the-pi-guy said:
"school shootings?" You're in a thread about a school shooting. Where is the confusion? |
Im here for deadly mass shootings.
A school guard gunning down a pervert who was about to fuck a kid in ass is a "school shooting".
My 3ds friendcode: 5413-0232-9676 (G-cyber)
SanAndreasX said:
If a mass murderer pulls a gun, it is already too late. |
Exactly too late.
Also a mass murderer isn't exactly going to become a mass murderer if there is no guns for him to use, so the statement is a moot point.
the-pi-guy said:
>Its the SECOND Amendment for godsake Amendments can be changed. The right to arms has limits that most people recognize. Felons for example have no such right. The government can make changes to amendments, and the supreme court has reinterpreted the constitution at different times and came to different conclusions about what the second amendment exactly means. Most importantly, very few countries ban guns outright. Some countries like Norway, Sweden, Canada own quite a few guns. Even Australia which supposedly banned guns still has quite a few guns. This is the problem with this country. We are so unwilling to bend even a little bit, to even acknowledge basic facts, that even basic, common sense regulations are as scare mongering as full gun bans. We can't even get basic universal background checks, we can't even get mental health funding, because of nonsense scaremongering. And again, a lot of these supposed gun free zones are not gun free zones. Many of them still have security guards and police officers that are carrying guns. |
Exactly these people hinge their argument on an outdated piece of paper that made sense at the time.
It was written at a time revolvers and rifles were the norm, not guns that fired 40 rounds in seconds. I am sure if we had high powered weapons back then, that would have been excluded as common sense says you don't need to fire like a lunatic spraying bullets to defend yourself.
And you are right countless changes have been made in America and by many countries to keep up with modern times, so this should really be no different.
No one is saying ban guns, just ban the semi automatics and create a licensing requirement. It is clear why people feel so strongly against it in the US, because they know most of them wouldn't be deemed responsible enough to own a gun.
You watched a cop lynch a Black man in broad daylight on camera. Now you’ve seen cops allow the murder of young children while they arrest the parents. You’ve seen enough to become an abolitionist. You’ve seen enough.
— Crystal Fleming is here but not here (@alwaystheself) May 27, 2022
| cyberninja45 said: Again wtf is "school shootings?", "rate of death per mass shooting"? (useless stat if lower likelihood of mass shootings. Did they have data on deterred mass shootings in this study?) Where is the study that came to the conclusion that that the more people legally armed in an area(zone)the more MASS shootings occurs AND more deadly(or just as deadly) the MASS shootings? |
I sincerely hope for your sake that this is sealioning.
Ryuu96 said:
What on Earth are you talking about. This thread is about a school shooting. |
Really? we really can't discuss the mass shooting aspect of it? Come on
My 3ds friendcode: 5413-0232-9676 (G-cyber)
cyberninja45 said:
Really? we really can't discuss the mass shooting aspect of it? Come on |
If we are talking about prevention, removing the "mass" is kind of the point. It would kind of be pointless to do an analysis of school shooting excluding the instances when the shooter is stopped if we are discussing whether certain methods work for preventing shootings. That invalidates the whole analysis.
And, if I may be so bold, where is all of your evidence proving your hypothesis? Why are the people who disagree with you the only ones tasked with providing studies to suit you?
Last edited by sundin13 - on 27 May 2022
sundin13 said:
If we are talking about prevention, removing the "mass" is kind of the point. It would kind of be pointless to do an analysis of school shooting excluding the instances when the shooter is stopped if we are discussing whether certain methods work for preventing shootings. That invalidates the whole analysis. |
What? Y'all replied to my post about mass shootings and gave those studies.
My 3ds friendcode: 5413-0232-9676 (G-cyber)
cyberninja45 said:
What? Y'all replied to my post about mass shootings and gave those studies. |
Yes.
And?
I honestly have no idea what you are trying to say at this point.
I'll just add this: Why don't you actually try to provide some evidence to support your hypothesis instead of just demanding everyone else do it for you?
sundin13 said:
If we are talking about prevention, removing the "mass" is kind of the point. It would kind of be pointless to do an analysis of school shooting excluding the instances when the shooter is stopped if we are discussing whether certain methods work for preventing shootings. That invalidates the whole analysis. And, if I may be so bold, where is all of your evidence proving your hypothesis? Why are the people who disagree with you the only ones tasked with providing studies to suit you? |
Its people in this thread who seem to claim that more guns means more masshootings or whatever, not me.
My 3ds friendcode: 5413-0232-9676 (G-cyber)
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2026 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
