Jump to content

So there was a mass shooting about 10 mins from me


Recommended Posts

21 minutes ago, McWickedSmawt85 said:

Let's try again: go ahead and give me the reason(s) why all the other first world countries don't have this problem.

I can tell you why

 

Better gun regulation and stricter rules. Guns do not need to be outlawed but they need to be more difficult to obtain so you cant just buy one on a whim and go on a shooting rampage. Also better public education in every other first world country. Home schooling? lmao that should be outlawed

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 337
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

We don't even know who you are 

I think healthcare is also a significant reducer of these types of incidents.  If you can afford to get checked out, then it's more likely mental issues will be caught early, before they manifest into

I don't know why you INSIST on punishing the people that have guns and don't kill people. Makes ZERO sense.   And you want the black market to GROW   Are you retarded?

Posted Images

4 minutes ago, Cookester15 said:

I can tell you why

 

Better gun regulation and stricter rules. Guns do not need to be outlawed but they need to be more difficult to obtain so you cant just buy one on a whim and go on a shooting rampage. Also better public education in every other first world country. Home schooling? lmao that should be outlawed

 

I think healthcare is also a significant reducer of these types of incidents.  If you can afford to get checked out, then it's more likely mental issues will be caught early, before they manifest into these types of actions. 

 

I was trying to get this kind of answer out of Slow Johnny.  I guess that was expecting too much. :] 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, McWickedSmawt85 said:

I think healthcare is also a significant reducer of these types of incidents.  If you can afford to get checked out, then it's more likely mental issues will be caught early, before they manifest into these types of actions. 

 

I was trying to get this kind of answer out of Slow Johnny.  I guess that was expecting too much. :] 

Yes american healthcare plays a role. Its ok to have public roads, firemen, police, schools, but health (the most important thing) is a big no no? ive never understood this mentality.. but hey, America still uses the imperial measurement system. Its like they enjoy being contrary to everyone else just for the lulz. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, McWickedSmawt85 said:

No other first world country in the world has this type of thing happen on the regular, Slow Johnny.  Why not?

There is no answer . What do you think ? 

 

Do other countries have more guns than people ?

Do other countries have "the right to bear arms"

Do other countries people hold such importance on that ?

There are a lot of crazy Americans . You can't compare America to other countries because shocker, not all countries are obsessed with their rights , and guns .

 

Guns could have been 100 percent banned and this incident would have still happened.  Why ? 

 

You can't forecably take people's guns because that would start a war within ourselves .

 

Maybe you should phone up Mr Trump and tell him you have a sloution to murder . 

 

Now quit being the idiot calling people slow ....because nothing really registers in your head expect for fantasy . 

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Cookester15 said:

I can tell you why

 

Better gun regulation and stricter rules. Guns do not need to be outlawed but they need to be more difficult to obtain so you cant just buy one on a whim and go on a shooting rampage. Also better public education in every other first world country. Home schooling? lmao that should be outlawed

 

So murderers can still murder , they just have to wait a little bit longer ? 

 

Problem solved. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Jon2B said:

So murderers can still murder , they just have to wait a little bit longer ? 

 

Problem solved. 

No... But having to second guess yourself may prevent it all together. A murderer may have a change of hard if his or her plans are foiled. Im sure you could have figured this out. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Cookester15 said:

No... But having to second guess yourself may prevent it all together. A murderer may have a change of hard if his or her plans are foiled. Im sure you could have figured this out. 

So your argument is based on "maybes"

 

How many mass killings took place directly after someone bought a gun ? Honest question .

 

Also let's remember buying a gun at a store is not the only way to get a gun. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Jon2B said:

So your argument is based on "maybes"

 

How many mass killings took place directly after someone bought a gun ? Honest question .

 

Also let's remember buying a gun at a store is not the only way to get a gun. 

I don't know the answer to that. BUT logically speaking it would make a difference, no matter how small, some prevention of murder must be worth inconveniencing gun buyers right?  Is ease of purchase really more important than possibly preventing the death of some school kids? It's more difficult to get a drivers license than buying a weapon. Do you not see something wrong with that? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Cookester15 said:

I don't know the answer to that. BUT logically speaking it would make a difference, no matter how small, some prevention of murder must be worth inconveniencing gun buyers right?  Is ease of purchase really more important than possibly preventing the death of some school kids? 

I think making it harder to get guns could possibly prevent normal gun related deaths ( which are a bigger problem tbh , nobody talks about that tho )

 

I don't think it would stop mass killings . If you're the kind of person that can put your gun on a 95 year old lady or a 13 year old kill and still be able to pull the trigger...I don't think a longer wait period would stop that. 

 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Jon2B said:

I think making it harder to get guns could possibly prevent normal gun related deaths ( which are a bigger problem tbh , nobody talks about that tho )

 

I don't think it would stop mass killings . If you're the kind of person that can put your gun on a 95 year old lady or a 13 year old kill and still be able to pull the trigger...I don't think a longer wait period would stop that. 

 

 

it's not about stopping it 100% (as yet), America has too many guns for that to happen over night. 

 

Right now It's about reducing the amounts of incidents that involve killings with guns. 

 

It can gradually get better year after year but you have to start somewhere. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Jon2B said:

There is no answer . What do you think ? 

 

Do other countries have more guns than people ?

Do other countries have "the right to bear arms"

Do other countries people hold such importance on that ?

There are a lot of crazy Americans . You can't compare America to other countries because shocker, not all countries are obsessed with their rights , and guns .

 

Guns could have been 100 percent banned and this incident would have still happened.  Why ? 

 

You can't forecably take people's guns because that would start a war within ourselves .

 

Maybe you should phone up Mr Trump and tell him you have a sloution to murder . 

 

Now quit being the idiot calling people slow ....because nothing really registers in your head expect for fantasy . 

Switzerland has the third largest amount of guns behind the US and Yemen.........think about that for a second. Think about how small Switzerland is.

 

But more importantly, it probably has a higher rate of gun owners. The US number is inflated, because a single gun owner can have multiple guns.  But switzerland has a higher percentage of gun owners, overall.

 

And that is due to their "armed neutrality" laws. Adults who are "fit" are required to be issued a rifle, and are required to attend training every year. Basically their form of mandatory military service.

 

The weapon they are given when they attend militia training, is the weapon they get to keep in their homes. The government literally gives the weapon while they are a "fit" adult. After you have served your militia training years, you can buy the gun from the government, and can keep it with a permit. Highly regulated.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Jon2B said:

Sure but they have 8 million people . We have over 300 million 

How does this matter? The US has a larger government with more employees, more law enforcement etc. You have the means to enact change but don't do it because its unpopular with most people on the right. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Jon2B said:

Controller 3 million guns compared to controlling over 300 million guns.

 

Like are you guys even serious ?

what are you talking about? all guns can easily be controlled.

 

guns are made by limited amount of manufacturers, and could be controlled from that point.

 

that's why i specifically said that Switzerland has a higher rate of adults with guns.. The US number is inflated by gun owners who own many guns..

 

Last time I checked, gun owners only have two hands.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, jehurey said:

what are you talking about? all guns can easily be controlled.

 

guns are made by limited amount of manufacturers, and could be controlled from that point.

 

that's why i specifically said that Switzerland has a higher rate of adults with guns.. The US number is inflated by gun owners who own many guns..

 

Last time I checked, gun owners only have two hands.

You can't control guns already out there which is over 300 million in USA

 

You're comparing a country with the population of NYC with a country with over 300 million people , and the same or more guns 

Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Jon2B said:

You can't control guns already out there which is over 300 million in USA

 

You're comparing a country with the population of NYC with a country with over 300 million people , and the same or more guns 

yes you can. impose a tax levy on people owning more than X amount of guns, and it completely stops them from owning any more guns unless they trade-in a gun.

 

that can pass over to ammo purchases.  buy-back programs. automatic gun programs if you are ever charged with a violent crime (like domestic violence).

 

and more importantly, you can probably outlaw certain guns being manufactured, so that it creates a high aftermarket, and therefore a lucrative blackmarket that the ATF can then crackdown on. And then slowly move the restrictions onto other weapons.

 

The "oh well, its too far beyond us to do anything now" isn't an answer. Its just defeatist thinking.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Cooke locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...