Welcome Guest Search | Active Topics | Members | Log In | Register

Over 100 Shooting Deaths (U.S.) and counting Since Sandy Hook. Updated to 12/21/2012 @7 pm EST Options · View
Buz
Posted: Sunday, December 23, 2012 11:15:03 PM

Rank: The Linebacker

Joined: 3/2/2011
Posts: 5,700
Location: Atlanta, United States
Redneck. That is just another racist word. All the name calling is so intelligent.

keoloke
Posted: Sunday, December 23, 2012 11:22:13 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/12/2010
Posts: 599
Location: United States
Buz wrote:
No one ever has their mind changed by what is posted in this damn Tank, the constant bickering, insults and fighting really just deepens each individual's own point of views and causes permanent bitterness.


You're right Buz, but we exchange thoughts. Everyone depending on their own baggage of experience has a different opinion. We can all be wrong and right at the same time.

If our actions are fueled by a sincere thought to do better, than and only than we could probably agree.


Choose n Practice Happiness

Life is simple; we are what we eat and what we read. Talk is superfluous.
keoloke
Posted: Sunday, December 23, 2012 11:38:41 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/12/2010
Posts: 599
Location: United States
MrNudiePants wrote:


No, the object isn't to simply throw another gun in there and hope for the best. It's to add a good man, with all the tools he needs at his disposal, to stand watch in case the next nutjob with a gun (or pipebomb, or homemade poison gas canister) chooses HIS school to attack.


Mr. N/P you know it's not the answer. Let's not mention that it's not feasible since it would cost close to 7 Billions. He's going to pay?

Oh and while we're at it, parents could buy the new bullet proof backpacks (not a joke) all they have to do is to instruct the child to kneel and raise the backpack to their face and upperbody.


Choose n Practice Happiness

Life is simple; we are what we eat and what we read. Talk is superfluous.
niceguy89
Posted: Wednesday, January 02, 2013 2:06:37 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 11/16/2009
Posts: -24
Location: Texas, United States
Guns kill, that is why they were made. Guns that hold more rounds give the shooter (good or bad) a tactictal advantage. Gun crimes have been slowly going down while CHL's and CCW's have been going up. The good guys are winning! As long as there are guns there will be gun deaths. Educate and inform the good guys and the bad guys will countinue to shrink. We do not need more gun legislation. We need more human integrity and gun owner accountability. Stop giving up your rights out of ignorance and fear. Start learning what you can do to protect yourself. Guns are not the only solution.
keoloke
Posted: Sunday, March 24, 2013 5:52:31 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/12/2010
Posts: 599
Location: United States
2,243 Shooting Death (US) and counting Since Sandy Hook. It's only 98 days since.
Updated: 03/22/2013 11:29 pm EST


Link for the disturbing interactive death map unfolding before your eyes. Contain also the names of the deceased

It's an average of almost 23 peoples per day, so we will have another over 6000 gun related death by the end of the year.

Is it clear now why the bans are not passed?


Choose n Practice Happiness

Life is simple; we are what we eat and what we read. Talk is superfluous.
MrNudiePants
Posted: Sunday, March 24, 2013 6:53:50 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/10/2009
Posts: 2,140
Location: United States
keoloke wrote:


It's an average of almost 23 peoples per day, so we will have another over 6000 gun related death by the end of the year.

Is it clear now why the bans are not passed?



Is it because they won't actually do anything to prevent violence? Huh? Is it? Is it? Did I win?

CleverFox
Posted: Sunday, March 24, 2013 7:09:06 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 1/25/2012
Posts: 478
Location: United States
Posting armed guards in schools is not the answer. It costs too much money and do you want to have somebody in a flack jacket with a high power rifle patrolling the halls at your child's school? How do you know that this guy isn't some sort of pedophile and you just handed him the keys to the kingdom? So you have somebody with a side arm walking around the school instead? What happens when the bad guy or bad guys attack with high power rifles and wearing flack jackets? Will the good guy put on his white cowboy hat and take out 7 bad guys with 5 shots, hitting each bad guy right between the eyes before any of the bad guys get off a shot so there are no innocent bystanders?

You live in a Hollywood-Fantasy-Cowbay world that never really existed.
MissDaisy1
Posted: Sunday, March 24, 2013 9:03:31 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 3/7/2013
Posts: 418
Location: United States
Ban bullets?
elitfromnorth
Posted: Monday, March 25, 2013 1:19:37 AM

Rank: Brawling Berserker

Joined: 2/12/2012
Posts: 1,614
Location: Burrowed, Norway
MrNudiePants wrote:


If that's the case, why is it that the only weapons used to carry out the deadliest mass killing of civilians ever undertaken on American soil were box cutters? And the only weapons used in the second and third deadliest we're homemade bombs?


Because those aren't crimes of opportunity or planned events with easily obtainable materials. Why are there so few bombing incidents? Because it's difficult to get it right if you want a large death toll and you have to do a lot of heavy planning if you're gonna go thorugh with a hijacking of a plane or building a large bomb. Usually the shooting sprees are grabbing a gun they have in the closet or pop down to the local shop and buy it like it's a carton of milk and then go out shooting.

Also, you dragging in acts of terrorism in this debate shows that you struggle to come up with reasonable arguments for your view.

"It's at that point you realise Lady Luck is actually a hooker, and you're fresh out of cash."
Kitanica
Posted: Monday, March 25, 2013 5:21:17 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 4/16/2011
Posts: 881
Location: The Sprawl, United States
keoloke wrote:
These are deaths from shootings, obviously total shooting is a larger number. This for all the people who are pro -gun and blame only the finger that pull the trigger. In the following case, it was the fast finger of a 3 years old from Guthrie, Okla., who died after accidentally shooting himself in the head with a gun he found inside his aunt and uncle's house.


1. The Childs guardians are at fault for leaving him alone, the owner of the gun is at fault for not properly securing his firearm.

2. Several appear to be your run of the will gangbangers. Need I mention that baby shot in a robbery by a 17 and 14 year old?

3. Several by law enforcement? Why is that bad if they chose to shoot it out with the police.

4. You fail to specify which include assault weapons

5. What correlation does sandyhook have at all with this random grouping? The fact they died from guns is insignificant, I fail to see any other similarity so I must conclude if there's any other it's negligible.

6. In your second post you state that it's now upwards of 2243 (upwards accounting for growth between the time you posted and I posted) so what does that have to do with sandyhook or the assault weapons ban?

7. Applying to my previous two points if you look at FBI crime statistics approximately 10-13,000 people die each year from murder. That said I don't know the exact number or whether the following quote is 100% accurate but this is from
another forum of a similar topic ad from I read in the past it looks about right. I'm not currently aware of the gun related death toll. But I'm sure it's a majority of that 13,000.

The FBI murder statistics do not differentiate between types of rifles. There are about 100 million rifles in the United States. In 2009, the last year in which numbers have been reported, there were 13,636 murders. Guns were used to murder 9,146 people. Hands and feet were used to murder 801 people. Blunt objects were used to murder 611 people. Rifles were used to murder 348 people, and that is all rifles, of which assault rifles are only a small fraction. Assault rifles are used so infrequently in homicides that many police departments almost never see them; in 2009, there were nine states that did not have a single murder committed with any rifle.

Having read them before I can say that the statistics do not in fact differentiate between rifles and so called "assault weapons" (as I discussed that very point in the past regarding how many are rifles and how many would be the weapons in question) so lets say less than or equal to 348 people die each year from assault weapons.

Out of 13,640 murders
350 died from assault weapons (I'm rounding off to the nearest 10th and assuming these are accurate statistics)

That would amount to approximately about 2.5% die from assault weapons provided my math is correct. We know in recent years deaths have decreased in total.

So as to answer your second post: yes, I see why assault weapons have not been banned, as I don't see a realistic threat they provide over any other type of firearm or method of murder.
Now if I wanted to make a gross misrepresentation of numbers I could say my hands are at least 200% more deadly than any assault weapon and make the argument your twice as likely to die at any given moment by hands or feet but that would be silly; though true.

8. You appear to be upset over this assault weapons ban,
Did you know the most deadly shooting in u's history by a single gunman was the Virginia tech shooting? (now I don't know his name because I don't believe in glorifying the crazies as media outlets do) He did not use a rifle of any kind, but in fact used 2 hand guns. How is aurora or sandyhook—forgive my grammar—more worse? The only point I can see for the latter of the two being they were innocent school children which I shall concede, but in the grand scheme
of things I don't place any murder above that of another because murder is equally horrific in any form. So I'll have to play the devils advocate there and say low thirties is worse than high twenties.

9. You did not specify in your ban comment whether it was a reference to all weapons. If it was I'll remind you they're are already 300million weapons in circulation in the united states i.e. one for each person. A ban on further weapon sales in the united states is simply not going to happen nor would it do anything because as shown 300million weapons equates to 13000 murders, about .004 murders for every gun, some of which aren't even gun related. I like those numbers alot compared to what could be much much higher numbers. I'd prefer it be zero of course, but compared to 50,000 murders. Assault weapons simply aren't the demon they're made out to be. You, your friends, and your children are more likely to be killed by a drunk driver really... And if you have a problem with guns then you don't have to own one, or like them, that's your opinion, and if you want to do something well let's reduce gun violence in general and stop focusing on the assault weapons that aren't even used. I'm sure for every grieving parent at sandyhook I can find 50-100 parents that lost their child to a gun that wasn't an assault weapon. I'm sure we could all do the math and find the number but it'd take more time than I care to give these articles. As I said you were vague so I don't know what you meant by the gun ban, because the proposed legislation is not for all firearms. dontknow

10. This is just so I can round out my list. I feel it's better to end on a double digit, I like to think it adds a little oomph to drive the point home "here's 10 reasons" yada yada, it just has a better ring to it and I could go on like this for a while so go ahead and just read up to 9 then stop, if you hit 10 you've gone to far. Seriously. Stop.
I hope this slightly comical end to my post catches you by surprise and lightens the mood of a serious topic. occasion9

I typed this rather late and I was tired so if I made a huge mistake with my numbers and I'm off let me know, I was rounding and I believe it's right. I checked it once or twice but I shouldn't be running statistics at this hour. help

Thankyou, I look forward to your hatemail and just to be clear I'm a liberal so I'd appreciate no red-neck comments.




Kitanica
Posted: Monday, March 25, 2013 5:32:00 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 4/16/2011
Posts: 881
Location: The Sprawl, United States
I'm seeing a few more spelling errors, but I'm going to pass on editing them further. Curse my thumbs and this tiny cracked phone screen.

Sorry everyone
MrNudiePants
Posted: Thursday, March 28, 2013 9:31:49 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/10/2009
Posts: 2,140
Location: United States
Quote:
Butts County, GA —

Four people who tried to break into a home in Butts County on Wednesday got a little more than they bargained for.

Butts County Sheriff Gary Long tells WSB the four suspects apparently were interested in some marijuana believed to be in the house.

"It appears that there was a female and three black males. They put on bandanas across their face, they went to the back door to break into the house. The homeowner heard them, the female there. She comes around the corner and they're kicking the door to try and come in and she fires one shot," said Long.



Quote:
One of the suspects,Cornelius Williams, 19, a student at Jasper High School, was shot near the right eye. A second suspect, Frank Milligan, also 19, and also a Jasper High School student, was hit in the head with shrapnel. A third suspect, Louis Ross, 25, broke his leg when he jumped off the back porch trying to escape. The female suspect, Ashley Eiland, 29, who Long says had picked the boys up from high school, has been charged with criminal attempt to commit burglary.

When the three get out of the hospital, they'll be arrested.


Link-a-dink...

CleverFox
Posted: Thursday, March 28, 2013 11:37:01 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 1/25/2012
Posts: 478
Location: United States
MrNudiePants wrote:


No, the object isn't to simply throw another gun in there and hope for the best. It's to add a good man, with all the tools he needs at his disposal, to stand watch in case the next nutjob with a gun (or pipebomb, or homemade poison gas canister) chooses HIS school to attack.


And it is so easy to tell the good guys from the bad guys because good guys wear white hats and bad guys wear black hats.
MrNudiePants
Posted: Friday, March 29, 2013 7:38:48 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/10/2009
Posts: 2,140
Location: United States
CleverFox wrote:


And it is so easy to tell the good guys from the bad guys because good guys wear white hats and bad guys wear black hats.


The school resource officer will know that the person (or persons) walking around shooting people is the threat, no matter how they're dressed, and will be properly trained to assess the threat and respond. The only other choice brings the phrase "fish in a barrel" to mind.

Magical_felix
Posted: Friday, March 29, 2013 11:30:36 AM

Rank: Wild at Heart

Joined: 4/3/2010
Posts: 4,870
Location: California
MrNudiePants wrote:



Is it because they won't actually do anything to prevent violence? Huh? Is it? Is it? Did I win?


Yes nudiepants, you won... You won the idiot contest.

As for everyone else that seems to not understand statistics, please use your brains. When you say that there are more car related deaths than gun related deaths then point out that we should ban cars too like you are making some witty point... You're not. The reason there are more car related deaths is because there is simply more cars than guns. There are more knives, blunt objects and fists than guns too. The more guns there are, the more guns that will be fired. The notion that we would have a polite society if we were all trained to use and respect guns properly is a fantasy. Reduce the number of guns and the gun deaths will go down. Increase the number of guns and the gun deaths will go up.

100 people in a room with no guns. 100 people that are in no danger of getting shot. One of the people might get mad and fist fight a guy and the crowd can stop them.

100 people in a room with half of them having guns. 100 people in danger of being shot. One of them pulls a gun and starts shooting and another guy will pull his gun and start shooting at the guy shooting. That guy misses and hits another guy's wife and then that guy is shooting the guy trying to prevent the first guy shooting. Then another guy starts shooting all the other shooters because he doesn't know who the "good" guys are. Confusing right? Shooting and shooting and shooting.



keoloke
Posted: Tuesday, April 02, 2013 6:58:49 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/12/2010
Posts: 599
Location: United States
Well put Magic Felix.

Simple example about the 100 people that may just come true in real life. In Nelson GA (US) was just voted unanimously to approve the Family Protection Ordinance. In short.. the measure requires every head of household to own a gun and ammunition to "provide for the emergency management of the city" and to "provide for and protect the safety, security and general welfare of the city and its inhabitants." Unless you do not want to or you're convict, but you better get one as most will.. they did vote!

If other town will follow suit we may just have people being shot in public squares and city blocks. It’s the OK Corral all over again… ehaaa

Also from the article:

_Earlier Monday, lawmakers in Oklahoma scuttled a bill that would have allowed public school districts to decide whether to let teachers be armed.

_ Spring City, Utah, passed an ordinance this year recommending that residents keep firearms, softening an initial proposal that aimed to require it.


I think I’m done with this topic.. it goes nowhere, and people will keep on dying.. yeees not because of guns but because of happy triggers. Ok so I just made lots of people happy.



Read The Above Unbelievable Article Here


p.s. I have received a private message about the "idiocy" of my post that stated that gun were invented to hunt for food not to kill peoples. Try to answer that.



Choose n Practice Happiness

Life is simple; we are what we eat and what we read. Talk is superfluous.
Kitanica
Posted: Friday, April 05, 2013 8:24:07 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 4/16/2011
Posts: 881
Location: The Sprawl, United States
keoloke wrote:
Well put Magic Felix.

Simple example about the 100 people that may just come true in real life. In Nelson GA (US) was just voted unanimously to approve the Family Protection Ordinance. In short.. the measure requires every head of household to own a gun and ammunition to "provide for the emergency management of the city" and to "provide for and protect the safety, security and general welfare of the city and its inhabitants." Unless you do not want to or you're convict, but you better get one as most will.. they did vote!

If other town will follow suit we may just have people being shot in public squares and city blocks. It’s the OK Corral all over again… ehaaa

Also from the article:

_Earlier Monday, lawmakers in Oklahoma scuttled a bill that would have allowed public school districts to decide whether to let teachers be armed.

_ Spring City, Utah, passed an ordinance this year recommending that residents keep firearms, softening an initial proposal that aimed to require it.


I think I’m done with this topic.. it goes nowhere, and people will keep on dying.. yeees not because of guns but because of happy triggers. Ok so I just made lots of people happy.



Read The Above Unbelievable Article Here


p.s. I have received a private message about the "idiocy" of my post that stated that gun were invented to hunt for food not to kill peoples. Try to answer that.

well guns were invented as fireworks as far as I know. At least that's were the gunpowder was used... the Chinese pioneered it and the technology spread.
MrNudiePants
Posted: Friday, April 05, 2013 10:03:51 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/10/2009
Posts: 2,140
Location: United States
keoloke wrote:


If other town will follow suit we may just have people being shot in public squares and city blocks. It’s the OK Corral all over again… ehaaa




That's simply a preposterous notion. There are already other cities that have such laws on the books - Kennesaw, Georgia has had a statute requiring gun ownership in every household since 1982. The whole "OK Corral" and "blood will run in the streets" threats just aren't true. People don't turn into homicidal maniacs because of the presence of a firearm.

Stick to the truth. It keeps the debate much saner, and clearer.

keoloke
Posted: Monday, April 08, 2013 7:18:06 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/12/2010
Posts: 599
Location: United States
Kitanica wrote:
well guns were invented as fireworks as far as I know. At least that's were the gunpowder was used... the Chinese pioneered it and the technology spread.


Well he says that they were invented to get food. You say the Chinese... fine, the point was made to who is to blame?

The internet was invented by the government for use military use. If "today" I use the internet to lure kids or for other illegal activities. The military or the government is NOT to blame.

Choose n Practice Happiness

Life is simple; we are what we eat and what we read. Talk is superfluous.
keoloke
Posted: Monday, April 08, 2013 7:32:05 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/12/2010
Posts: 599
Location: United States
MrNudiePants wrote:


That's simply a preposterous notion. There are already other cities that have such laws on the books - Kennesaw, Georgia has had a statute requiring gun ownership in every household since 1982. The whole "OK Corral" and "blood will run in the streets" threats just aren't true. People don't turn into homicidal maniacs because of the presence of a firearm.

Stick to the truth. It keeps the debate much saner, and clearer.


Mr ND

I don't feel the comment has anything out of common sense. Every word that there is a fact, not an opinion. You do know what is the OK Corral, that is why I have included. The exaggeration to a fact to make a point. Actually back than it was honorable, since they would stand in the street and fire at each other.. not at a group of unarmed people.. possibly underage too.

So many info, again facts into the comment and you have only picked the OK Corral.

If you do not believe (as all the facts mentioned) that more guns will mean more deaths, it's fine. We do not need to continue this. They are way too many comments that prove the futility of these conversations.

Choose n Practice Happiness

Life is simple; we are what we eat and what we read. Talk is superfluous.
MrNudiePants
Posted: Monday, April 08, 2013 10:05:26 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/10/2009
Posts: 2,140
Location: United States
keoloke wrote:


Mr ND

I don't feel the comment has anything out of common sense. Every word that there is a fact, not an opinion. You do know what is the OK Corral, that is why I have included. The exaggeration to a fact to make a point. Actually back than it was honorable, since they would stand in the street and fire at each other.. not at a group of unarmed people.. possibly underage too.

So many info, again facts into the comment and you have only picked the OK Corral.

If you do not believe (as all the facts mentioned) that more guns will mean more deaths, it's fine. We do not need to continue this. They are way too many comments that prove the futility of these conversations.


Hey, you're the one that brought the "OK Corral" into the discussion, pal. Feel free to bow out any time you choose. You're stating that because Nelson, GA passed a law saying that every head of house in the town must own a firearm, suddenly it will be "the OK Corral all over again..."

Here's a challenge for you:

Find us any jurisdiction in America that passed more lenient gun use laws where the passage of those laws resulted in any kind of dramatic upswing in the crime rate. Any jurisdiction at all. You made the statement that more guns equals more deaths. Back that up with facts, not wishful thinking. Fact is, people will be people, no matter how you arm them (or disarm them).

Here's an interesting take:

Quote:
That means that, based on these statistics, you are more than twice as likely to be a victim of knife crime in the UK as you are to be a victim of gun crime in the US.


Does that mean that you're safer in the US than you are in the UK? Maybe, maybe not. More depends on your own personal habits than on any statistical analysis.

Is banning guns a possible answer? Maybe, maybe not. Reports from Great Britain are inclusive. This report is from mid-June, 2010.


Quote:
The latest figures show knife deaths have almost doubled in the last 30 years.
The total is up 58 on two years ago and 80 more than in the last year of Tory rule.
There are also 60 non-fatal knife crimes daily, with 22,000 recorded in the year.
But the number of people charged in London has more than halved over four years.
Tories got details using freedom of information laws.


Since then, the British government has reported that overall knife crime rates have fallen. They've also changed the way these crimes are reported. Not only that, but since many of the perpetrators are in prison, it just goes to figure that the overall crime rate may very well be lower... at least until the criminals are released again.

You believe what you choose - I'm not here to force ANYONE to own a gun. All I'm saying is that in America, law-abiding Americans have the Constitutional right to choose for themselves whether to own a gun or not.

ByronLord
Posted: Monday, April 08, 2013 10:27:21 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 11/14/2010
Posts: 748
Location: Massachusetts, United States
MrNudiePants wrote:

Here's a challenge for you:

Find us any jurisdiction in America that passed more lenient gun use laws where the passage of those laws resulted in any kind of dramatic upswing in the crime rate. Any jurisdiction at all. You made the statement that more guns equals more deaths. Back that up with facts, not wishful thinking. Fact is, people will be people, no matter how you arm them (or disarm them).


Here is a challenge for you:

Why does the US have a gun murder rate over a hundred times that of the UK where all guns other than actual sporting guns (shotguns) are now completely banned?

Why is the US non-gun murder rate almost exactly that of Europe?

It turns out that the US is not actually a more violent society than Europe. It is just the ready access to guns that means far more tense situations end up as murders.

Kitanica
Posted: Monday, April 08, 2013 10:35:25 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 4/16/2011
Posts: 881
Location: The Sprawl, United States
keoloke wrote:


Well he says that they were invented to get food. You say the Chinese... fine, the point was made to who is to blame?

The internet was invented by the government for use military use. If "today" I use the internet to lure kids or for other illegal activities. The military or the government is NOT to blame.


Well my post had nothing to do with that, its just odd to say they were created just for food since the technology and application has been around for hundreds of years.
The first recorded use is 1188 from a song dynasty battlefield (according to wikipedia which normally I wouldn't quote as wikis are notoriously unreliable, but I just really don't care enough at the moment to get into this so you'll have to pardon me on that) it's hard to hunt deer with a cannon, it's kind of heavy and loud. It was unrelated to the theme of this post.


Sure I'll play along with your premise.
If you lure victims off the Internet that makes you liable not the military, and not the government. so because you used the internet, we should ban the internet for the everyone else ? Um why? Your argument seems to be ban the Internet. It's your own logic not mine, the Internet didn't force you to, and the Internet can only contribute to a minuscule amount of cases if you want to do the research too find out I'd be interested in hearing it, but my point is the Internets a small player in a bigger problem that lies with the people going around kidnapping people. why restrict the Internet. why not improve the tools at hand to prevent these people from doing what they do. I believe I posted previously on this topic regarding problems I have with your original post that was never replied too so the sudden problem with my post regarding fireworks as a possible origin of modern firearms eludes me. Just a side note sopa and pipa didn't go over to well, to be exact they failed miserably. (they were bills trying to increase censorship)

Bad man uses Internet: kidnaps 12 random people. Logical conclusion: Internet is evil and the sole purpose is to kidnap people. That makes no sense. I don't know what world you live in but I hear about alot of "kidnappings" that have nothing to do with the Internet. why are we ignoring those victims? For every 12 (or 26) people getting kidnapped by "the Internet" are there not another hundred people getting kidnapped by random thugs, family members, and strangers?

Why not try to reduce overall kidnappinings instead of the smallest contributing factor to kidnapping violence. Out of all the heart attacks from food, is bacon at the top of the list of "heart attack inducing substances" (if said list even exists which it most likely does not) so why is bacon the bad guy here? hamburgers cause 100 heart attacks. bacon causes less than 100. So how is bacon the greater evil? Because you get more strips of bacon in a shorter amount of time in one package so it must cause more heart attacks? isn't any heart attack bad??
It's absurd really. Why don't we get people to eat healthier and deal with the society that is okay with letting heart attacks happen. Then heart attacks everywhere will go down, and people who enjoy bacon can have it, and you can eat your salad without fear of being struck down by the salty brown scourge. dontknow I don't understand what your trying to say? Who is to blame? That's fairly obvious. The person kidnapping. the Internet is just a tool to make our lives easier. It's not the governments fault (the Chinese) and it's not the tools fault as it's an inanimate object that doesn't actually exist beyond a string of binary numbers..

The Internet user is to blame. It was never a particularly difficult realization to come too.
Now I'll just get replies and get drawn into the whole thing again. Bad choice on my part. I just wanted to watch comedy central and check my messages lol.

MrNudiePants
Posted: Wednesday, April 10, 2013 8:23:01 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/10/2009
Posts: 2,140
Location: United States
ByronLord wrote:


Here is a challenge for you:

Why does the US have a gun murder rate over a hundred times that of the UK where all guns other than actual sporting guns (shotguns) are now completely banned?

Why is the US non-gun murder rate almost exactly that of Europe?

It turns out that the US is not actually a more violent society than Europe. It is just the ready access to guns that means far more tense situations end up as murders.


First off, it doesn't. The US does NOT have a murder rate "over a hundred times that of the UK". Saying it does is just a lie. Second, if all guns are banned in the UK, how is it that they have any firearm-related murders at all? Could it be that gun-control laws don't work? Third, here are some actual facts:

The total US murder rate is 4.8 per 100,000, while over-all, a good number to use for Europe is 3.5. Not even close.

The US gun-related murder rate is 3.2 per 100,000. Take that away from the 4.8, and you're left with 1.6 per 100,000. Again, not even close.

Lastly, comparing The United States demographics to any other area of the world may have made sense in the latter part of the 18th century, when most Americans were so closely removed from their origins as to still hold cultural mores and ideals from their homeland. making that same comparison now, two and a half centuries later, is foolishly comparing apples to Chevrolets. We now have little in common with European standards, habits, education levels, and lifestyles. Making any comparison like that has no choice but to be completely erroneous.

It's not the guns that make people violent - it's something in the people themselves. Take away the guns, and you'll get knife attacks like what just occurred at the Lone Star Community College.

All the "solutions" being bandied about are akin to lining America with soft, bouncy rubber mats, taking away every utensil but a spork, and destroying every tool more dangerous than a Nerf gun. Find a way to fix the people, and you won't have to child-proof the world.

Guest
Posted: Wednesday, April 10, 2013 8:36:08 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 531,807
Yes, well, it seems none of those stabbed died. Imagine what he could've done with firearms.

It may have been horrific.



Or should we just forget that in the interest of gun owner penis envy?
MrNudiePants
Posted: Wednesday, April 10, 2013 8:49:39 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/10/2009
Posts: 2,140
Location: United States
Highwayman wrote:
Yes, well, it seems none of those stabbed died. Imagine what he could've done with firearms.

It may have been horrific.

Or should we just forget that in the interest of gun owner penis envy?


Yeah, 'cause he was using a fucking box cutter.

Imagine what he could've done with an improvised explosive device?



Or should we just forget that in the interest of placating an overly-vocal, hoplophobic minority?

Marshall_Lewis
Posted: Wednesday, April 10, 2013 9:20:46 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/16/2012
Posts: 329
Location: South Charleston , United States
Placed my fully loaded colt ar-15 on my lawn chair facing the street the other day. It laid there for 8 hours. People walking by looked, the mail man looked confused. After siting there for 8 hours I picked it up, pulled the clip out. Not a single shot fired, at this point I am thinking either I have the worlds laziest gun, or it's people who shoot people. Well that's my rant, I got to run. I hear spoons are making people fat.
Guest
Posted: Wednesday, April 10, 2013 11:23:39 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 531,807
Overly vocal, or just using common sense argument against melodrama and nonlinear thought? Not sure what the scrabble points would be for hoplophobic, but cudos on that one.

Those who would use such explosive devices are usually carrying guns so that others "respect their authoratay!" Find a way to fix people? Not gonna happen, but guess what, no matter how looney anyone here is, there are no guns, just cap lock arguments, huffing and puffing, and little digs. When we are unarmed we all count on our wits and style.

BTW, sitting around with a loaded weapon for no reason is just stupid. What reaction would you want from anyone when seeing a person sitting silently with a gun close by. You guys are as mixed as your suppositions.

How many does that one score I wonder?

PS: You might wanna watch out for blue balls since you didn't unload.
CleverFox
Posted: Sunday, April 14, 2013 7:36:57 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 1/25/2012
Posts: 478
Location: United States
MrNudiePants wrote:


The school resource officer will know that the person (or persons) walking around shooting people is the threat, no matter how they're dressed, and will be properly trained to assess the threat and respond. The only other choice brings the phrase "fish in a barrel" to mind.


Yes and I am sure that every school in the USA will be able to find the money to hire and train a school resource officer to properly asses the threat and respond since every school in the USA is just over flowing with money and teachers are just paid so well that adding another non-teaching staff member won't cause any sort of money drain at all!

(SARCASM!)
LadyX
Posted: Wednesday, April 17, 2013 3:48:57 PM

Rank: Artistic Tart

Joined: 9/25/2009
Posts: 4,827
http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/17/politics/senate-guns-vote/index.html?hpt=hp_c2

The figure of 90% is probably an exaggeration when talking about what percentage of Americans support background checks on guns purchased at gun shows and online. Nevertheless, shame on those who can't even support the same checks that already exist for guns bought in stores. Funny how the NRA used to support the background checks that these motherfuckers now lied and twisted facts to help defeat.

Fuck this country sometimes, seriously. Slippery-slope, big-brother, my ass. This makes no sense.

I'll now await the cavalcade of shirtless crazies to use the word "jackboots" somewhere in their response.
Users browsing this topic
Guest 


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Main Forum RSS : RSS

Powered by Yet Another Forum.net version 1.9.1.6 (NET v4.0) - 11/14/2007
Copyright © 2003-2006 Yet Another Forum.net. All rights reserved.