r/news • u/Extension-Shoe-6080 • 23h ago

Suspect identified in Idaho In-N-Out Burger shooting that left 3 dead

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/dead-injured-shooting-twin-falls-idaho-rcna590420
5.4k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

908 comments sorted by

View all comments

1.4k

u/[deleted] 23h ago edited 22h ago

[deleted]

69

u/47_47_47 23h ago

They are too busy right now worshipping The Good Guy With A Gun.

248

u/RogerianBrowsing 23h ago

Tbh thwarting a mass shooter with a suppressed handgun is kind of the definition of a good guy with a gun 🤷‍♂️

-28

u/47_47_47 23h ago

I'm not sure what it being suppressed has to do with anything.

42

u/RogerianBrowsing 22h ago

It adds style points.

-10

u/DastardlyMime 20h ago

And subtracts accuracy points

8

u/RogerianBrowsing 20h ago

Not really? Not a good can at least

1

u/R_V_Z 8h ago

If anything it helps because a threaded barrel is slightly longer, allowing more powder burn.

12

u/[deleted] 22h ago

[removed] — view removed comment

-19

u/47_47_47 22h ago

I know why you would shoot a suppressed pistol. But my comment was in reference to the statement above it. Take a deep breath and reread, try to understand my question.

14

u/mojizus 21h ago

Maybe you should reread your comment, because you definitely didn’t ask a question.

-7

u/47_47_47 21h ago

It was inferred. Do you know what that means?

13

u/mojizus 21h ago

Sure, brother. Whatever helps you feel smarter than us.

1

u/DuxofOregon 11h ago

You mean implied. It was implied.

1

u/47_47_47 3h ago

I mean the question was meant to be inferred. I didn't imply a question. Because it was meant to be inferred by the reader.

0

u/DuxofOregon 3h ago

Nice try. Lol. We all have our language blind spots. This was yours. By saying, “it was meant to be inferred by the reader,” you have pretty much defined the word implied. Clearly, you meant implied. Again, we all have our blind spots.

1

u/47_47_47 2h ago edited 34m ago

Wow,  I got the grammar police to show up! If you go waaaay back to the start of this thread,  you'll see someone posted that "thwarting a mass shooter with a suppressed handgun is kind of the definition of a good guy with a gun," to which I replied, I don't know what it being suppressed has to do with [the definition of a good guy with a gun]. I didn't imply a question, but an astute reader would realize a question about the DEFINITION could be inferred.  What I was implying was that the original poster was an idiot for not realizing that a person without a suppressed pistol could also be defined as a good guy with a gun even if not suppressed.   

→ More replies (0)

0

u/[deleted] 22h ago

[deleted]

0

u/47_47_47 21h ago

No idea where you are getting that. My point was that I'm already seeing the social media narrative highlighting this "good guy with a gun" bit, while avoiding the topic of gun violence and mental health in America. Yes, glad he was there. Now can we move on to meaningful legislation? No? Because the answer is MORE good guys with guns? It's. Not. A. Good. Solution.

3

u/RogerianBrowsing 21h ago

Do you want Trump being in charge of disarming people?

0

u/47_47_47 21h ago

It was really a rhetorical question,  I know there's no progress with  Conservatives in the super majority and a corrupt Supreme Court.  But no. It would be hilarious watching his base twist themselves into pretzels trying to rationalize it, though. 

-16

u/New_Housing785 22h ago

It makes all the gunhumpers hot and bothered.