Cashier in Atlanta shop fatally shot after argument over face masks

So stupid! To kill somebody over a friggin' face mask.

“Tucker walked directly back to the cashier, pulled out a handgun and shot her,” the Georgia Bureau of Investigation wrote in the news release.

It's becoming increasingly clear that more and more idiots are arming themselves.

And no surprise that the NRA takes advantage of these idiots , take their money ,spent it on themselves, their wives and mistresses and still the idiots keep giving.

Thankfully he was armed.

Too bad the suspect was. If only there was a way to figure out why in other countries, where guns are banned, no-one walks up to cashiers and shoots them, while in America, where guns are not banned, they do. We know it's not because access to guns are the problem - despite the reams of evidence that say that it is - because the gun lobby servants of the NRA say it isn't.

All the thoughts and prayers don't seem to be working. Maybe God just doesn't listen to American prayers.

It's not too difficult to figure out. As you wrote, guns are banned in those countries. Guns are not banned in America.

Oh, so guns are the reason for gun violence! Cool. I had been assured by Republicans for year that guns weren't the cause for gun violence, but now I understand that they are.

So let's ban guns to stop gun violence. Simple as can be.

That is your conclusion not mine.

You said that the reason for the level of gun violence in America, as opposed to other countries, is because guns are banned in other countries, but not in the US. I can remind you of what you wrote:

It's not too difficult to figure out. As you wrote, guns are banned in those countries. Guns are not banned in America.

This leads to one, and only one, variable: the legal status of guns. Where guns are banned, gun violence is extremely rare. When they are not, it is common. Therefore, to get rid of gun violence, ban guns. There is no other conclusion that can be drawn from what you wrote.

I always thought gun violence is perpetrated by the person pulling the trigger.

Pulling the trigger of what?

How about banning violence, That is simpler.

Violence is banned. If you are violent, you run the very real risk of being arrested and jailed.

And let people keep guns.

Not if you want to end gun violence. I've already used your statement ti prove this isn't possible. Thanks again for the help, by the way.

A reserve deputy, who was employed part-time for security with the store, exchanged fire with the suspect and both were wounded, 

Thankfully he was armed.

A reserve deputy, who was employed part-time for security with the store, exchanged fire with the suspect and both were wounded, 

With the continued defunding and early retirement of law enforcement, gun sales and firearm training facilities will hit full capacity.

Express sisterToday  01:09 pm JST

Too bad the suspect was. If only there was a way to figure out why in other countries, where guns are banned, no-one walks up to cashiers and shoots them,

It's not too difficult to figure out. As you wrote, guns are banned in those countries. Guns are not banned in America.

Maddox said the deputy’s response might have kept other people from being hurt.

So here, it was a good thing the deputy was armed.

Express sisterToday  01:17 pm JST

It's not too difficult to figure out. As you wrote, guns are banned in those countries. Guns are not banned in America.

Oh, so guns are the reason for gun violence! Cool. I had been assured by Republicans for year that guns weren't the cause for gun violence, but now I understand that they are.

That is your conclusion not mine. I always thought gun violence is perpetrated by the person pulling the trigger.

Express sisterToday  01:17 pm JST

So let's ban guns to stop gun violence. Simple as can be.

How about banning violence, That is simpler. And let people keep guns.

Express sisterToday  01:32 pm JST

That is your conclusion not mine. 

You said that the reason for the level of gun violence in America, as opposed to other countries, is because guns are banned in other countries, but not in the US. I can remind you of what you wrote:

Why would I need a reminder of what I wrote? If there are no guns, then no violent people can use the guns for violence. If there are guns, which there are in the US, need I remind you, then violent people can use those to commit violent crimes. They can also use knives to commit violent crimes. You want to ban knives? If there were no violent actors, then guns, knives, bazookas, will not be used by violent petiole to commit violent acts.

> This leads to one, and only one, variable: the legal status of guns. Where guns are banned, gun violence is extremely rare. When they are not, it is common. Therefore, to get rid of gun violence, ban guns. There is no other conclusion that can be drawn from what you wrote.

The other conclusion that can be drawn from what I wrote is if there is no violence, then there will be no violent acts committed with guns.

Violence is banned. If you are violent, you run the very real risk of being arrested and jailed.

So you just made the argument that banning violent people isn't possible, and as a result there will the violent acts using guns, knives, bazookas or whatever.

Not if you want to end gun violence. I've already used your statement ti prove this isn't possible. Thanks again for the help, by the way.

You are right--using your statements, you can't end violence. And so violent acts will continue.

Thank you for your help by the way.