Shooting in Texas

[welfare]

Originally Posted by iwantaskyline

Of course welfare of all people would post an alt-right youtube channel's video as his source.

"Alt-right"
Hahahaha.

Originally Posted by DragonChi

The trending down was one of his points of many. I'm sure it was trending down when the event that caused the stricter gun control happened as well right?

Which countries would these be?

Mexico, Jamaica, South Africa, etc...

[Zedbra]

Gun rights in USA have been in place for over 100 years
Schools used to allow students to bring their guns to schools, there were shooting clubs and gun safety up to the 70's. - There were no mass school shootings.

So, if the guns have always been there, and the culture was civilized to the point that mass school shootings didn't exist - how is not addressing this new culture not prominent but the sheeple choose to blame an object? The problem with common sense these days is that it isn't common anymore - that's the new culture.

[DragonChi]

Originally Posted by welfare

"Alt-right"
Hahahaha.


Mexico, Jamaica, South Africa, etc...

Mexico:

"The right to keep arms
In regard to the right to keep arms, Title II, Chapter II, Article 15 of the Federal Law of Firearms and Explosives states:

(translated) Weapons may be kept in the home for security and legitimate defense of its dwellers. Their possession imposes the duty to manifest them to the Secretariat of National Defense for their registration. For every weapon, record of its registration will be issued.[22]
Under this clause, citizens are entitled to keep firearms of the type and calibers permitted by law for their security and defense within their home only. Every weapon must be registered with the federal government. While federal law does not set a limit, in legal practice, citizens are only allowed to keep a total of 10 registered firearms (nine long guns, one handgun) per household.

Additionally, a place of business or employment is not covered under this provision unless the place of business is the same as the place of residence (home business) and therefore it is illegal to keep or carry a firearm in a place of business, even if the business is owned by the lawful registered owner of the weapon unless the appropriate license to carry outside the home is issued by SEDENA.[23]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Mexico

Sounds awefully familiar?

[DragonChi]

Furthermore,

"Mexicans have a right to own firearms,[1] but legal purchase from the single Mexican gun shop in Mexico City, controlled by the Army, is extremely difficult.[2] Guns smuggled into Mexico are sometimes obtained at gunshops in the United States and carried across the US-Mexico border.[3][4] In other cases the guns are obtained through Guatemalan borders[5] or stolen from the police or military.[6] Consequently, black market firearms are widely available. Many firearms are acquired in the U.S. by women with no criminal history, who transfer their purchases to smugglers through relatives, boyfriends and acquaintances who then smuggle them to Mexico a few at a time.[7] The most common smuggled firearms include AR-15 and AK-47 type rifles, and FN 5.7 caliber semi-automatic pistols. Many firearms are purchased in the United States in a semi-automatic configuration before being converted to fire as select fire machine guns.[8] Mexico seized in 2009 a combined total of more than 4,400 firearms of the AK-47 and AR-15 type, and 30% of AK-47 type rifles seized have been modified to select fire weapons, effectively creating assault rifles.[9]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smuggl...ms_into_Mexico

Nice to choose a countries where you can openly bribe authorities. Totally apples to baseballs comparison.

[DragonChi]

Originally Posted by Zedbra

Gun rights in USA have been in place for over 100 years
Schools used to allow students to bring their guns to schools, there were shooting clubs and gun safety up to the 70's. - There were no mass school shootings.

So, if the guns have always been there, and the culture was civilized to the point that mass school shootings didn't exist - how is not addressing this new culture not prominent but the sheeple choose to blame an object? The problem with common sense these days is that it isn't common anymore - that's the new culture.

Perhaps the transition from a culture based on independence, homesteading, and reliance on neighbours to survive had something to do with it. In the current world there is no need to carry firearms in the civilian world other than for entertainment.

[welfare]

Originally Posted by DragonChi

Nice to choose a countries where you can openly bribe authorities. Totally apples to baseballs comparison.

so would it be correct to assume that laws don't necessarily determine outcome?

[DragonChi]

It would be correct to assume that if gun purchases weren't overtly available in the surrounding countries, there would be no supply.

Ever wonder why nuclear weapon non-proliferation is such a big deal?

[iwantaskyline]

Originally Posted by Zedbra

Gun rights in USA have been in place for over 100 years
Schools used to allow students to bring their guns to schools, there were shooting clubs and gun safety up to the 70's. - There were no mass school shootings.

So, if the guns have always been there, and the culture was civilized to the point that mass school shootings didn't exist - how is not addressing this new culture not prominent but the sheeple choose to blame an object? The problem with common sense these days is that it isn't common anymore - that's the new culture.

95% of mass shootings are done with semi automatic rifles. When were these guns made available to American citizens? After the 70's.

Florida School Shooting: Why Civilians Started Buying AR-15s | Time

Americans found themselves “outgunned” in Vietnam in 1962, Defense Secretary Robert S. McNamara ordered the Pentagon to make one to match it. The result was the M16. A lighter semiautomatic-only version of was available to civilians shortly after. That gun was the AR-15.

Civilians started to be able to buy the weapons shortly after they were developed for the military, but Chivers argues that doing so was still relatively uncommon. Many American gun-owners didn’t know or didn’t think about the option of owning a semiautomatic weapon.

That changed after a shooting at a Stockton, Calif., elementary school on Jan. 17, 1989, that left 5 dead and 29 wounded.

“Before Stockton, most people didn’t know you could buy those guns,” Chris Bartocci, a former employee of AR-15 manufacturer Colt and author of Black Rifle II, told CNN. He argues that people went out and bought the weapon after reading and hearing the news reports about the school shooting.

[Nabatron]

like I said before if you have people going in an shooting up a school whether its a college, highs school, elementary school and things don't change then it will never change. You would think after someone goes in and shoots innocent teens/kids/children and the government doesn't do anything to prevent another mass shooting then there will be no change and it will just repeat itself over and over. It still baffles me the government has no changed anything. Not sure if there is a conspiracy to try and get the population down or what not but still strange that in the year 2018 this is just an everyday thing in the states.

[welfare]

Originally Posted by DragonChi

It would be correct to assume that if gun purchases weren't overtly available in the surrounding countries, there would be no supply.

Ever wonder why nuclear weapon non-proliferation is such a big deal?

wait, don't we live right next door to the country with the most guns?

Originally Posted by iwantaskyline

95% of mass shootings are done with semi automatic rifles.

lol what?

[DragonChi]

Yes, we live in a country right next door to the country with the most guns. We also live in a country where gun smuggling isn't an issue. We also live in a country where police can't be bribed. We also live in a country where life is held to the highest of standards. We also live in a country that do not have drug cartels with more money than the government does. We also live in a country where open mass graves filled with corpses dispatched from firearms would never be tolerated.

[Manic!]

Originally Posted by welfare

wait, don't we live right next door to the country with the most guns?

American guns are killing our neighbors in Canada and Mexico

70% of the crime guns recovered and traced in Mexico, and 98% of crime guns in Canada originate in the U.S.

[iwantaskyline]

Originally Posted by welfare

lol what?

lol?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_s..._United_States

19/22 of the deadliest mass shootings were done with semi-auto rifles or pistols. Not counting the few listed as "Multiple types of firearms" -- I'm too lazy to check if semi-autos are included in that.

[DragonChi]

Welfare, from your posts, it seems that you are of the opinion that stricter gun control would have had no impact in preventing the shooting in Texas, as well as the school shooting in Florida. Please answer yes or no, you may follow up with a rebuttal after answering.

[Zedbra]

Originally Posted by iwantaskyline

95% of mass shootings are done with semi automatic rifles. When were these guns made available to American citizens? After the 70's.

Florida School Shooting: Why Civilians Started Buying AR-15s | Time

So, you're sticking to it's the gun, eh? Check out one of the first US mass school shooting - back in the 60's - good old bolt action. Bad people will do bad things. With our current society admiring rich and famous celebrity status, putting these nut jobs on the TV gives them the outlet they seek - it is prevalent throughout our society. Like keyboard cowboys looking for likes and fails. I seem to see a similarity - that being mental illness of some degree.

[DragonChi]

Originally Posted by Zedbra

So, you're sticking to it's the gun, eh? Check out one of the first US mass school shooting - back in the 60's - good old bolt action. Bad people will do bad things. With our current society admiring rich and famous celebrity status, putting these nut jobs on the TV gives them the outlet they seek - it is prevalent throughout our society. Like keyboard cowboys looking for likes and fails. I seem to see a similarity - that being mental illness of some degree.

Machete potential kill count, in the 10s.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enoch_...chool_massacre
Bolt action potential kill count, in the 20s.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Whitman
Bump stock potential kill count, in the 50s.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Las_Vegas_shooting


The malice may be human, but the severity is on the tool.

I'm checking out of this thread. As others have said, there isn't anything new being discussed.

[welfare]

Originally Posted by Manic!

American guns are killing our neighbors in Canada and Mexico

So criminals break the law, and the liberal answer is...more laws.

Originally Posted by iwantaskyline

lol?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_s..._United_States

19/22 of the deadliest mass shootings were done with semi-auto rifles or pistols. Not counting the few listed as "Multiple types of firearms" -- I'm too lazy to check if semi-autos are included in that.

oh, now it's deadliest mass shootings? Lol indeed.
Wanna know what else the vast majority of those shooters have in common? Nearly all of them grew up in a home where the biological father was not present.
In fact, the greatest common denominator of all male offenders incarcerated is not race, age group, or offense type. It's the lack of a biological father in the offenders life.
Unfortunate the liberal mindset is. Focus on the consequence rather than the cause.

Originally Posted by DragonChi

Welfare, from your posts, it seems that you are of the opinion that stricter gun control would have had no impact in preventing the shooting in Texas, as well as the school shooting in Florida. Please answer yes or no, you may follow up with a rebuttal after answering.

Define "stricter gun control"

Originally Posted by DragonChi

Machete potential kill count, in the 10s.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enoch_...chool_massacre
Bolt action potential kill count, in the 20s.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Whitman
Bump stock potential kill count, in the 50s.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Las_Vegas_shooting


The malice may be human, but the severity is on the tool.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moto...n_U.S._by_year

In 2010, there were an estimated 5,419,000 crashes, 30,296 of with fatalities, killing 32,999, and injuring 2,239,000.[2] About 2,000 children under 16 die every year in traffic collisions.

Good lord. That's a whole lot more deaths than guns cause. Especially by legal gun owners who, excluding suicides, only make up about 3% of all gun deaths.
Maybe it's time to start restricting the drivers who haven't done anything wrong as well.

[westopher]

Lol the car argument.
Was a car designed with the purpose of car accidents in mind?
Guns are designed to kill. Certain instances, such a function makes sense, however, no member of the public is out putting fucking food on their table with a glock 9mm. I mean definitely you should have it to fight the gubment wen dey cum and take ur rites.

[Zedbra]

Originally Posted by westopher

Lol the car argument.
Was a car designed with the purpose of car accidents in mind?
Guns are designed to kill. Certain instances, such a function makes sense, however, no member of the public is out putting fucking food on their table with a glock 9mm. I mean definitely you should have it to fight the gubment wen dey cum and take ur rites.

....and there comes westopher's insults. Last verse same as the first. You'll be the first to find a keyboard when they take yours.

[welfare]

Originally Posted by westopher

Lol the car argument.
Was a car designed with the purpose of car accidents in mind?
Guns are designed to kill. Certain instances, such a function makes sense, however, no member of the public is out putting fucking food on their table with a glock 9mm. I mean definitely you should have it to fight the gubment wen dey cum and take ur rites.

The argument is restricting people's freedoms who've done nothing wrong because of people who disregard the rules.
It's subjective. You don't care about taking away those freedoms because in the case of guns, it makes no difference to you.

[DragonChi]

I'm checking out of this thread. As others have said, there isn't anything new being discussed.

[Manic!]

Originally Posted by welfare

So criminals break the law, and the liberal answer is...more laws.



oh, now it's deadliest mass shootings? Lol indeed.
Wanna know what else the vast majority of those shooters have in common? Nearly all of them grew up in a home where the biological father was not present.
In fact, the greatest common denominator of all male offenders incarcerated is not race, age group, or offense type. It's the lack of a biological father in the offenders life.
Unfortunate the liberal mindset is. Focus on the consequence rather than the cause.


Define "stricter gun control"


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moto...n_U.S._by_year

Good lord. That's a whole lot more deaths than guns cause. Especially by legal gun owners who, excluding suicides, only make up about 3% of all gun deaths.
Maybe it's time to start restricting the drivers who haven't done anything wrong as well.

The average American spends Over 12 days a year driving. You think if Americans spent 12 days a years shooting there would not be a increase in deaths?

The government has implemented a lot of laws to make cars safer. Car manufacturers have spent tons of money making cars safer from safety Glass to cara that break automatically when they are about to hit somthing. What have gun manufacturers done to make guns safer?


And just to get on your level. Why ban Nukes. When is the last time somone has died from a nuke. In the last ten years more people have died eating carrots. We should ban charrots not nukes.

[westopher]

Originally Posted by Zedbra

....and there comes westopher's insults. Last verse same as the first. You'll be the first to find a keyboard when they take yours.

Here comes zedbra who always feels personally attacked when anyone uses an ounce of logic in a rebuttal. The next line was a tongue in cheek comment about how using the “right to bear arms” in the constitution has no relevance in today’s modern society, where you most certainly won’t be fighting a tyrannical government.
Welfare is a big boy. He can handle it if I use the f word.
Maybe you should head to your safe space zedbra where people can sit in a room with ar-15s but won’t have any opinions that will hurt your feelings? What is it that offends you about me wanting so see less kids dying, or at least try something that may result in that.

[Zedbra]

Originally Posted by westopher

Here comes zedbra who always feels personally attacked when anyone uses an ounce of logic in a rebuttal.
Welfare is a big boy. He can handle it if I use the f word.
Maybe you should head to your safe space zedbra where people can sit in a room with ar-15s but won’t have any opinions that will hurt your feelings? What is it that offends you about me wanting so see less kids dying, or at least try something that may result in that.

I'm not offended, simply amused at your typical behaviour of you jumping to conclusions on everyone and everything, then claiming that it is victorious because you have the moral high ground no matter what you say. Kinda sad, but now predictable. Last verse, same as the first.

[westopher]

How about this. You start, instead of coming in every thread, and calling anyone who disagrees with you a personal attack, either offer some insight, information, or at least some funny meme, instead of “oh here comes the snowflakes slinging insults” or “typical left behaviour” or just block me if you can’t deal with it. I’ve never had a meaningful conversation with you on here other than saying you have cool dogs, so you won’t miss much.