Another Day in the USA

[Rebound]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

Amusingly it was also a gun free zone. 

It's horrifying that you find murdered high school students "amusing."

[Black Dog]

5 minutes ago, User said:

Gee, you are dumber than I thought, and I thought you were pretty dumb before this. 

If I am mocking the concept of a gun-free zone... hmm... I wonder what the alternative to that is. 

I support SROs and increased security measures and practices including allowing teachers/staff to be armed. 

So you support bandaid solutions involving putting more guns in schools thus increasing the risk to students this no evidence it actually reduces the probability or severity of school shootings just to avoid addressing the actual issue. What a loser.

[Yakuda]

1 hour ago, Black Dog said:

See normal people think participating in the democratic process should be easier than buying something to slaughter a classroom full of little kids, and if you think the opposite you shouldn't be allowed to do either.

Why should voting be easier if it is more consequential to the lives of more people on a daily basis than than owning a gun?  Since the obtuse leftists voted for that wingnut Biden, Russia invaded Ukraine, 13 American soldier have been killed and the Oct 7 massacre happened just for starters. Only a dimwit thinks voting should be easier. 

Let me give you a hypothetical,  if voting republican for the rest of your life guaranteed there would never be another school shooting would you vote Republican for the rest of your life? 

 

[Black Dog]

8 minutes ago, Yakuda said:

Why should voting be easier if it is more consequential to the lives of more people on a daily basis than than owning a gun? 

Because democracy depends on an active and engaged citizenry.

Why should it be harder to vote than buy a weapon of mass murder?

Quote

Since the obtuse leftists voted for that wingnut Biden, Russia invaded Ukraine, 13 American soldier have been killed and the Oct 7 massacre happened just for starters. Only a dimwit thinks voting should be easier. 

Yes I understand you only think democracy is good when it gives you the results you want. 

Quote

Let me give you a hypothetical,  if voting republican for the rest of your life guaranteed there would never be another school shooting would you vote Republican for the rest of your life? 

Well, that's a dumb hypothetical since Republicans are the objectively pro-school shooting party. If they weren't they would not be Republicans.

[Yakuda]

28 minutes ago, Black Dog said:

Because democracy depends on an active and engaged citizenry.

Why should it be harder to vote than buy a weapon of mass murder?

Yes I understand you only think democracy is good when it gives you the results you want. 

Well, that's a dumb hypothetical since Republicans are the objectively pro-school shooting party. If they weren't they would not be Republicans.

Right and voting has a greater impact on a greater number of people on a daily basis than guns. Glad we agree. Since it is so serious voting should not be easier. 

Leftists hate democracy.

So you wouldn't vote for Republicans for the rest of your life if it guaranteed no more school shootings. I love when dimwitted leftists admit their narrative is bullshit. Good job donkey boy

Edited September 5, 2024 by Yakuda

[CdnFox]

4 hours ago, Yakuda said:

Thank you. The number killed by abortion far outpaces shootings every year. 

Yeah i figured thats where you were going.  

[Black Dog]

7 minutes ago, Yakuda said:

Right and voting has a greater impact on a greater number of people on a daily basis than guns. Glad we agree. Since it is so serious voting should not be easier. 

It is precisely because it effects so many people that it should be more accessible, stupid.

Quote

Leftists hate democracy.

We're not the ones who want to make it harder to participate in the democratic process. Thats you, stupid.

Quote

So you wouldn't vote for Republicans for the rest of your life if it guaranteed no more school shootings. I love when dimwitted leftists admit their narrative is bullshit. Good job donkey boy

No, I simply reject your premise, stupid. Man, you're dumber than pigshit.

Edited September 5, 2024 by Black Dog

[Yakuda]

1 minute ago, CdnFox said:

Yeah i figured thats where you were going.  

Only because it's the truth 

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, Rebound said:

It's horrifying that you find murdered high school students "amusing."

Nobody was murdered in that picture. Do you see blood? Bodies?  A school got shot up. 

In fact the whole picture is meant to be a joke. The humor being that of course republicans care more about transing the kids than they do about schools being shot up. 

Soooo - is the poster horrifying you too for putting up a joke comic about a school shooting?

You realize you've just proven my point right?   

[Black Dog]

Just now, Yakuda said:

Only because it's the truth 

Here's a hypothetical for you: would you suck off a hundred feral hogs if it prevented one abortion?

[CdnFox]

4 hours ago, Black Dog said:

I can't take this claim seriously when you very clearly don't either.

Oh look, you opened with a lie. What a shock. 

You can't take it seriously because your echo chamber doesn't want you to.  I do take it very seriously which is why watching you dems and lefties behave like this is so disappointing. 

Quote

Banning certain weapons of certain calibres or capacities is by definition not banning all guns, even someone as chronically stupid as you should understand that.

Sure it is. We've seen it here quite a bit.  Here's precisely how it works and has worked.  They say "ban assault rifles and military rifles".  Seems reasonable right? Then all they have to do is keep adding to their definition of military rifle. Your hunting rifle? Why that's a super sniper rifle don't you know. Trudeau got called out for this just a year or so ago - they were banning 'military' guns and most hunting rifles would have qualified. 

So your hunting rifle becomes a sniper rifle. Your ipsc race gun becomes a terrorist handgun babykiller model mark 2.  Your .22 lr plinkster becomes "one of those guns gangsters off people with' especially if it'll chamber subsonics.

If you know even one thing about guns, you would know this: There really isn't a gun that's more dangerous than another gun. How they are used etc is what makes them dangerous. And does gary mauser's research showed clearly there is no correlation between the availability of guns and the murder rate. The murder rate that a country has does not go up if it has better access to guns or down if it has fewer. It's all over the map. And some of the states with the strictest gun laws have the highest murder rates and other states with the most relaxed gun laws have the lowest

The whole thing is complete Bullshit. And as I showed here as we've seen several times already in this very thread the democratic reaction  Any republican, any gun owner, any gun. Of course gun owners in the states take one look at that and dig their heels in.

Things can start to get better when lunatics like yourself and the other posters here that behave like rabid animals and deny the simple truths put aside their bigotry and hatred and take the issue seriously. Until then you will continue to enjoy having the opportunity to virtue signal happily

18 minutes ago, Black Dog said:

Here's a hypothetical for you: would you suck off a hundred feral hogs if it prevented one abortion?

Will you stop worrying, nobody's trying to take your job. 

[Aristides]

3 hours ago, Yakuda said:

Untrue but why dont you ask instead of assume? Too much work for you? Better to remain stupid then ask questions right? 

Good. Then by that reasoning firearms are not the problem. There might be hope for you 

What's the problem then, you get all sweaty about abortions but aren't willing to do anything to prevent live children from being murdered.

5 hours ago, User said:

And when someone still shows up with a gun to your magical gun-free zones... 

There really is no such thing as a gun free zone in the US.

[CdnFox]

3 minutes ago, Aristides said:

 

There really is no such thing as a gun free zone in the US.

there must be, it's the law. Guns are banned from those zones. You said banning guns would solve problems. It's almost like you're admitting it's a bad idea

[Aristides]

Quote

 

Sure it is. We've seen it here quite a bit.  Here's precisely how it works and has worked.  They say "ban assault rifles and military rifles".  Seems reasonable right? Then all they have to do is keep adding to their definition of military rifle. Your hunting rifle? Why that's a super sniper rifle don't you know. Trudeau got called out for this just a year or so ago - they were banning 'military' guns and most hunting rifles would have qualified. 

So your hunting rifle becomes a sniper rifle. Your ipsc race gun becomes a terrorist handgun babykiller model mark 2.  Your .22 lr plinkster becomes "one of those guns gangsters off people with' especially if it'll chamber subsonics.

 

Except the US had an assault weapons ban for 20 years and that never happened. Bush 2 refused to renew it and the rest is history.

 

[User]

17 minutes ago, Aristides said:

There really is no such thing as a gun free zone in the US.

For the good guys, yes. 

You folks on the left make sure the bad guys know they are almost certainly going to be the only ones armed in your magical gun free zones. 

[User]

7 minutes ago, Aristides said:

 

Except the US had an assault weapons ban for 20 years and that never happened. Bush 2 refused to renew it and the rest is history.

 

The US had a ban for 10 years, and it was based on several characteristics defining what made a gun an "assault weapon"

It was almost meaningless and just an annoyance. 

You could have the same exact AR-15, but without a compensator, grenade launcher lugs, or bayonet fixture. It's still a semi-automatic rifle. 

 

[impartialobserver]

Gun laws only act as a deterrent in some cases. They are a product of folks wanting to do something, anything to not have these random spree killings. There is no miracle drug for this... harsh but true. 

[User]

3 hours ago, Black Dog said:

So you support bandaid solutions involving putting more guns in schools thus increasing the risk to students this no evidence it actually reduces the probability or severity of school shootings just to avoid addressing the actual issue. What a loser.

How do mass shootings end?

Almost all of them end either two ways: The bad guy chooses to end it most often by killing themselves or other people with guns show up and stop them. 

Allowing folks the means to defend themselves gets us more quickly to the solution to stopping the bad people. 

But sure... keep thinking the no-gun signs protect the kids...

 

[Yakuda]

1 hour ago, Black Dog said:

It is precisely because it effects so many people that it should be more accessible, stupid.

We're not the ones who want to make it harder to participate in the democratic process. Thats you, stupid.

No, I simply reject your premise, stupid. Man, you're dumber than pigshit.

 Not with brain damaged leftists voting you shouldn't pinhead

[Yakuda]

32 minutes ago, Aristides said:

What's the problem then, you get all sweaty about abortions but aren't willing to do anything to prevent live children from being murdered.

There really is no such thing as a gun free zone in the US.

Copy and paste the evidence you have for that moronic conclusion 

 

Thank God. Ever notice that these nuts that shoot kids in schools never pick a police station or NRA convention to shoot up? 

[Black Dog]

38 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Oh look, you opened with a lie. What a shock. 

I'm not lying when I say I don't take you seriously. You're an absolute joke.

Quote

You can't take it seriously because your echo chamber doesn't want you to.  I do take it very seriously which is why watching you dems and lefties behave like this is so disappointing. 

Yes I know you take lying very seriously. You lie like it's your job.

Quote

Sure it is. We've seen it here quite a bit.  Here's precisely how it works and has worked.  They say "ban assault rifles and military rifles".  Seems reasonable right? Then all they have to do is keep adding to their definition of military rifle. Your hunting rifle? Why that's a super sniper rifle don't you know. Trudeau got called out for this just a year or so ago - they were banning 'military' guns and most hunting rifles would have qualified. 

Why are you blathering about Trudeau here, this is about your unsupported claim that Democrats want to ban all guns.

Quote

If you know even one thing about guns, you would know this: There really isn't a gun that's more dangerous than another gun. How they are used etc is what makes them dangerous.

OK tell you what: you can take a shot at me with a .22 from 50 feet away and then I get to take a shot at you with a Barrett M82 from the same distance and we'll see who walks away.

Quote

And does gary mauser's research showed clearly there is no correlation between the availability of guns and the murder rate. The murder rate that a country has does not go up if it has better access to guns or down if it has fewer. It's all over the map.

I've never heard of the guy, is he one of John Lott's alter egos?

Quote

And some of the states with the strictest gun laws have the highest murder rates and other states with the most relaxed gun laws have the lowest

You know what states with the strictest gun laws have the lowest rates of? Gun deaths.

Quote

The whole thing is complete Bullshit. And as I showed here as we've seen several times already in this very thread the democratic reaction  Any republican, any gun owner, any gun. Of course gun owners in the states take one look at that and dig their heels in.

All we've seen is your hysterical reaction to a strawman of your own making.

Quote

Things can start to get better when lunatics like yourself and the other posters here that behave like rabid animals and deny the simple truths put aside their bigotry and hatred and take the issue seriously. Until then you will continue to enjoy having the opportunity to virtue signal happily

Eat a bullet.

[Black Dog]

13 minutes ago, User said:

How do mass shootings end?

Almost all of them end either two ways: The bad guy chooses to end it most often by killing themselves or other people with guns show up and stop them. 

More mass shootings have been stopped by unarmed people than people with guns.

Quote

 

Allowing folks the means to defend themselves gets us more quickly to the solution to stopping the bad people. 

But sure... keep thinking the no-gun signs protect the kids...

 

Except there's little to no evidence that armed guards in schools prevent or stop mass shootings, just as there's little to no evidence that being a "gun free zone" makes a place more likely to be targeted. As I said, two of the worst mass school shooting in history  happened at schools where a SRO was present.

[CdnFox]

14 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

Gun laws only act as a deterrent in some cases. They are a product of folks wanting to do something, anything to not have these random spree killings. There is no miracle drug for this... harsh but true. 

Well taking a break from the ridiculous gun argument for a moment, the fact is there are some things that can be done. There are some top notch researchers in this field and they have come to the conclusion that nobody just snaps. People get to this point through a path and it is a path that can be recognized if you know what to look for.

Canadian police have had much much better luck stopping these events before they happen. There are a number of reasons for this including that they have more powers when red flags are raised then some of their American counterparts.

The number one solution is to help people recognize when someone is at risk of this kind of thing and to provide them with tools to address it one way or another in a fashion that doesn't wind up getting the person shot.

Once somebody has decided to kill, it doesn't really matter what tool they use. The trick is to get them before they get to that point

[impartialobserver]

5 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Well taking a break from the ridiculous gun argument for a moment, the fact is there are some things that can be done. There are some top notch researchers in this field and they have come to the conclusion that nobody just snaps. People get to this point through a path and it is a path that can be recognized if you know what to look for.

Canadian police have had much much better luck stopping these events before they happen. There are a number of reasons for this including that they have more powers when red flags are raised then some of their American counterparts.

The number one solution is to help people recognize when someone is at risk of this kind of thing and to provide them with tools to address it one way or another in a fashion that doesn't wind up getting the person shot.

Once somebody has decided to kill, it doesn't really matter what tool they use. The trick is to get them before they get to that point

Even then, there are exceptions. Stephen Paddock did not let on that anything was bothering him. All that the very few people close to him knew was that his gambling fortunes were starting to not be so great. 

[CdnFox]

6 minutes ago, Black Dog said:

I'm not lying when I say I don't take you seriously. You're an absolute joke.

 

Of course you're lying. That's why you can't really address the points. You get angry and frustrated that what I'm saying is correct because it goes against your echo chamber.

Quote

OK tell you what: you can take a shot at me with a .22 from 50 feet away and then I get to take a shot at you with a Barrett M82 from the same distance and we'll see who walks away.

Me  if i go first. every time. Killed a Looooooooota critters with a 22 lr.  But i'll say something nice at your funeral   

Wheras there's a pretty good chance you won't hit me with the BMG.  It's heavy, it's very difficult to manage the recoil, it's a hard to shoot gun unless you've got a lot of experience with them and unless you can set it up with a good rest and a fairly stationary target etc.

You realize there's a reason they don't use them much for sniper rifles right? Most snipers prefer 338 lapua  or.... the venerable 308, one of the most common HUNTING rounds in the world if we're talking about police snipers and such. 

Not really a gun owner are you. 

8 minutes ago, Black Dog said:

I've never heard of the guy, is he one of John Lott's alter egos?

no. Is a Canadian researcher that has produced a wide body of research on the subject and has spoken at the united nations and then consulted by a number of agencies. He's extremely well respected and his work is backed up with extensive data

The reason you've never heard of him is because you don't care about the facts.

9 minutes ago, Black Dog said:

You know what states with the strictest gun laws have the lowest rates of? Gun deaths.

Not really. Utah for example has very low gun laws and very few 'gun deaths' , but you just demonstrated a classic liberal lie that is frequently used.  "gun" deaths.  As if whether or not someone is murdered with a gun or a knife makes them less dead.  so lets take a look at whether or not gun laws actually reduce killings or if killers just find other ways. 

District of columbia has some of the toughest gun laws in the us.  Highest murder  rate most years.  Hmmmm. 

Utah has very few gun laws, very low murder rate.  Hmmm. 

Maryland has very strict gun laws, number 9 in homicides per capita  How odd. 

Why  it's almost as if gun laws have absolutely no effect on actual violence.

That's why anti-gun losers try to argue in terms of gun deaths rather than deaths. They don't actually care about deaths they just want to make it look like gun deaths are a problem. Like a stabbing death is no big deal but it's the gun deaths we should be worked up about.

Again, the biggest mass murders in American history did not happen with a gun.

And in fact the biggest mass killers are serial killers, and very few of them use a gun. Just because their murders don't all happen on the same day doesn't make them any less of a problem or tragedy.

But we don't care about those we only care about gun deaths. Nobody really died if there's no gun involved you see.

 

The facts and the evidence are not on your side. Wanton unjustified emotion is but that's about it.