unmagical

Do we actually know if he had a knife? Initial reporting was that the police knew he had a knife because he refused to take his hands out of his pockets. While he did threaten them, it was contingent upon them continuing to follow them. He did not actually attack them until after multiple officers attempted to tase him. Furthermore, so what if he had a knife? As far as we're aware, he's got a second amendment right to keep and bear arms. Being armed isn't an excuse to be killed by cops because you are generally explicitly allowed to be armed.

All in all:

• We don't know he's armed
• We don't know his intentions
• He didn't immediately attack anyone
• While he did threaten them he made no indication that he intended to follow through until he was attacked
• He continued to try to leave the situation until he was attacked
• The police attacked him first
• He didn't have a gun
• 4 people were shot by the police; ~~he was killed~~ (this seems to have been erroneously reported earlier. He is now reportedly in critical condition), an officer and 2 bystanders were wounded
• No one was stabbed

While that is textbook escalation, it really doesn't seem like they shot him cause he had a knife. They shot him (and 3 others) cause he didn't care about their authority and they couldn't let the guy that was already on the train go. And all that came about because he tried to skip a fare that costs around the same amount as the bullets fired.

There are 5 basic rules for guns:

• Treat every gun as if it were loaded.
• Always point your gun in a safe direction.
• Never point your gun at anything you don't intend to shoot.
• Keep your finger off the trigger until you're ready to shoot.
• Be sure of your target and what's beyond.

What I posted was a subset of the five then alluded to the full list.

After Israel bombed an UNRWA School, BTW. Since the headline went out of its way to obfuscate that.

Now watch as nearly half the voting population accepts this behavior.

There are VoIP options, sure, but not the actual phone bands.

Except the actual phone part.

It's way more than just trigger discipline. There's the traditional rules of course:

• Never point your gun at something you do not intend to kill
• Be sure of your target and what's beyond
• Trigger discipline

But there's also reasonable shit beyond the 5 basic rules:

• Don't willingly put yourself in a situation where use of a gun may be warranted.
• Property isn't worth killing over, especially in situations where you had to go out of your way to put yourself in perceived danger to protect it.
• Don't block in the person you are trying to convince to leave.
• People with guns commit more acts of violence than those who don't. Owning a gun is an irresponsible choice. There are more and there are less responsible gun owners, but owning a gun puts you and those around at a greater risk of violence. When all you have is a hammer ...

Oh s---, my gun just went off

Weird, I'd been told they don't do that.

Cause Trump is incapable of admitting fault. He wanted his supporters to kill his last VP because Pence recognized that America didn't want Trump.

Cool! Yet another way to have Google loop the same 20 songs tangentially related to the artist I searched for without actually playing the artist I searched for.

Ya want the truth? Lax gun laws led to public shootings as an easy way to gain notoriety. So many people took the school shooting route that they are now old hat. Want to get famous? Take out a prominent politician. What doesn't help is Republicans blocking every effort to control access to guns (even those the majority of Republicans want) and Trump's rhetoric stoking fear and normalizing violence.

If your goal is to dump as many mags as possible into a crowd then your aim and recoil don't matter that much.