-->
@Intelligence_06
Nice to know we are training police so hard for them to wait till a murderer runs out of bullets before taking action.
Tired Pro-Gun Talking Points
Posts
Total:
190
-->
@Double_R
The last statistic I saw on that was that the US accounts for 31% of the world’s mass shootings, despite accounting for 5% of the world’s population. I’d Google it but am not interested in a Google battle since there are countless sources with “studies” to affirm either position. What is definitive here is that this is not a problem anywhere else in the eyes of their own citizens. The rest of the world looks at us like we’re crazy, so that right there says it all. Or at least it should.
A worldwide comparison is useless for multiple reasons, the US has to be compared to other developed countries. The population difference is such that even if laws, culture and media environment made zero difference whatsoever an event (like random spree killings) that occurs four times a year in the US would only be expected to happen once every fifteen years in a country like New Zealand, Ireland, or Norway. To be clear, I would be absolutely stunned if the per-capita rate of spree killings wasn't higher in the US than other countries, but I'm just saying it's something that should be considered when thinking about this sort of thing
I never understood the opposition to an assault weapons. Of course we can cherry pick little things wrong with the bill, that’s a reason to amend it, not get rid of it.If guns are about self defense, no one needs an AR15. If guns are about sport, then I would love to see someone explain to the parents of the Uvalde victims that our love of sport is more important than their child’s life.
Nobody would ever say that to the parents, of course. But there are all kinds of tragedies that happen just because someone uses something they don't "need"...nobody "needs" a swimming pool, a motorcycle, a classic car with no seatbelts or airbags, sugary foods, cigarettes etc...and these things assuredly cause more suffering and death per year than "assault rifles" even among people who didn't choose to use them but were caught up accidentally. The opposition to an assault weapons ban is quite obvious, a lot of people like those guns and are perfectly capable of owning and using them responsibly. Virtually all owners of them in fact. There's a middle ground I think...obviously it is a problem when clear headcases who everyone knows are the type to do a mass shooting can just buy a high powered rifle and does exactly that, but you also have to admit that millions of people responsibly enjoy owning and using these guns. You may not enjoy them, I don't either, but I think the problem can be very mitigated through some minor roadblocks that still allow responsible people to own them
Also as ridiculous as it seems for modern couch potato Americans to take up arms against a future corrupt government it's also not an option I want to totally take off the table either.
Comparing assault rifles to candy bars and cars is ludicrous. One is a fucking sweet, the other is the basis for all infrastructure pretty much. An assault rifle mows down every living thing in your path. That's the Holy All of it.
Now you can count numbers all you like and take a "dispassionate" view of it, or whatever you'd like to call it, but there's some ugly shit that happens around the world. We had concentration camps, slavery, terrorism, Islam in general is a shitshow, Russia in Ukraine atm. But fucking hell if school shootings aren't way up on the list. It is gross. Car accidents and smoking aren't gross humanity, school shootings are. Obesity is a problem. Diabetes is a problem. Children hooked on sugar is a problem. These are problems. School shootings are disgusting. If you're not willing to throw the kitchen sink at fixing school shootings, you're a piece of shit tbh. Yes to all the other stuff. Kids shouldn't be obese af and diabetic at 12 years old. What's your point? Fix your shit.
I just don't get the religious folk like thett and Dr.Franklin about it tbh. You both got so many frankly obnoxious, useless opinions about all sorts of things, but this one right here is so easy. I mean, not obnoxious, not to be too harsh, but same shit, pointless. But this one really is so easy. Where's the dispassionate take on how much transgenderism hurts anyone? Sugar more, right? And porn is evil and corrupts the mind, but a nation armed to teeth, all ready to kill each other, that's fine. No it isn't. That's prisoner's dilemma shit. It's only perfectly reasonable that your kids are blowing each other away. America is a retard nation.
You'll have your teachers training in special needs and learning how to do positive reinforcement and whatever else teachers do. Pedagogy. Good, wholesome things. Then they'll go down to that other room for target practice with tiny little cut-out target children. Is that not the king of all corruption?
-->
@Greyparrot
Laws banning guns in one city does not work in a country where guns are readily available.So why create these dangerous gun free zones?
Do you understand the difference between a city and a country?
Do you think you can purchase a truckload of guns in Mexico and drive it into the US without issue?Of course, especially under the current President of law enforcement.
Ah ok, so you’re just being stupid, presumably because you have no valid response. Got it.
-->
@ILikePie5
You’re arguing for something that isn’t feasible
Which is what exactly?
nor is it in spirit of the Constitution
Please explain what “well regulated” means.
Your solution takes guns away from lawful citizens.
And our solution to drugs takes crack away from responsible crack doers. That’s how banning anything works.
Nearly every mass shooter was a law abiding citizen till they fired the first bullet. That is in fact the case with most gun homicides. This is a terrible reason to support the proliferation of a product literally designed to kill people.
And again, how are you going to regulate private sales of guns. We already saw what happened during Prohibition.
See post 39
-->
@Outplayz
I'm not a republican and i'm more so progressive.. i don't think this is absurd. Actually, if you think about it, there is one thing in the gun debate we haven't tried, the "good guy with a gun" hypothesis.
I’m not arguing that it wouldn’t be better in a mass shooting situation for the teachers to be armed, I’m arguing that to put this forward as the solution is absurd. This idea, along with the many other proposals that tend to be paired with it (armed police in every corner, one door entry/exit, etc) is essentially to turn our schools into military bases.
I call this absurd because it's kind of like seeing a wave of car accident deaths all involving speeding vehicles, and then putting forward as the solution; tire reform. I mean sure, better tires might make things a little better but clearly the problem is people speeding.
I talk about the way every other nation see's us because it really is amazing to take a step back and look at where we are when this is where our gravitate towards as the solution.
-->
@Double_R
Ah ok, so you’re just being stupid, presumably because you have no valid response. Got it.Do you understand the difference between a city and a country?
I do. Can you answer this question please?
So why create these dangerous gun free zones in a city?
Don't you think removing these dangerous gun-free zones would be a good idea until you can come up with a plan to ban all guns on the planet?
I’m arguing that to put this forward as the solution is absurd.
Not nearly as absurd as the insistence that gun-free zones are not inherently dangerous.
-->
@Double_R
Ah ok, so you’re just being stupid, presumably because you have no valid response. Got it.
-->
@badger
practice with tiny little cut-out target children. Is that not the king of all corruption?
As long as there is no dried semen on the cut out targets, I am ok with this.
Not nearly as absurd as the insistence that gun-free zones are not inherently dangerous.
-->
@ILikePie5
Everyone forgets Obama gave guns to the cartels.
Guns are bad, unless they are in the hands of a Ukrainian! 40 billion dollars worth.
-->
@Double_R
I’m not arguing that it wouldn’t be better in a mass shooting situation for the teachers to be armed, I’m arguing that to put this forward as the solution is absurd. This idea, along with the many other proposals that tend to be paired with it (armed police in every corner, one door entry/exit, etc) is essentially to turn our schools into military bases.
I understand your argument, but it feels a little the same from other arguments. Like ban AR's is like saying ban Honda's bc most accidents involve a Honda. Or background checks, etc. Although i think tightening these other laws up will help, i don't see any of them making a big impact. Quite literally having everyone armed is probably the one solution that would put the biggest dent into this problem. I mean, we've never done it so i'm not sure how it will play out... will bar fight deaths outweigh any other positive? I'm not sure, but i imagine people will be prosecuted the same for negligent deaths. I don't agree with turning schools into military posts, or more cops (seeing that they can be cowards and are) ... i don't see them as solutions with a great yield of effect. Just this one idea.. a fully armed populace. Just this if done right has the potential to be most effective. At least, how i'm imagining it. I could be wrong but like i am saying, we've never tried it. what else would have a great impact on these shootings? I truly can't think of any short of banning all/most guns. The one other plus of this solution is that it will be favored by the politically right.
I talk about the way every other nation see's us because it really is amazing to take a step back and look at where we are when this is where our gravitate towards as the solution.
It's def annoying, but we aren't other nations. We've opened up this can, and we have to find a solution to it.
-->
@thett3
But there are all kinds of tragedies that happen just because someone uses something they don't "need"...nobody "needs" a swimming pool, a motorcycle, a classic car with no seatbelts or airbags, sugary foods, cigarettes etc...
If guns only killed the person pulling the trigger then this would be a valid comparison, but it's the opposite. None of these can be used as a weapon of mass murder, except the classic car I guess but that's true of every car.
obviously it is a problem when clear headcases who everyone knows are the type to do a mass shooting can just buy a high powered rifle and does exactly that, but you also have to admit that millions of people responsibly enjoy owning and using these guns.
Of course, but that's not relavant. Banning anything means that those who were able to handle themselves responsibly also have to pay the price, but we don't let that stop us when there is a greater good to come out of it. This is exactly the problem with guns, we treat them differently than we treat anything else.
-->
@Greyparrot
So why create these dangerous gun free zones in a city?Don't you think removing these dangerous gun-free zones would be a good idea until you can come up with a plan to ban all guns on the planet?
For the same reason the NRA bans guns from it's own convention; removing guns removes the possibility of someone shooting the place up. This is basic common sense.
Outlawing guns while having no controls in place to stop guns from coming in is worthless, especially the the neighboring county is swimming in them. Cities cannot stop guns from crossing it's borders, only countries can do that.
Do you understand this point? Yes or No?
Still, I support at least some measures because it's about more then just stopping mass shootings. If you have to risk jail time to carry a gun you are going to be less likely to carry a gun, making it less likely that you would end up using it. This idea that criminals don't follow our laws is an absurd argument, the world is not so cartoonishly simple. Everything is about risk vs reward.
-->
@Double_R
If guns only killed the person pulling the trigger then this would be a valid comparison, but it's the opposite.
62% of U.S. gun deaths are suicides [**]
Outlawing guns while having no controls in place to stop guns from coming in is worthless.
How do you know this? We have never tried universally permitted conceal carry laws in the country yet. Maybe the NRA is wrong about universal concealed carry?
Can you accept the fact that the NRA could be wrong?
-->
@TheMorningsStar
it's consensus science that where there's more guns, or more people have them, that there's more murders than places that dont have guns. it's basically. irrefutable that non-gun murders are in line with the rest of the world, but gun murders are wildly out of whack. if this was a bad person problem, not a gun problem, then non-gun murders would be out of whack too. dont need scientific study for this though, this is such common sense, and it's obvious that you are just regurgitating stupid gun nut talking points, that there is something obviously wrong with your critical thinking skills.
gun control won't stop mass shootings, as people can just regular guns, or a few of them, and go on a rampage. but it might help some. if it's too hard to get a gun (fewer guns, more restrictions), people are more likely to give up. that helps a little.
gun control is mostly about lessening the amount of times someone gets mad and happens to have a gun when they do, less about mass schooting. i saw two strangers kill each other in road rage before, which obviously wouldn't have happened if they didn't have guns.
or, like sandy hook, if they dont have assault rifles, they won't be able to shoot hundreds of spray shots with such ease in a few minutes. obviously, the benefit greatly outweighs the cost of confiscating assault rifles, given they're almost never needed for self defense.
if you tell someone they can't have a gun, not everyone who is denied will run out and get one. if they dont have a gun when they are mad, they are less likely to kill someone than if they had a knife or other weapon. it might be possible to 3d print guns, but not everyone who is denied a gun is willing to go to that level of desperation.
this is all common sense. u need to work on your critical thinking and drop the propaganda.
-->
@n8nrgim
it's consensus science that where there's more guns, or more people have them, that there's more murders than places that don't have guns
Wrong, most mass shootings take place where concealed carry is outlawed.
this is all common sense
So it's common sense to be wrong about the science of concealed carry policies? No wonder America has problems.
here's a load of science that shows the consensus in science is against the gun nuts.
-->
@Greyparrot
look at the link in my last post. ive tried before, i'm not gonna keep trying to educate someone who refuses to be educated.
-->
@Greyparrot
so do you honestly think criminals research whether their target area has concealed carry or not? if they dont research the point, they're gonna do the shooting regardless of that law.
do you seriously think considering how rare people have concealed carry and how rare mass shootings are, that a hero will be able to emerge than if concealed carry didn't exist? it's good for guns to be in circulation for self defense, to help stop those situations, but that dont mean concealed carry is necessary.
you're making a leap in logic here in many ways
-->
@n8nrgim
I read your source. It says we never had universal concealed carry laws. That is common sense.
What is not common sense is the removal of the gun-free zones in a nation where almost all the mass shootings occur. 94% according to science.
We have never tried that before so we have no idea if it will work or not.
Are you willing to accept that the founding fathers may have been wrong?
-->
@n8nrgim
how rare people have concealed carry and how rare mass shootings are, that a hero will be able to emerge than if concealed carry didn't exist?
It's not nearly as rare as you think if you don't get your science from the media.
-->
@n8nrgim
do you honestly think criminals research whether their target area has concealed carry or not?
How else do you explain the 94% statistic? None of the inner schools in high crime areas saturated with illegal guns seem to be targeted for mass shootings. There is a common sense reason for that.
-->
@Greyparrot
as usual, you are getting hung up on irrelevant side points. maybe concealed carry isn't that uncommon, but that doesn't have anything to do with whether that law makes a difference in mass shootings.
-->
@Greyparrot
i'm willing to examine your source on that. the 94% point.
-->
@n8nrgim
as usual, you are getting hung up on irrelevant side points.
How is a 94% occurrence of mass shootings in gun-free zones an irrelevant side point?
i do know, most schools are gun free zones, so just because most mass shootings happen in gun free zones doesn't mean they are targeted for that reason. u need to show the proportion of gun free zones versus the rate they are targeted.