
103,452
Latest member
HelaineSha
 

 

 

Latest posts

Latest profile posts

Big areas means BIG ELAND BULLS!!
d5fd1546-d747-4625-b730-e8f35d4a4fed.jpeg
autofire wrote on LIMPOPO NORTH SAFARIS's profile.
Do you have any cull hunts available? 7 days, daily rate plus per animal price?
 
Top