Originally posted by Robtard
@quanEvery time a Black man fires a gun certain people want to consider it a "mass shooting", even when there's zero deaths
If a black guy fires a gun and hits four or more people it's a mass shooting lol.
You're talking about the FBI deciding to apply the definition of mass murder to mass shootings. But it's batshit insane to say if I shoot 100 people and none die it's not a mass shooting.
Originally posted by Surtur
I read the article, it lists some of the reasons why Republicans don't want this. How do you feel about those? One guy talks about how it could potentially take a month to get a firearm.
I'm okay with it taking a month to get a firearm. But closer to 10 days is better. I think a cap (haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa! pun!) of 20 days wait should be in place to prevent states from abusing the second amendment with super long wait times.
So is my 10+ gun having little brother who is a gun hobbyist and has 4.5 acres to do target shooting and regularly hunts with his best friend.
Originally posted by Surtur
For anyone curious, here are the numbers:https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/past-tolls
You can look at the number of mass shootings in 2016 and compare it to the two following years and see my statement is correct.
2016: 382
2017:346
2018: 340My statement is 100% correct. Don't let TDS blind you.
Mass Shooting Events are increasing in frequency while deaths are going down.
I personally believe this is due to monitoring and prevention doing better to stop these events quickly before the bodies pile high.
Gilroy was stopped within minutes. Dayton was stopped in 30 seconds according to some places.
Originally posted by SurturFbi>you. Cute one example of 100 shot without at least fourth deaths.
If a black guy fires a gun and hits four or more people it's a mass shooting lol.You're talking about the FBI deciding to apply the definition of mass murder to mass shootings. But it's batshit insane to say if I shoot 100 people and none die it's not a mass shooting.
Originally posted by dadudemon
I'm okay with it taking a month to get a firearm. But closer to 10 days is better. I think a cap (haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa! pun!) of 20 days weight should be in place to prevent states from abusing the second amendment with super long wait times.So is my 10+ gun having little brother who is a gun hobbyist and has 4.5 acres to do target shooting and regularly hunts with his best friend.
There's nothing wrong with waiting 30d ays for a gun in the general sense.
It could potentially stop that rare would-be mass murderer from doing their thing as they could come to their senses between those 30 days.
Originally posted by dadudemon
Mass Shooting Events are increasing in frequency while deaths are going down.I personally believe this is due to monitoring and prevention doing better to stop these events quickly before the bodies pile high.
Gilroy was stopped within minutes. Dayton was stopped in 30 seconds according to some places.
Well the link I just gave you says the opposite.
If people wanna ignore the stats fine, but then I'd appreciate if the media and democrats stopped using it as a source.
Originally posted by dadudemon
I'm okay with it taking a month to get a firearm. But closer to 10 days is better. I think a cap (haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa! pun!) of 20 days wait should be in place to prevent states from abusing the second amendment with super long wait times.So is my 10+ gun having little brother who is a gun hobbyist and has 4.5 acres to do target shooting and regularly hunts with his best friend.
*shrug* So someone whose life is potentially in danger might have to wait 30 days. If you're cool with that okay.