EPTIf you're seeing this topic then another mass shooting hap…
| Forum Index > General Forum |
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. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Sero
United States692 Posts
No, there was not another mass shooting. There’s just the same 3 people having a circular argument for years without persuading anyone. Maybe you’ll change their minds next post though. | ||
|
Excludos
Norway8267 Posts
On December 19 2018 23:21 Sero wrote: I see this thread all the time thanks to its needlessly long title, and never once has it been accurate. Seeing it constantly gets really tiresome. No, there was not another mass shooting. There’s just the same 3 people having a circular argument for years without persuading anyone. Maybe you’ll change their minds next post though. There's like a new mass shooting every week dude, what are you on about? The fact that you see this thread consistently popping up should be alarming (And no, there's loads more than just "3 people having a circular argument" going on here. There's 9 different people on the last page alone). | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Sero
United States692 Posts
On December 19 2018 23:31 Excludos wrote: There's like a new mass shooting every week dude, what are you on about? The fact that you see this thread consistently popping up should be alarming (And no, there's loads more than just "3 people having a circular argument" going on here. There's 9 different people on the last page alone). The last mass shooting that I’m aware of took place in Thousand Oaks, California on November 7. Today is December 19. That was, like, 6 weeks ago dude. Why should I be alarmed? Because you enjoy arguing about another country’s gun control policy endlessly? No, you mean that I should be alarmed and hysterical about mass shootings and hurry to enact gun control laws, right? You must have misunderstood my post. I’m not taking a side in your little debate here, so you can save it for Danglars. Yeah, there’s more than 3 posters in this thread. Good job spotting that hyperbole. My point is that the majority of posts are made by the same few people and it’s as close as you can get to a circle jerk without getting wet. | ||
|
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom9915 Posts
On December 20 2018 00:55 Sero wrote: The last mass shooting that I’m aware of took place in Thousand Oaks, California on November 7. Today is December 19. That was, like, 6 weeks ago dude. Why should I be alarmed? Because you enjoy arguing about another country’s gun control policy endlessly? No, you mean that I should be alarmed and hysterical about mass shootings and hurry to enact gun control laws, right? You must have misunderstood my post. I’m not taking a side in your little debate here, so you can save it for Danglars. Yeah, there’s more than 3 posters in this thread. Good job spotting that hyperbole. My point is that the majority of posts are made by the same few people and it’s as close as you can get to a circle jerk without getting wet. At least you're here to contribute something new and valuable to the discussion, eh? | ||
|
Excludos
Norway8267 Posts
On December 20 2018 00:55 Sero wrote: The last mass shooting that I’m aware of took place in Thousand Oaks, California on November 7. Today is December 19. That was, like, 6 weeks ago dude. Why should I be alarmed? Because you enjoy arguing about another country’s gun control policy endlessly? No, you mean that I should be alarmed and hysterical about mass shootings and hurry to enact gun control laws, right? You must have misunderstood my post. I’m not taking a side in your little debate here, so you can save it for Danglars. Yeah, there’s more than 3 posters in this thread. Good job spotting that hyperbole. My point is that the majority of posts are made by the same few people and it’s as close as you can get to a circle jerk without getting wet. Ah, yes, the "I haven't been paying attention therefore it's not happening" argument. The last mass shooting was December 18... also known as YESTERDAY.. You should be alarmed because this is your fucking country. Do you not care about you fellow countrymen, women and children getting injured and dying every day? Or your own future children? What about yourself? Do you care about yourself? How does this not scare you to shits knowing that the next lan you attend some asshole can show up and shoot half the attendants because he's muffed about losing in Fifa?! You're claiming you're not taking a side, but you are. By actively saying you don't care, you are taking a stance that status quo is ok. Also you need to look up the word for cirklejerk. People arguing against each other is about as far away from that as you can get. But thank you so much for coming in here and contributing to the discussion. Your input has truly been valuable. | ||
|
Aveng3r
United States2411 Posts
On December 20 2018 00:55 Sero wrote: The last mass shooting that I’m aware of took place in Thousand Oaks, California on November 7. Today is December 19. That was, like, 6 weeks ago dude. Why should I be alarmed? Because you enjoy arguing about another country’s gun control policy endlessly? No, you mean that I should be alarmed and hysterical about mass shootings and hurry to enact gun control laws, right? You must have misunderstood my post. I’m not taking a side in your little debate here, so you can save it for Danglars. Yeah, there’s more than 3 posters in this thread. Good job spotting that hyperbole. My point is that the majority of posts are made by the same few people and it’s as close as you can get to a circle jerk without getting wet. What kind of dumbass post is this? You really came in here to berate people for discussing the topic of the thread? | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On December 19 2018 23:21 Sero wrote: I see this thread all the time thanks to its needlessly long title, and never once has it been accurate. Seeing it constantly gets really tiresome. No, there was not another mass shooting. There’s just the same 3 people having a circular argument for years without persuading anyone. Maybe you’ll change their minds next post though. If it's really that tiresome for you, maybe it's the same for others, and you can pop into the website feedback thread and propose shortening/locking/warning for off-topic. I'm just posting in the de-facto gun control/gun rights thread, and the engagement with the topic always spikes after a mass shooting. Also, the "people disagree on what to do" part of the topic is still relevant today. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On December 19 2018 23:21 Sero wrote: I see this thread all the time thanks to its needlessly long title, and never once has it been accurate. Seeing it constantly gets really tiresome. No, there was not another mass shooting. There’s just the same 3 people having a circular argument for years without persuading anyone. Maybe you’ll change their minds next post though. The thread is a meta commentary on the gun control debate itself. Before we used to threads about posted about each specific shooting in the US, with the same arguments rehashed each time between the same people. Over time, people started to comment on this behavior and the seeming intractable issues and regurgitated arguments. One day in the year of our lord, 2012, someone our friend from Finland decided to post this thread. Kindly note the legendary Onion article that exists to point out how amazingly stupid this debate has become. https://www.theonion.com/no-way-to-prevent-this-says-only-nation-where-this-r-1830308976 The Onion repost the same article every time there is a mass shooting and only changing minor details to mirror the city and number of people killed. We are trapped in the circular argument because that maintains the status quo, which is the goal of the folks who want zero gun laws passed. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On December 20 2018 03:55 Plansix wrote: The thread is a meta commentary on the gun control debate itself. Before we used to threads about posted about each specific shooting in the US, with the same arguments rehashed each time between the same people. Over time, people started to comment on this behavior and the seeming intractable issues and regurgitated arguments. One day in the year of our lord, 2012, someone our friend from Finland decided to post this thread. Kindly note the legendary Onion article that exists to point out how amazingly stupid this debate has become. https://www.theonion.com/no-way-to-prevent-this-says-only-nation-where-this-r-1830308976 The Onion repost the same article every time there is a mass shooting and only changing minor details to mirror the city and number of people killed. We are trapped in the circular argument because that maintains the status quo, which is the goal of the folks who want zero gun laws passed. And gun control advocates repost the Onion article on a regular basis and the cycle continues. I also think the thread is a meta commentary on the debate. After every mass shooting, a bunch of people sitting on the sidelines on the issue or otherwise unengaged jump in and demand action. Bans, confiscation, magazine size, attachments, scary looking black things we want to call assault rifles (okay, maybe we'll settle for the nebulous "assault weapons), red flag laws. Later, disparagement on even the legitimacy of keeping a gun for self defense or home defense, why owning a gun is stupid (period!), and gun owners (that don't fit sportsmen and rural wild animals carve-outs) need to think like me on gun laws or they're part of the problem. Then it quiets down until the next mass shooting (and workplace violence, gang violence, and terrorist violence only count if poster says it counts). The thread title mimics the behavior on the issue, because the debate is rife with "activists-for-a-day" that will move on to another topic when it gets boring or hard. The people that stick around probably have debated the various facets for a long time and have formed strong opinions on the lines of argument that crop up routinely. I don't think too many expect to change minds from having an argument on the internet, to put it back to Sero's post. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
ShambhalaWar
United States930 Posts
On December 20 2018 00:55 Sero wrote: The last mass shooting that I’m aware of took place in Thousand Oaks, California on November 7. Today is December 19. That was, like, 6 weeks ago dude. Why should I be alarmed? Because you enjoy arguing about another country’s gun control policy endlessly? No, you mean that I should be alarmed and hysterical about mass shootings and hurry to enact gun control laws, right? You must have misunderstood my post. I’m not taking a side in your little debate here, so you can save it for Danglars. Yeah, there’s more than 3 posters in this thread. Good job spotting that hyperbole. My point is that the majority of posts are made by the same few people and it’s as close as you can get to a circle jerk without getting wet. Such a weird post. On another note... https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/17/us/pittsburgh-assault-weapon-ban/index.html Love this, hope we see more of it. Also love the bump stock ban. It was honestly insane that Obama didn't do anything about it... go figure it was Trump. I'll never figure it out. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States24125 Posts
On December 20 2018 15:32 ShambhalaWar wrote: + Show Spoiler + On December 20 2018 00:55 Sero wrote: The last mass shooting that I’m aware of took place in Thousand Oaks, California on November 7. Today is December 19. That was, like, 6 weeks ago dude. Why should I be alarmed? Because you enjoy arguing about another country’s gun control policy endlessly? No, you mean that I should be alarmed and hysterical about mass shootings and hurry to enact gun control laws, right? You must have misunderstood my post. I’m not taking a side in your little debate here, so you can save it for Danglars. Yeah, there’s more than 3 posters in this thread. Good job spotting that hyperbole. My point is that the majority of posts are made by the same few people and it’s as close as you can get to a circle jerk without getting wet. Such a weird post. On another note... https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/17/us/pittsburgh-assault-weapon-ban/index.html Love this, hope we see more of it. Also love the bump stock ban. It was honestly insane that Obama didn't do anything about it... go figure it was Trump. I'll never figure it out. What exactly are you hoping to see more of? | ||
|
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom9915 Posts
This seems... strange. Do people use assault rifles for suicide? | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States24125 Posts
On December 20 2018 18:20 Jockmcplop wrote: That article claims that trying to ban assault rifles has something to do with suicide rates. This seems... strange. Do people use assault rifles for suicide? Handguns make up the majority of suicide by guns according to the research I've seen (but it is from 1985). Seems like a poorly written and considered policy to me but I guess it's satisfactory for the "anything is better than nothing" crowd. | ||
|
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom9915 Posts
On December 20 2018 18:31 GreenHorizons wrote: Handguns make up the majority of suicide by guns according to the research I've seen (but it is from 1985). Seems like a poorly written and considered policy to me but I guess it's satisfactory for the "anything is better than nothing" crowd. I mean I'm all for banning assault rifles, good job on that, but for Christ's sake people should do the most basic research. I know nothing about guns at all (except that they are bad lol) but clearly if you want to have an effect on suicide rates mandatory waiting periods for buying guns is the way to go, because it gives people time to reconsider what they are going to do. This is like banning bazookas to try and get a grip on gang violence. | ||
|
Excludos
Norway8267 Posts
On December 20 2018 18:41 Jockmcplop wrote: I mean I'm all for banning assault rifles, good job on that, but for Christ's sake people should do the most basic research. I know nothing about guns at all (except that they are bad lol) but clearly if you want to have an effect on suicide rates mandatory waiting periods for buying guns is the way to go, because it gives people time to reconsider what they are going to do. This is like banning bazookas to try and get a grip on gang violence. Not to be "that guy" (well, I am now I guess), but assault rifles have been practically banned since 1986. Assault rifles is the term for select fire rifles (fully automatic) with detachable magazines and an intermitten cartridge (around 5.56/.223). You can still get them, but the hoops you have to go through are insane enough, and costly enough, for normal people not to stand a chance. The article talks about "assault weapons", which is a term with no definition. The word just started popping up from people who have no idea what they're talking about. Over the years, it's come to mean "weapons that looks military ish", but it's still kinda vague. Talking about banning something with no definition is not really valuable to the conversation. | ||
micronesia
United States24780 Posts
1) Folks were talking about the history and name of this thread. This thread's name changed several times as the users and mods collectively tried to figure out how to allow discussion about gun control on these forums. One day, when it became clear to Kwark (I believe it was Kwark) that this thread seems to be bumped whenever there is a mass shooting, and then people argue fruitlessly about what to do about it, Kwark named the thread to be what it is today. As others have said, despite the specific title the thread is really an ongoing discussion about gun control and lack of gun control. 2) Regarding the Pittsburgh law banning assault weapons, here is what the article specifically says: "Among the weapons that would be banned are any rifles with a pistol grip, folding stock and detachable magazine. The legislation specifically bans several AR-15 style weapons by name. The weapons — semi-automatic variants of the M-4 and M-16 type weapons issued to US troops — have been used in a plethora of shootings in the past few years, including the October 27 attack on the Tree of Life synagogue. " Essentially the law seems to be banning Ryder trucks because truck bombers always use Ryder trucks even though U-Haul or Penske trucks are equally viable for use by truck bombers, yet they remain unbanned. It does indeed seem to be a "well let's do something" effort. 10 Seems like a reasonable magazine size limit though, and I support bump stock bans so long as the devices are properly captured by the words. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States24125 Posts
On December 20 2018 20:50 micronesia wrote: Two things: 1) Folks were talking about the history and name of this thread. This thread's name changed several times as the users and mods collectively tried to figure out how to allow discussion about gun control on these forums. One day, when it became clear to Kwark (I believe it was Kwark) that this thread seems to be bumped whenever there is a mass shooting, and then people argue fruitlessly about what to do about it, Kwark named the thread to be what it is today. As others have said, despite the specific title the thread is really an ongoing discussion about gun control and lack of gun control. 2) Regarding the Pittsburgh law banning assault weapons, here is what the article specifically says: "Among the weapons that would be banned are any rifles with a pistol grip, folding stock and detachable magazine. The legislation specifically bans several AR-15 style weapons by name. The weapons — semi-automatic variants of the M-4 and M-16 type weapons issued to US troops — have been used in a plethora of shootings in the past few years, including the October 27 attack on the Tree of Life synagogue. " Essentially the law seems to be banning Ryder trucks because truck bombers always use Ryder trucks even though U-Haul or Penske trucks are equally viable for use by truck bombers, yet they remain unbanned. It does indeed seem to be a "well let's do something" effort. 10 Seems like a reasonable magazine size limit though, and I support bump stock bans so long as the devices are properly capture by the words. They effectively sabotage progress by refusing to learn about what they are trying to regulate and it's hard to accept it isn't intentional at this point. Some rep out in NY put up an especially bad one iirc. | ||
| ||
