Originally posted by Esau Cairn
Errr we haven't had a mass shooting in over 22 years.It's only 3 months into 2018 & your 18th school shooting so far, this year alone kinda doesn't back your argument.
You're talking about "mass shootings", not homicides. We are not talking about the same thing. And has any credible research been done to prove that the strict gun control laws prevented mass shootings?
Because my Australian coworker says guns are quite common in Australia, still, and he has no idea WTF us "pommie bastards" are talking about.
As I understand the "Holy land of Australian Strict Gun Control Laws" argument it is as follows:
1. Australia confiscated almost all of guns with a "buy-back" program.
2. Mass shootings disappeared because no one has anymore guns.
From what I understand neither 1 nor 2 are correct.
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
In the imagination of conservatives, having a firearm turns them all into John Rambo.
Despite my liberal position on guns, this is correct. Unless your gun is very quickly accessible in all sorts of places in your home (very unsafe), you're not going to stop an intruder with a gun. If you have it properly locked up in a gun safe, unless you have tiny gun safes all over than can open in less than a second (finger print scan that, as far as I am aware, doesn't exist on gun safes that operate that quickly), you're not going to save yourself from an intruder who is armed.
Unless you have plenty of time to anticipate the intruder because he's trying to break in:
http://abcnews.go.com/US/okla-woman-shoots-kills-intruder911-operators-shoot/story?id=15285605
A young Oklahoma mother shot and killed an intruder to protect her 3-month-old baby on New Year's Eve, less than a week after the baby's father died of cancer.Sarah McKinley says that a week earlier a man named Justin Martin dropped by on the day of her husband's funeral, claiming that he was a neighbor who wanted to say hello. The 18-year-old Oklahoma City area woman did not let him into her home that day.
On New Year's Eve Martin returned with another man, Dustin Stewart, and this time was armed with a 12-inch hunting knife. The two soon began trying to break into McKinley's home.
As one of the men was going from door to door outside her home trying to gain entry, McKinley called 911 and grabbed her 12-gauge shotgun.
McKinley told ABC News Oklahoma City affiliate KOCO that she quickly got her 12 gauge, went into her bedroom and got a pistol, put the bottle in the baby's mouth and called 911.
"I've got two guns in my hand -- is it okay to shoot him if he comes in this door?" the young mother asked the 911 dispatcher. "I'm here by myself with my infant baby, can I please get a dispatcher out here immediately?"
The 911 dispatcher confirmed with McKinley that the doors to her home were locked as she asked again if it was okay to shoot the intruder if he were to come through her door.
"I can't tell you that you can do that but you do what you have to do to protect your baby," the dispatcher told her. McKinley was on the phone with 911 for a total of 21 minutes.
When Martin kicked in the door and came after her with the knife, the teen mom shot and killed the 24-year-old. Police are calling the shooting justified.
"You're allowed to shoot an unauthorized person that is in your home. The law provides you the remedy, and sanctions the use of deadly force," Det. Dan Huff of the Blanchard police said.
Stewart soon turned himself in to police.
McKinley said that she was at home alone with her newborn that night because her husband just died of cancer on Christmas Day.
"I wouldn't have done it, but it was my son," McKinley told ABC News Oklahoma City affiliate KOCO. "It's not an easy decision to make, but it was either going to be him or my son. And it wasn't going to be my son. There's nothing more dangerous than a woman with a child."
That woman is super unlucky. Only 18, has a newborn. Husband just died of cancer. And some assholes are trying to (probably) rape her.
Originally posted by dadudemon
I don't understand why they are using the Star of David.
They're trying to force a narrative that gun owners in America are like Jews in Nazi Germany,ostracized, oppressed, stripped of rights etc.
They're a bunch of whiny babies in reality. They have the gun industry and the NRA with their billions in politician's pockets backing them. They even have the President behind them, as he's in the NRA's pocket as well.
I would be okay with banning guns only if we banned alcohol as well. 88,000 people die from alcohol related deaths each year in the US. https://www.niaaa.nih.gov/alcohol-health/overview-alcohol-consumption/alcohol-facts-and-statistics
Also 2.5 million years of potential life lost each year due to alcohol.
https://www.cdc.gov/alcohol/fact-sheets/alcohol-use.htm
That pales in comparison to the 13,000 gun homicides per year.
https://everytownresearch.org/gun-violence-by-the-numbers/
Originally posted by Kurk
I would be okay with banning guns only if we banned alcohol as well. 88,000 people die from alcohol related deaths each year in the US. https://www.niaaa.nih.gov/alcohol-health/overview-alcohol-consumption/alcohol-facts-and-statistics
Also 2.5 million years of potential life lost each year due to alcohol.
https://www.cdc.gov/alcohol/fact-sheets/alcohol-use.htmThat pales in comparison to the 13,000 gun homicides per year.
https://everytownresearch.org/gun-violence-by-the-numbers/
Yeah, I can totally get on board with that if they also add fast food, sugary products, and red meat.
Murica, land of the free.
Originally posted by Robtard
They're trying to force a narrative that gun owners in America are like Jews in Nazi Germany,ostracized, oppressed, stripped of rights etc.They're a bunch of whiny babies in reality. They have the gun industry and the NRA with their billions in politician's pockets backing them. They even have the President behind them, as he's in the NRA's pocket as well.
Oh, that makes sense. They are painting themselves as the Jews who were disarmed by Nazi Germany and systematically killed (everyone knows this terrible story).
I think it's a bit disingenuous to do that. Dishonest, maybe? It's a bit stupid. Far more likely, if there is the American Civil War II, the gun-hating pansy lefties will die by the millions quite quickly. Pretending like they (the conservatards) are like oppressed Jews is simply stupid.
Originally posted by snowdragon
Yeah, I can totally get on board with that if they also add fast food, sugary products, and red meat.Murica, land of the free.
America hasn't been free in a long time. All we are is tax payers for redistribution. every single persons data is collected, saved and stored by not only the government but TransUnion, Equifax and Experian that is sold to the highest or lowerst bidder depending on the organization.
Originally posted by Kurk
I would be okay with banning guns only if we banned alcohol as well. 88,000 people die from alcohol related deaths each year in the US. https://www.niaaa.nih.gov/alcohol-health/overview-alcohol-consumption/alcohol-facts-and-statistics
Also 2.5 million years of potential life lost each year due to alcohol.
https://www.cdc.gov/alcohol/fact-sheets/alcohol-use.htmThat pales in comparison to the 13,000 gun homicides per year.
https://everytownresearch.org/gun-violence-by-the-numbers/
I've made a similar argument. However, as we know, drug prohibitions never work and cause more deaths.
http://www.druglibrary.org/prohibitionresults1.htm
The Short Answer:Alcohol consumption rose to record levels during alcohol prohibition.
...By 1926, most of the problems were worse than they had been before Prohibition went into effect and there were a number of new problems -- such as a drinking epidemic among children -- that had not been there before.
So more prohibitions don't work. Especially on Freedom Loving Americans.
Safer cars and self driving cars will prevent some of those alcohol deaths.