You cannot even remain slightly civil before you piss yourself with emotional outbursts. You're not capable of having an adult discussion which is why I do not indulge you and usually ignore you.
Please stop getting so emotional? Pretty please? Just keep it civil, dude. Don't make us like the others.
No, the topic of the thread is the Sutherland Texas Shooting. The topic you replied to and I replied to is more gun control. I said the gun control was in place: he did not legally possess that firearm.
So your response was to throw a red herring out there that is irrelevant. Then you pretended like it was the greatest argument ever made.
And now you're pretending like stopping less than .01% of violence in the US is a magical solution to the violence in the US.
And when I directed your attention to that, you got mad and now want to make this "ONLY ABOUT MASS SHOOTINGS AND THAT'S IT. NOTHING ELSE. JUST MASS SHOOTINGS."
Okay, great. You care about mass shootings, only. But gun control laws clearly do not stop mass shootings in the US. You cannot use Australia because Australia is not an apples to apples comparison.
I've directed your attention to Russia which has much stricter gun control laws and far fewer guns in circulation than the US and yet has far far more homicides.
I don't want to be anything with you. You're unreasonable, get too emotional, and are very illogical.
I couldn't care less about your bad point regarding Australia. It's never a topic I addressed or wanted to talk about until I chose to indulge a post ago.
You "DEMANDED, BY GAWD!!!!!!!" someone address your bad point. Your very bad idea about doing an illogical comparison with Australia. You need to be intellectually honest with yourself: you're dead set on your Australia thing being the end all be all. You're not open for debate. You're not open to the idea that your example is a poor comparison to the US and can never work in the US. You're not looking for someone to provide a rebuttal (I did, but it made you very upset that I listed other countries with lots of gun ownership but far far less violent crime).
If you're not happy about that, then go to any of the other countries that researcher listed. How often do mas shootings occur there?
So let's directly guns and violence in Australia since 1996:
Murders went up in 1999, in Australia, which was after your high prized gun laws went into place.
Additionally, several mass murders took place in Australia since 1996.
And if you want to use Australia's numbers for homicide, then we can compare apples to oranges:
US Gun Homicides dropped more from 1993 to 2013 than Australia's murders did from 1996 until 2014:
USA: dropped 43%
Australia: dropped 23%
Again, that's an apples to oranges comparison. Actual homicide rates in the US dropped by more than half since 1980. That's an apples to apples to comparison. Murders peaked in the US in the early 1990s so whatever we did in the US is better than Australia who saw a 23% drop in homicides sense then, right? By your logic, we're doing better than Australia, right? Since I am actually being intellectually honestly, I'll tell you the answer: it is not an apples to apples comparison so I cannot pretend like the US' policy on how to address violence is better than Australia's, despite the data being able to support that idea.
The Universal Background Check idea is what I'm referring to.
How do we enforce gun control laws on private sales? You can't. Jaden was coming close to it with technology but people will always and easily get around technological barriers, even if you institute 'buy back' programs to de-circulate guns.
But even mass shootings in the US, the vast majority are not done with automatic or automatic-like firearms. Less than 10% are.
But we do agree on one thing: banning those types of guns doesn't significantly decrease violent crime rates. Or at all: it could increase it if you use Glasgow as an example when they hit a peak on violent crime and murder rates in 2005 for the Western World (bordering on rates similar to war-torn African countries). But I won't pretend that it was due to the loss of firearms: just making a point about statistical significance and improper correlations.
As I've cited, better, not more, but better gun control laws mixed with:
better and universal healthcare
reducing our poverty rates
increasing our education rates
Will actually have a meaningful and significant reduction on violence in the US. That includes the item you are laser focused on: mass shootings.
Gender: Male Location: The Proud Nation of Kekistan
Certainly more helpful than whatever the **** you're doing in this thread tbh
Unless you actively gave to or participated in some charity that's helping in the aftermath of this tragedy, you're not being any more of use. I'm not exactly doing less than anyone else in this thread to help with the situation tbh, unless there's some charity shit I don't know of.
Could it be that you have some special contempt for and gripe with religion that you seized on this thread as an excuse to attack people for expressing empathy for the victims, or is this your way of morally grandstanding and suggesting anyone who disagrees with you on gun control policy is just uncaring towards the victims of these tragedies?
__________________
Shadilay my brothers and sisters. With any luck we will throw off the shackles of normie oppression. We have nothing to lose but our chains! Praise Kek!
THE MOTTO IS "IN KEK WE TRUST"
Last edited by Emperordmb on Nov 6th, 2017 at 04:47 AM
Gender: Male Location: On a rock, floating through space..
No. More Americans killing each other with guns? This was completely unpredictable and totally unexpected. If only there had been some kind of warning.
Gender: Male Location: The Proud Nation of Kekistan
Again, no less useful than you bitching about people expressing basic empathy for other people.
__________________
Shadilay my brothers and sisters. With any luck we will throw off the shackles of normie oppression. We have nothing to lose but our chains! Praise Kek!
THE MOTTO IS "IN KEK WE TRUST"
You just need to look at, say, airport security to see where their priorities are. Too cheap to invest in a proper security system, but willing to spend just enough on poorly trained, underpaid help to create the illusion of security to people keep buying those overpriced plane tickets and food concessions..
__________________ What CDTM believes;
Never let anyone else define you. Don't be a jerk just to be a jerk, but if you are expressing your true inner feelings and beliefs, or at least trying to express that inner child, and everyone gets pissed off about it, never NEVER apologize for it. Let them think what they want, let them define you in their narrow little minds while they suppress every last piece of them just to keep a friend that never liked them for themselves in the first place.
__________________ Your Lord knows very well what is in your heart. Your soul suffices this day as a reckoner against you. I need no witnesses. You do not listen to your soul, but listen instead to your anger and your rage.
When you phrase it with a non-sequitur logical structure like that, of course it doesn't make sense. Anyone can form ridiculous structures like that and then pretend to defeat stupid arguments.
Mental healthcare will never be the answer to firearm regulation because they aren't the same thing. As Firefly pointed out, why not both? What you mean to say is that violence can be reduced by better gun regulation and better mental healthcare in the US.
As I pointed out, the stupid gun regulations in some states needs to go away. And the sparse or even lacking gun regulations need to be shored up in other states. That's in addition to all those other things I mentioned.
Wrong: violence needs to be addressed, not specifically gun violence. If other countries can do it, we can do it. You're make the mistake of a false dichotomy. It's not this or that. You don't have to make a choice between mutually exclusive poles. You can choose both at the same time. We agree that better gun regulation needs to be in place. I did not say more: I said better.
I don't see that at all in this thread. I see US Leftists using old, tired, and even ill-informed ideas on how to solve violence in the US and me, the most liberal person in this thread, knocking down the stupid ideas and using legit data to help steer people towards the proper solutions.
Has anyone in this thread represented the "other side" at all in this thread?
Or were you talking about US Americans and not this thread?
I wonder if mental health services ever helped anyone?
I've spent most of my young life in the system. For "tourettes", back when it was barely understood. Sat in individual sessions. Sat in groups. Was given meds.
All I remember about that time is just wishing to get it over with. I wouldn't say it 'helped" in any way talking to these guys, who all seemed pretty aloof and unapproachable..
__________________ What CDTM believes;
Never let anyone else define you. Don't be a jerk just to be a jerk, but if you are expressing your true inner feelings and beliefs, or at least trying to express that inner child, and everyone gets pissed off about it, never NEVER apologize for it. Let them think what they want, let them define you in their narrow little minds while they suppress every last piece of them just to keep a friend that never liked them for themselves in the first place.
we have to somehow magically cure 100% of all mental illness, because it makes too much sense to just not allow the mentally ill to own guns.
__________________ Your Lord knows very well what is in your heart. Your soul suffices this day as a reckoner against you. I need no witnesses. You do not listen to your soul, but listen instead to your anger and your rage.
Gender: Male Location: 4th Street Underpass, Manhattan
3 terrorist attacks in the span of slightly over a month. Interestingly, the least deadly attack, and the only attack not performed by a Caucasian male, was also the only attack that received both consolatory and legislative response from the president.