|
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. |
On June 15 2016 21:33 Velr wrote:
Wow, now you compare the US to the third and second world.
Way to hit rockbottom.
they dont even have an universal health care system so i can see where he is coming from :^)
|
On June 15 2016 21:29 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2016 21:21 Incognoto wrote:On June 15 2016 21:17 Gorsameth wrote:I once again feel compelled to copy a statement once made in satire that has been proven painfully true. ‘No Way To Prevent This,’
Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens Painfully true? Sorry, but to me that is painfully FALSE. Just look at France, Belgium, Tunisia, etc. It's a very regular occurence. There are some valid arguments to be made but honestly posting that sort of thing is really just detracting to the discussion at hand. Your comparing a small number of terrorist attacks to a country that has almost as many shooting events as it has days in the year. 136 events in which 4 or more people were injured or killed by guns in 164 days CNN SourceAnd your telling me they are equivocal?
So it's a question of numbers? What a cynical way to look at things. You're telling me that we need more than a certain amount of victims for it to qualify as a "mass shooting"? What a disgusting outlook.
Firearm violence in France is a regular occurence:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/20/world/europe/marseille-hit-by-violent-wave-of-drug-crimes.html?_r=0
I didn't know that we needed a quota of victims before it became a "problem".
|
On June 15 2016 21:30 Incognoto wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2016 21:22 ForTehDarkseid wrote:
@Incognoto
Gun (and life) security has nothing to do with a gun regulation. Infact, if you restrict guns, it will only become worse. When it comes to mass shootings, people are suddenly become tunnel-visioned, forgetting the old wisdom: it's not on a weapon, but on a shooter instead. If he plans to kill a lot of people and is skilled/determined for it, he would find a way to a black market, or you know would use another device for murder, because he is essentially a criminal.
Free gun market is created not for criminals, but for regular citizens as a mean to defend themselves. That's bollocks, the free gun market exists for regular citizens as a means to obtain a gun. What about people who don't choose to buy firearms to defend themselves? The idea behind gun regulation is that it reduces the ease of access to malicious people in the first place. Our good friend Omar went into a gun store and purchaused two semi-automatic weapons three days before his attack. It's too easy to obtain these weapons for isolated people with malicious intent. Do you think that people should be allowed to drink and drive? It's their right!! It's their life, they get to do what they want. "Fuck seatbelts, you can't tell me what to do"? Organized crime is indeed going to have access to the black market, the idea behind regulation is to prevent that one guy, without all the shady contacts, to just go into a gun shop and buy a semi-auto weapon because he was in the mood for a nice mass shooting. That is waay too easy. No meaningful background checks, no licences, no ability whatsoever to check that this person is worthy to be trusted with a firearm. You don't even get that degree of leniency with cars..
Pray tell how are you going to prove intent before action? Also, the US all ready has background checks. Do some research folks. Most of the shooters of these highly publicized incidents PASSED THE BACKGROUND CHECKS. In lamens terms that means they had no criminal record prior to their act. How exactly you going to prevent that (in theory) without restricting ownership. I'm all ears.
|
On June 15 2016 21:37 Wegandi wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2016 21:36 zatic wrote:On June 15 2016 21:32 Wegandi wrote:On June 15 2016 21:24 Gorsameth wrote:On June 15 2016 21:22 ForTehDarkseid wrote:
@Incognoto
Gun (and life) security has nothing to do with a gun regulation. Infact, if you restrict guns, it will only become worse. When it comes to mass shootings, people are suddenly become tunnel-visioned, forgetting the old wisdom: it's not on a weapon, but on a shooter instead. If he plans to kill a lot of people and is skilled/determined for it, he would find a way to a black market, or you know would use another device for murder, because he is essentially a criminal.
Free gun market is created not for criminals, but for regular citizens as a mean to defend themselves. So why is the rest of the world not drowning in mass shootings? Why is it only America? Are you really that ignorant of the rest of the world? Here, welcome to South America and Africa, have a look around if you want. And if we point out that America's peer group is the OECD or even just a subset of that you are going to accuse us of Eurocentrism again? Of course we are not going to compare the US with countries with barely functioning societies. So by rest of the world you mean Europe. Yeah, no Euro-centrism there.
Is it our fault the first world is North America, Europe, Japan and Australia?
On June 15 2016 21:32 Wegandi wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2016 21:24 Gorsameth wrote:On June 15 2016 21:22 ForTehDarkseid wrote:
@Incognoto
Gun (and life) security has nothing to do with a gun regulation. Infact, if you restrict guns, it will only become worse. When it comes to mass shootings, people are suddenly become tunnel-visioned, forgetting the old wisdom: it's not on a weapon, but on a shooter instead. If he plans to kill a lot of people and is skilled/determined for it, he would find a way to a black market, or you know would use another device for murder, because he is essentially a criminal.
Free gun market is created not for criminals, but for regular citizens as a mean to defend themselves. So why is the rest of the world not drowning in mass shootings? Why is it only America? Are you really that ignorant of the rest of the world? Here, welcome to South America and Africa, have a look around if you want.
Congratulations you are beating Africa.
By all means, don't aim to high.
|
On June 15 2016 21:21 Incognoto wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2016 21:17 Gorsameth wrote:I once again feel compelled to copy a statement once made in satire that has been proven painfully true. ‘No Way To Prevent This,’
Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens Painfully true? Sorry, but to me that is painfully FALSE. Just look at France, Belgium, Tunisia, etc. It's a very regular occurence. There are some valid arguments to be made but honestly posting that sort of thing is really just detracting to the discussion at hand.
France and Belgium have gun suicides and homicides every day? (Honestly asking; I don't know.)
|
Guys, guys. I obviously undersand you have a point. But there is a thing: you can't make a deal with the whole country and enormous industry based on a single events which include either radical terrorism, or street gangs. It's not like Americans haven't already gave up on a huge list of freedoms since 911 happened, you know. There is such a thing called a cost-benefit analysis. Regulating guns don't solve the terrorism problem. Don't solve the mass shootings problem. Don't solve the suicide problems.
It will give a significant rise to a crime on a streets. Will lead to a huge social outbreak. WIll cost a fuck ton of dollars to regulate. And you'd literally have nothing against the police. Mind you, it's not Europe: in USA police shooting is a fucking problem too.
I have a solution, you know. Tighten up the fucking security in the public spaces. It helps not against personal agenda mass-shooters, but any kind of weaponized criminal, too. Make estate owners responsible for the fact one can easily bring a semi-rifle through their doors and shoot people inside for hours straight.
Always fight against the cause of the problem. not against the consequences.
|
Zurich15365 Posts
On June 15 2016 21:37 Wegandi wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2016 21:36 zatic wrote:On June 15 2016 21:32 Wegandi wrote:On June 15 2016 21:24 Gorsameth wrote:On June 15 2016 21:22 ForTehDarkseid wrote:
@Incognoto
Gun (and life) security has nothing to do with a gun regulation. Infact, if you restrict guns, it will only become worse. When it comes to mass shootings, people are suddenly become tunnel-visioned, forgetting the old wisdom: it's not on a weapon, but on a shooter instead. If he plans to kill a lot of people and is skilled/determined for it, he would find a way to a black market, or you know would use another device for murder, because he is essentially a criminal.
Free gun market is created not for criminals, but for regular citizens as a mean to defend themselves. So why is the rest of the world not drowning in mass shootings? Why is it only America? Are you really that ignorant of the rest of the world? Here, welcome to South America and Africa, have a look around if you want. And if we point out that America's peer group is the OECD or even just a subset of that you are going to accuse us of Eurocentrism again? Of course we are not going to compare the US with countries with barely functioning societies. So by rest of the world you mean Europe. Yeah, no Euro-centrism there.
I am honestly at a loss of words.
|
On June 15 2016 21:40 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2016 21:37 Wegandi wrote:On June 15 2016 21:36 zatic wrote:On June 15 2016 21:32 Wegandi wrote:On June 15 2016 21:24 Gorsameth wrote:On June 15 2016 21:22 ForTehDarkseid wrote:
@Incognoto
Gun (and life) security has nothing to do with a gun regulation. Infact, if you restrict guns, it will only become worse. When it comes to mass shootings, people are suddenly become tunnel-visioned, forgetting the old wisdom: it's not on a weapon, but on a shooter instead. If he plans to kill a lot of people and is skilled/determined for it, he would find a way to a black market, or you know would use another device for murder, because he is essentially a criminal.
Free gun market is created not for criminals, but for regular citizens as a mean to defend themselves. So why is the rest of the world not drowning in mass shootings? Why is it only America? Are you really that ignorant of the rest of the world? Here, welcome to South America and Africa, have a look around if you want. And if we point out that America's peer group is the OECD or even just a subset of that you are going to accuse us of Eurocentrism again? Of course we are not going to compare the US with countries with barely functioning societies. So by rest of the world you mean Europe. Yeah, no Euro-centrism there. Is it our fault the first world is North America, Europe, Japan and Australia? Show nested quote +On June 15 2016 21:32 Wegandi wrote:On June 15 2016 21:24 Gorsameth wrote:On June 15 2016 21:22 ForTehDarkseid wrote:
@Incognoto
Gun (and life) security has nothing to do with a gun regulation. Infact, if you restrict guns, it will only become worse. When it comes to mass shootings, people are suddenly become tunnel-visioned, forgetting the old wisdom: it's not on a weapon, but on a shooter instead. If he plans to kill a lot of people and is skilled/determined for it, he would find a way to a black market, or you know would use another device for murder, because he is essentially a criminal.
Free gun market is created not for criminals, but for regular citizens as a mean to defend themselves. So why is the rest of the world not drowning in mass shootings? Why is it only America? Are you really that ignorant of the rest of the world? Here, welcome to South America and Africa, have a look around if you want. Congratulations you are beating Africa. By all means, don't aim to high.
At least we're not 95% white na-na-na-na you homogenous racist Hollanders you. Got ya beat on that diversity measurement stick.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
On June 15 2016 21:39 Wegandi wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2016 21:30 Incognoto wrote:On June 15 2016 21:22 ForTehDarkseid wrote:
@Incognoto
Gun (and life) security has nothing to do with a gun regulation. Infact, if you restrict guns, it will only become worse. When it comes to mass shootings, people are suddenly become tunnel-visioned, forgetting the old wisdom: it's not on a weapon, but on a shooter instead. If he plans to kill a lot of people and is skilled/determined for it, he would find a way to a black market, or you know would use another device for murder, because he is essentially a criminal.
Free gun market is created not for criminals, but for regular citizens as a mean to defend themselves. That's bollocks, the free gun market exists for regular citizens as a means to obtain a gun. What about people who don't choose to buy firearms to defend themselves? The idea behind gun regulation is that it reduces the ease of access to malicious people in the first place. Our good friend Omar went into a gun store and purchaused two semi-automatic weapons three days before his attack. It's too easy to obtain these weapons for isolated people with malicious intent. Do you think that people should be allowed to drink and drive? It's their right!! It's their life, they get to do what they want. "Fuck seatbelts, you can't tell me what to do"? Organized crime is indeed going to have access to the black market, the idea behind regulation is to prevent that one guy, without all the shady contacts, to just go into a gun shop and buy a semi-auto weapon because he was in the mood for a nice mass shooting. That is waay too easy. No meaningful background checks, no licences, no ability whatsoever to check that this person is worthy to be trusted with a firearm. You don't even get that degree of leniency with cars.. Pray tell how are you going to prove intent before action? Also, the US all ready has background checks. Do some research folks. Most of the shooters of these highly publicized incidents PASSED THE BACKGROUND CHECKS. In lamens terms that means they had no criminal record prior to their act. How exactly you going to prevent that (in theory) without restricting ownership. I'm all ears.
If they passed the background checks, then you're going to want better and more meaningful background checks. You also need more meaningful ways to prove that you can be trusted with a firearm. How hard is it to wrap your head around that?
Fuck, having a middle of the road view in this thread means you get flamed by everyone. T_T
|
On June 15 2016 21:39 Incognoto wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2016 21:29 Gorsameth wrote:On June 15 2016 21:21 Incognoto wrote:On June 15 2016 21:17 Gorsameth wrote:I once again feel compelled to copy a statement once made in satire that has been proven painfully true. ‘No Way To Prevent This,’
Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens Painfully true? Sorry, but to me that is painfully FALSE. Just look at France, Belgium, Tunisia, etc. It's a very regular occurence. There are some valid arguments to be made but honestly posting that sort of thing is really just detracting to the discussion at hand. Your comparing a small number of terrorist attacks to a country that has almost as many shooting events as it has days in the year. 136 events in which 4 or more people were injured or killed by guns in 164 days CNN SourceAnd your telling me they are equivocal? So it's a question of numbers? What a cynical way to look at things. You're telling me that we need more than a certain amount of victims for it to qualify as a "mass shooting"? What a disgusting outlook. Firearm violence in France is a regular occurence: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/20/world/europe/marseille-hit-by-violent-wave-of-drug-crimes.html?_r=0I didn't know that we needed a quota of victims before it became a "problem".
Do you think if we include all gun violence the US is going to look any better?
|
On June 15 2016 21:43 Incognoto wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2016 21:39 Wegandi wrote:On June 15 2016 21:30 Incognoto wrote:On June 15 2016 21:22 ForTehDarkseid wrote:
@Incognoto
Gun (and life) security has nothing to do with a gun regulation. Infact, if you restrict guns, it will only become worse. When it comes to mass shootings, people are suddenly become tunnel-visioned, forgetting the old wisdom: it's not on a weapon, but on a shooter instead. If he plans to kill a lot of people and is skilled/determined for it, he would find a way to a black market, or you know would use another device for murder, because he is essentially a criminal.
Free gun market is created not for criminals, but for regular citizens as a mean to defend themselves. That's bollocks, the free gun market exists for regular citizens as a means to obtain a gun. What about people who don't choose to buy firearms to defend themselves? The idea behind gun regulation is that it reduces the ease of access to malicious people in the first place. Our good friend Omar went into a gun store and purchaused two semi-automatic weapons three days before his attack. It's too easy to obtain these weapons for isolated people with malicious intent. Do you think that people should be allowed to drink and drive? It's their right!! It's their life, they get to do what they want. "Fuck seatbelts, you can't tell me what to do"? Organized crime is indeed going to have access to the black market, the idea behind regulation is to prevent that one guy, without all the shady contacts, to just go into a gun shop and buy a semi-auto weapon because he was in the mood for a nice mass shooting. That is waay too easy. No meaningful background checks, no licences, no ability whatsoever to check that this person is worthy to be trusted with a firearm. You don't even get that degree of leniency with cars.. Pray tell how are you going to prove intent before action? Also, the US all ready has background checks. Do some research folks. Most of the shooters of these highly publicized incidents PASSED THE BACKGROUND CHECKS. In lamens terms that means they had no criminal record prior to their act. How exactly you going to prevent that (in theory) without restricting ownership. I'm all ears. If they passed the background checks, then you're going to want better and more meaningful background checks. You also need more meaningful ways to prove that you can be trusted with a firearm. How hard is it to wrap your head around that? Fuck, having a middle of the road view in this thread means you get flamed by everyone. T_T
Welcome to the club. Libertarians get flamed by everyone too, so at least I'm not the only one in this thread to know how that feels  .
You keep saying nebulous prescriptions. What exactly do you mean by more meaningful background checks? Are you going to have to go to a psychologist? Are we going to use psychologists as arbiters of who shall be able to own and who shouldn't? If you're in a depressed mood, then you're denied? What questions are going to be asked? Are you a terrorist? Do you have ill intent? Lying is pretty easy, especially for people really motivated to kill a bunch of people.
|
On June 15 2016 21:40 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2016 21:21 Incognoto wrote:On June 15 2016 21:17 Gorsameth wrote:I once again feel compelled to copy a statement once made in satire that has been proven painfully true. ‘No Way To Prevent This,’
Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens Painfully true? Sorry, but to me that is painfully FALSE. Just look at France, Belgium, Tunisia, etc. It's a very regular occurence. There are some valid arguments to be made but honestly posting that sort of thing is really just detracting to the discussion at hand. France and Belgium have gun suicides and homicides every day? (Honestly asking; I don't know.)
Nah, not every day, but pretending that gun violence is a USA only thing is just stretching the truth, not something I like. We also have drug gangs who are shooting at each other, yes, even in our "civilized" Europe. They have no difficulty obtaining military-grade weapons to carry out their business.
Not sure why suicide is a problem, if you're going to kill yourself then having a gun is nice, probably the cleanest way to leave, as far as I know. Suicide is suicide, not gun violence. Probably a little cynical on my part, but it matters because most deaths related to firearms, in the USA, are suicide.
On June 15 2016 21:45 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2016 21:39 Incognoto wrote:On June 15 2016 21:29 Gorsameth wrote:On June 15 2016 21:21 Incognoto wrote:On June 15 2016 21:17 Gorsameth wrote:I once again feel compelled to copy a statement once made in satire that has been proven painfully true. ‘No Way To Prevent This,’
Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens Painfully true? Sorry, but to me that is painfully FALSE. Just look at France, Belgium, Tunisia, etc. It's a very regular occurence. There are some valid arguments to be made but honestly posting that sort of thing is really just detracting to the discussion at hand. Your comparing a small number of terrorist attacks to a country that has almost as many shooting events as it has days in the year. 136 events in which 4 or more people were injured or killed by guns in 164 days CNN SourceAnd your telling me they are equivocal? So it's a question of numbers? What a cynical way to look at things. You're telling me that we need more than a certain amount of victims for it to qualify as a "mass shooting"? What a disgusting outlook. Firearm violence in France is a regular occurence: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/20/world/europe/marseille-hit-by-violent-wave-of-drug-crimes.html?_r=0I didn't know that we needed a quota of victims before it became a "problem". Do you think if we include all gun violence the US is going to look any better?
That's not the point. The point is don't spout senseless one-liners and except people having an actual discussion to appreciate it. Gun violence is not limited to just mass shooting, so no reason to pretend like that matters. 10 different occasions of one person getting shot due to firearms is not better than 1 mass shooting with 10 victims.
On June 15 2016 21:47 Wegandi wrote:
You keep saying nebulous prescriptions. What exactly do you mean by more meaningful background checks? Are you going to have to go to a psychologist? Are we going to use psychologists as arbiters of who shall be able to own and who shouldn't? If you're in a depressed mood, then you're denied? What questions are going to be asked? Are you a terrorist? Do you have ill intent? Lying is pretty easy, especially for people really motivated to kill a bunch of people.
I'm no specialist, but these are the kinds of question which would be more easily answered if we could have studies on gun violence (hence my dislike for the NRA's cock-blocking).
I wish I could give you an actual answer, but I'm not going to pretend I am technically competent to do so. I do know, however, that such measures could realistically be implemented. It's too easy to assume that they can't.
|
You must have little to no experience with gun shot wounds in order to think that they're the cleanest way of killing yourself. And making guns harder to get in the interest of lowering the suicide rate is just another good justification for increased regs.
|
On June 15 2016 21:48 Incognoto wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2016 21:40 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On June 15 2016 21:21 Incognoto wrote:On June 15 2016 21:17 Gorsameth wrote:I once again feel compelled to copy a statement once made in satire that has been proven painfully true. ‘No Way To Prevent This,’
Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens Painfully true? Sorry, but to me that is painfully FALSE. Just look at France, Belgium, Tunisia, etc. It's a very regular occurence. There are some valid arguments to be made but honestly posting that sort of thing is really just detracting to the discussion at hand. France and Belgium have gun suicides and homicides every day? (Honestly asking; I don't know.) Nah, not every day, but pretending that gun violence is a USA only thing is just stretching the truth, not something I like. We also have drug gangs who are shooting at each other, yes, even in our "civilized" Europe. They have no difficulty obtaining military-grade weapons to carry out their business. Not sure why suicide is a problem, if you're going to kill yourself then having a gun is nice, probably the cleanest way to leave, as far as I know. Suicide is suicide, not gun violence. Probably a little cynical on my part, but it matters because most deaths related to firearms, in the USA, are suicide.
Yes for Crime and gang related violence I can see Europe and the US being roughly the same but for mass shootings and other 'passion' killings the barrier of access to weapons is certainly a major difference.
Yes if you really want to get an sub machine gun to shoot up a bar or kill your ex wife you can theoretically get them but to do so your running a hugely increased risk of being discovered and arrested for buying/having the weapon compared to walking to a gun store, buying a legal gun and using that.
|
On June 15 2016 21:54 farvacola wrote:
You must have little to no experience with gun shot wounds in order to think that they're the cleanest way of killing yourself. And making guns harder to get in the interest of lowering the suicide rate is just another good justification for increased regs.
Meh, don't wanna argue about that.
I did research on suicide and what seemed to come up as the easiest way out was the use of a gun.
If people want to really kill themselves, they'll find some other way to do it. Guns aren't the problem in suicide, it's the reason why people want to kill themselves in the first place which needs to be examined. That's why it's off topic.
On June 15 2016 21:55 Gorsameth wrote:
Yes for Crime and gang related violence I can see Europe and the US being roughly the same but for mass shootings and other 'passion' killings the barrier of access to weapons is certainly a major difference.
Yes if you really want to get an sub machine gun to shoot up a bar or kill your ex wife you can theoretically get them but to do so your running a hugely increased risk of being discovered and arrested for buying/having the weapon compared to walking to a gun store, buying a legal gun and using that.
The thing is, gang related violence is very well making up most of the gun violence in the USA and that kind of violence is very well going to go fall under the "mass shooting" category. Gangsters don't patiently respect a "1 victim at a time" quota. It just doesn't get as much publicity as the mass shootings. That's conjecture though, since the NRA has decided that we can't have statisics on gun violence. Hence the NRA being a bunch of fucks.
I otherwise agree with you (though as I said before, coming up with efficient concrete measures is too hard for me), I just wanted to point out that the USA isn't some sort of uncivilized, barbaric land.
|
Guns are absolutely a part of the suicide problem; they provide individuals with a quick but oftentimes messy way to end their lives without as much chance of error as compared with other methods. Granted, there are folks who commit suicide in a "justified" manner, as in they are capable of deciding to end their lives without duress or other mental illness, but many, many suicides are incomplete attempts intended to be cries for help. Accordingly, pills, hangings, and other non-gun methods of suicide are actually beneficial in that their high rate of error allows the individual to get help afterwards and reconsider. With guns, the error rate is much lower and, consequently, dumbass teenagers or mentally ill folks with access to guns are far more likely to "accidentally" go through with a completed attempt.
This notion that suicide detracts from the pro-regulation stance is misguided.
|
The entire debate is a pointless circle-jerk. Both sides are already decided and merely spouting the same tired platitudes (memes) at each other over and over.
I think at the end of the day history will show the 2nd amendment to have been completely retarded (we really, absolutely, do not miss something like that in Europe and I can't recall the last time I saw a gun whether on a criminal or a civilian which makes me very happy. Yes we've had recent ISIS attacks but we don't have kindergarten, school, cinema or downtown shooters, not even armed gangbangers for the most part) and a major factor in the downfall of the US.
|
On June 15 2016 21:42 Wegandi wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2016 21:40 Gorsameth wrote:On June 15 2016 21:37 Wegandi wrote:On June 15 2016 21:36 zatic wrote:On June 15 2016 21:32 Wegandi wrote:On June 15 2016 21:24 Gorsameth wrote:On June 15 2016 21:22 ForTehDarkseid wrote:
@Incognoto
Gun (and life) security has nothing to do with a gun regulation. Infact, if you restrict guns, it will only become worse. When it comes to mass shootings, people are suddenly become tunnel-visioned, forgetting the old wisdom: it's not on a weapon, but on a shooter instead. If he plans to kill a lot of people and is skilled/determined for it, he would find a way to a black market, or you know would use another device for murder, because he is essentially a criminal.
Free gun market is created not for criminals, but for regular citizens as a mean to defend themselves. So why is the rest of the world not drowning in mass shootings? Why is it only America? Are you really that ignorant of the rest of the world? Here, welcome to South America and Africa, have a look around if you want. And if we point out that America's peer group is the OECD or even just a subset of that you are going to accuse us of Eurocentrism again? Of course we are not going to compare the US with countries with barely functioning societies. So by rest of the world you mean Europe. Yeah, no Euro-centrism there. Is it our fault the first world is North America, Europe, Japan and Australia? On June 15 2016 21:32 Wegandi wrote:On June 15 2016 21:24 Gorsameth wrote:On June 15 2016 21:22 ForTehDarkseid wrote:
@Incognoto
Gun (and life) security has nothing to do with a gun regulation. Infact, if you restrict guns, it will only become worse. When it comes to mass shootings, people are suddenly become tunnel-visioned, forgetting the old wisdom: it's not on a weapon, but on a shooter instead. If he plans to kill a lot of people and is skilled/determined for it, he would find a way to a black market, or you know would use another device for murder, because he is essentially a criminal.
Free gun market is created not for criminals, but for regular citizens as a mean to defend themselves. So why is the rest of the world not drowning in mass shootings? Why is it only America? Are you really that ignorant of the rest of the world? Here, welcome to South America and Africa, have a look around if you want. Congratulations you are beating Africa. By all means, don't aim to high. At least we're not 95% white na-na-na-na you homogenous racist Hollanders you. Got ya beat on that diversity measurement stick.
LOL
I have to say, your arguments keep getting better and better.
|
On June 15 2016 21:56 Incognoto wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2016 21:54 farvacola wrote:
You must have little to no experience with gun shot wounds in order to think that they're the cleanest way of killing yourself. And making guns harder to get in the interest of lowering the suicide rate is just another good justification for increased regs. Meh, don't wanna argue about that. I did research on suicide and what seemed to come up as the easiest way out was the use of a gun. If people want to really kill themselves, they'll find some other way to do it. Guns aren't the problem in suicide, it's the reason why people want to kill themselves in the first place which needs to be examined. That's why it's off topic. Show nested quote +On June 15 2016 21:55 Gorsameth wrote:
Yes for Crime and gang related violence I can see Europe and the US being roughly the same but for mass shootings and other 'passion' killings the barrier of access to weapons is certainly a major difference.
Yes if you really want to get an sub machine gun to shoot up a bar or kill your ex wife you can theoretically get them but to do so your running a hugely increased risk of being discovered and arrested for buying/having the weapon compared to walking to a gun store, buying a legal gun and using that. The thing is, gang related violence is very well making up most of the gun violence in the USA and that kind of violence is very well going to go fall under the "mass shooting" category. Gangsters don't patiently respect a "1 victim at a time" quota. It just doesn't get as much publicity as the mass shootings. That's conjecture though, since the NRA has decided that we can't have statisics on gun violence. Hence the NRA being a bunch of fucks. I otherwise agree with you (though as I said before, coming up with efficient concrete measures is too hard for me), I just wanted to point out that the USA isn't some sort of uncivilized, barbaric land.
Except we do have statistics.
https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/crime-in-the-u.s.-2013/offenses-known-to-law-enforcement/expanded-homicide/expanded_homicide_data_table_8_murder_victims_by_weapon_2009-2013.xls
Please people, do some cursory research beforehand. It helps.
|
On June 15 2016 22:09 Laurens wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2016 21:42 Wegandi wrote:On June 15 2016 21:40 Gorsameth wrote:On June 15 2016 21:37 Wegandi wrote:On June 15 2016 21:36 zatic wrote:On June 15 2016 21:32 Wegandi wrote:On June 15 2016 21:24 Gorsameth wrote:On June 15 2016 21:22 ForTehDarkseid wrote:
@Incognoto
Gun (and life) security has nothing to do with a gun regulation. Infact, if you restrict guns, it will only become worse. When it comes to mass shootings, people are suddenly become tunnel-visioned, forgetting the old wisdom: it's not on a weapon, but on a shooter instead. If he plans to kill a lot of people and is skilled/determined for it, he would find a way to a black market, or you know would use another device for murder, because he is essentially a criminal.
Free gun market is created not for criminals, but for regular citizens as a mean to defend themselves. So why is the rest of the world not drowning in mass shootings? Why is it only America? Are you really that ignorant of the rest of the world? Here, welcome to South America and Africa, have a look around if you want. And if we point out that America's peer group is the OECD or even just a subset of that you are going to accuse us of Eurocentrism again? Of course we are not going to compare the US with countries with barely functioning societies. So by rest of the world you mean Europe. Yeah, no Euro-centrism there. Is it our fault the first world is North America, Europe, Japan and Australia? On June 15 2016 21:32 Wegandi wrote:On June 15 2016 21:24 Gorsameth wrote:On June 15 2016 21:22 ForTehDarkseid wrote:
@Incognoto
Gun (and life) security has nothing to do with a gun regulation. Infact, if you restrict guns, it will only become worse. When it comes to mass shootings, people are suddenly become tunnel-visioned, forgetting the old wisdom: it's not on a weapon, but on a shooter instead. If he plans to kill a lot of people and is skilled/determined for it, he would find a way to a black market, or you know would use another device for murder, because he is essentially a criminal.
Free gun market is created not for criminals, but for regular citizens as a mean to defend themselves. So why is the rest of the world not drowning in mass shootings? Why is it only America? Are you really that ignorant of the rest of the world? Here, welcome to South America and Africa, have a look around if you want. Congratulations you are beating Africa. By all means, don't aim to high. At least we're not 95% white na-na-na-na you homogenous racist Hollanders you. Got ya beat on that diversity measurement stick. LOL I have to say, your arguments keep getting better and better.
Perhaps sarcasm isn't a strong suit for Flanders folk. It's ok, I understand.
|
|
|
|
|
|
661
231
178
EPT
