Yet Another Shooting

[Matthew]

Good luck engineering a gun from scratch. Jesus, I think I lose braincells responding to you.

You can ban them in America, doesn't mean you can't still get them from elsewhere.

Do you feel the need to always have the last word?

[Benji]

Mate, I'm sorry that you don't like what I have to say. Your words are indeed worthless, stop trying. There is no way of really solving shootings, murders easily. We don't need people such as yourself giving fuck offs, etc. It's entirely pointless.

Why can other countries do it, but the great america can't?

[JarlMiyu]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-message-field

Thats america for you.
They treat there schools line shooting ranges.

[Note Book]

Its a sad shame. Now everyone plays the blame game..

[Color]

Maybe instead of guns being the problem it's the people that shoot them that's the problem, people who are asking that ARs be banned and shit aren't looking at the big picture where the majority of of deaths (the ones that happen daily from guns) are from handguns not these rifles, and a decent percentage of them are also suicides. If the U.S. took psychological help more seriously and parents locked up their fucking guns how they're supposed to and taught their children that they aren't toys maybe we'd be in a better situation right now.Anyhow I'd be against banning all guns since criminals will find a way to get them regardless leaving the victim in any future situations shit out of luck, I do think that restrictions on certain guns that fire quickly or have large magazines is reasonable however.

[ALFREDPlat]

sad how politicians are so corrupt they dont want to fix things which kills innocent chidlren

[[MPGH]Dave84311]

You can ban them in America, doesn't mean you can't still get them from elsewhere.

Do you feel the need to always have the last word?

That goes with anything retard. The point is the ease of getting high power weapons is a problem. Banning guns would fix the problem no matter how you try to rationalize it.

[Matthew]

That goes with anything retard. The point is the ease of getting high power weapons is a problem. Banning guns would fix the problem no matter how you try to rationalize it.

Jesus Christ who cares. A gun is a gun. A rifle or a pistol, both can kill large amounts of people. Banning guns won't fix any problems.

[[MPGH]Dave84311]

Jesus Christ who cares. A gun is a gun. A rifle or a pistol, both can kill large amounts of people. Banning guns won't fix any problems.

You're a god damn moron

[bladeds]

Jesus Christ who cares. A gun is a gun. A rifle or a pistol, both can kill large amounts of people. Banning guns won't fix any problems.

Yeah that why the army use pistols when they fight wars ofcourse. Because there is no difference in the effectiveness of a automatic rifle and pistol.

Stats do not lie. Look at the deadliest mass shootings, the weapon of choice a rifle. The least deadly mass shootings pistols, why do you think this maybe ?

For your reference;

Case Location Year Fatal Injured Total Weapons
Las Vegas Strip massacre Las Vegas, NV 2017 58 546 604 23 firearms, mostly rifles; including scopes, and two modified for "fully automatic" firing; two were mounted on tripods
Orlando nightclub massacre Orlando, Florida 2016 49 53 102 Semiautomatic rifle, semiautomatic handgun
Virginia Tech massacre Blacksburg, Virginia 2007 32 23 55 Two semiautomatic handguns
Sandy Hook Elementary massacre Newtown, Connecticut 2012 27 2 29 Two semiautomatic handguns, one rifle (assault), one shotgun (assault)
Texas First Baptist Church massacre Sutherland Springs, TX 2017 26 20 46+ semiautomatic rifle
Luby's massacre Killeen, Texas 1991 24 20 44 Two semiautomatic handguns
San Ysidro McDonald's massacre San Ysidro, California 1984 22 19 41 One semiautomatic handgun, one rifle (assault), one shotgun
Stoneman Douglas High School shooting Parkland, Florida 2018 17 14 31+ semiautomatic rifle
United States Postal Service shooting Edmond, Oklahoma 1986 15 6 21 Three semiautomatic handguns


Hand guns ( No automatic rifles or automatic handguns )

Case Location Year Fatal Injured Total Weapons
San Francisco UPS shooting San Francisco, CA 2017 3 2 5 two handguns
Trestle Trail bridge shooting Menasha, Wisconsin 2015 3 1 4 "Two handguns
"
Walmart shooting in suburban Denver Thornton, CO 2017 3 0 3 semiautomatic handgun
Pennsylvania supermarket shooting Tunkhannock, PA 2017 3 0 3 shotguns
Rural Ohio nursing home shooting Kirkersville, Ohio 2017 3 0 3 handgun, shotgun
Fresno downtown shooting Fresno, California 2017 3 0 3 handgun
Fort Hood shooting 2 Fort Hood, Texas 2014 3 12 15 "handgun
"
Planned Parenthood clinic Colorado Springs, Colorado 2015 3 9 12 Long gun

[PTMartin]

Yeah that why the army use pistols when they fight wars ofcourse. Because there is no difference in the effectiveness of a automatic rifle and pistol.

Stats do not lie. Look at the deadliest mass shootings, the weapon of choice a rifle. The least deadly mass shootings pistols, why do you think this maybe ?

And what do you think would happen if magically no rifles were available anywhere?

Answer: A dedicated nut would simple use a handgun. A handgun is even better because it is easily concealed. A handgun can shoot just as many rounds just as fast as a rifle. And that is why any sort of "assault gun" ban is idiotic.

[bladeds]

And what do you think would happen if magically no rifles were available anywhere?

Answer: A dedicated nut would simple use a handgun. A handgun is even better because it is easily concealed. A handgun can shoot just as many rounds just as fast as a rifle. And that is why any sort of "assault gun" ban is idiotic.

No shit you moron ofcourse they would use a hand gun. Can you read the stats provided to you or are you brain dead ?
Much less fatalies with hand gun mass shootings, what would happen less people killed when a mass shooting occurs. That's the point .

I think you are void of any brain cells.

- - - Updated - - -

And what do you think would happen if magically no rifles were available anywhere?

Answer: A dedicated nut would simple use a handgun. A handgun is even better because it is easily concealed. A handgun can shoot just as many rounds just as fast as a rifle. And that is why any sort of "assault gun" ban is idiotic.

As above stats prove hand guns are not better. You have said something which is clearly not true ignoring any evidence provided to you. I have a full spreadsheet of 100's of mass shootings. It clearly shows hand guns are much less deadily. Jeez what a idiot.

For your reference;

Case Location Year Fatal Injured Total Weapons
Las Vegas Strip massacre Las Vegas, NV 2017 58 546 604 23 firearms, mostly rifles; including scopes, and two modified for "fully automatic" firing; two were mounted on tripods
Orlando nightclub massacre Orlando, Florida 2016 49 53 102 Semiautomatic rifle, semiautomatic handgun
Virginia Tech massacre Blacksburg, Virginia 2007 32 23 55 Two semiautomatic handguns
Sandy Hook Elementary massacre Newtown, Connecticut 2012 27 2 29 Two semiautomatic handguns, one rifle (assault), one shotgun (assault)
Texas First Baptist Church massacre Sutherland Springs, TX 2017 26 20 46+ semiautomatic rifle
Luby's massacre Killeen, Texas 1991 24 20 44 Two semiautomatic handguns
San Ysidro McDonald's massacre San Ysidro, California 1984 22 19 41 One semiautomatic handgun, one rifle (assault), one shotgun
Stoneman Douglas High School shooting Parkland, Florida 2018 17 14 31+ semiautomatic rifle
United States Postal Service shooting Edmond, Oklahoma 1986 15 6 21 Three semiautomatic handguns


Hand guns ( No automatic rifles or automatic handguns )

Case Location Year Fatal Injured Total Weapons
San Francisco UPS shooting San Francisco, CA 2017 3 2 5 two handguns
Trestle Trail bridge shooting Menasha, Wisconsin 2015 3 1 4 "Two handguns
"
Walmart shooting in suburban Denver Thornton, CO 2017 3 0 3 semiautomatic handgun
Pennsylvania supermarket shooting Tunkhannock, PA 2017 3 0 3 shotguns
Rural Ohio nursing home shooting Kirkersville, Ohio 2017 3 0 3 handgun, shotgun
Fresno downtown shooting Fresno, California 2017 3 0 3 handgun
Fort Hood shooting 2 Fort Hood, Texas 2014 3 12 15 "handgun
"
Planned Parenthood clinic Colorado Springs, Colorado 2015 3 9 12 Long gun
Last edited by bladeds; 3 Weeks Ago at 08:09 PM.

[PTMartin]

No shit you moron ofcourse they would use a hand gun. Can you read the stats provided to you or are you brain dead ?
Much less fatalies with hand gun mass shootings, what would happen less people killed when a mass shooting occurs. That's the point .

Your point was, "the weapon of choice a rifle. The least deadly mass shootings pistols," Now that you've moved the goalposts, we get to the real goal of all the, "let's enact reasonable gun restrictions" That being total confiscation of all guns. So just like the "gun free zones", the bad guys keep their guns, law abiding citizens get theirs confiscated, and you have a disarmed citizenry that is defenseless against government tyrants and other criminals. Sounds like a utopia for morons.

Oh and your previous posts about armed citizens not being able to defend themselves against government tyrants shows your ignorance of recent history including the battle of Athens and numerous cases of citizens successfully defending themselves against mistaken government raids.

Then there's your stupid, "we just need to check them better, like Japan..." The kid that did this was checked out high and low with multiple reports in multiple agencies that he was unstable. That didn't help, did it? Plus all the other factors that make comparing US gun violence to Japan a comparison of apples and oranges.

Finally, we have the fact that Schools are safer today than they had been in previous decades. https://www.npr.org/2018/03/15/59383...ls-and-reality



While we're at it, let's roll back other annoying civil rights like free speech, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, right to vote etc. I'm sure we can find some "reasonable" ways to get rid of them to further advance the utopia.

As above stats prove hand guns are not better. hand guns are much less deadily.

LOL which is it, handguns better or worse?

It's too easy debating someone that can't think rationally, much less, have a command of English.

[bladeds]

Your point was, "the weapon of choice a rifle. The least deadly mass shootings pistols," Now that you've moved the goalposts, we get to the real goal of all the, "let's enact reasonable gun restrictions" That being total confiscation of all guns. So just like the "gun free zones", the bad guys keep their guns, law abiding citizens get theirs confiscated, and you have a disarmed citizenry that is defenseless against government tyrants and other criminals. Sounds like a utopia for morons.

Oh and your previous posts about armed citizens not being able to defend themselves against government tyrants shows your ignorance of recent history including the battle of Athens and numerous cases of citizens successfully defending themselves against mistaken government raids.

Then there's your stupid, "we just need to check them better, like Japan..." The kid that did this was checked out high and low with multiple reports in multiple agencies that he was unstable. That didn't help, did it? Plus all the other factors that make comparing US gun violence to Japan a comparison of apples and oranges.

Finally, we have the fact that Schools are safer today than they had been in previous decades. https://www.npr.org/2018/03/15/59383...ls-and-reality



While we're at it, let's roll back other annoying civil rights like free speech, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, right to vote etc. I'm sure we can find some "reasonable" ways to get rid of them to further advance the utopia.



LOL which is it, handguns better or worse?

It's too easy debating someone that can't think rationally, much less, have a command of English.

Please quote me I never said anything about this

""Oh and your previous posts about armed citizens not being able to defend themselves against government tyrants shows your ignorance of recent history including the battle of Athens and numerous cases of citizens successfully defending themselves against mistaken government raids.""

- - - Updated - - -

Your point was, "the weapon of choice a rifle. The least deadly mass shootings pistols," Now that you've moved the goalposts, we get to the real goal of all the, "let's enact reasonable gun restrictions" That being total confiscation of all guns. So just like the "gun free zones", the bad guys keep their guns, law abiding citizens get theirs confiscated, and you have a disarmed citizenry that is defenseless against government tyrants and other criminals. Sounds like a utopia for morons.

Oh and your previous posts about armed citizens not being able to defend themselves against government tyrants shows your ignorance of recent history including the battle of Athens and numerous cases of citizens successfully defending themselves against mistaken government raids.

Then there's your stupid, "we just need to check them better, like Japan..." The kid that did this was checked out high and low with multiple reports in multiple agencies that he was unstable. That didn't help, did it? Plus all the other factors that make comparing US gun violence to Japan a comparison of apples and oranges.

Finally, we have the fact that Schools are safer today than they had been in previous decades. https://www.npr.org/2018/03/15/59383...ls-and-reality



While we're at it, let's roll back other annoying civil rights like free speech, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, right to vote etc. I'm sure we can find some "reasonable" ways to get rid of them to further advance the utopia.



LOL which is it, handguns better or worse?

It's too easy debating someone that can't think rationally, much less, have a command of English.

How did i move the goal post ? you do not like that I owned you. You dragged up a thread that I last commented on 3 weeks ago for whatever reason.

My only arguments was regarding not all guns being the same, which i provided evidence clearly showing they are not. Nothing more nothing less. Did i mention gun laws then ? NO Did i mention anything else then No ? Did i ever say this ''that being total confiscation of all guns. '' NO.

You put words in my mouth, tell me i have that view and then proceed to shout at me for it. What a idiot.

I argued with what you said as it was incorrect, you said hand gun were better, this is not true. STATS prove this. I will only argue with you when you say something that is not true.

You then waffle on about some other things so in-coherently that it is hard for me to to even get your point and make a counter argument. Well done.

How is taking away the most deadly weapons, equal total confiscation ? You understand what total means 100% ? you are again saying things which are clearly not true. I DO NOT THINK TAKING AWAY HAND GUNS IS GOOD.

''Oh and your previous posts about armed citizens not being able to defend themselves'' DID NOT SAY THIS. YOUR IGNORANCE SHOWS AS YOU CANT EVEN WORK OUT WHAT I SAID AND OTHER PEOPLE SAID. It was pro gun cursed that mentioned those things. Again what an idiot.

I never said Japan was 100% applicable, i posted one video as a point of reference that could be looked at . I made no comment on the video or compared gun violence.

So what if schools are safer than previous decades ? New York is lot safer than previous decades. Should the NYPD just stop what there doing and say oh well were much safer than before no point initiating any new policies ?

LOL idiot you said 'A handgun is even better because it is easily concealed'' it is better in terms of it can kill more as in it is more effective (better ) in killing lots in a mass shooting scenario. I said it is not better ' As above stats prove hand guns are not better. hand guns are much less deadily. '' They are not better at killing lots of people they are much less deadly in a mass shooting scenario therefore an assault ban is useful. Do you understand what you said ? Idiot.

You can think rationally. You have repeatidly said things which are clearly not true. If you say something is true which is clearly not true it does not make it so.

Well done.

Come back so I can rip you again.

[PTMartin]

Please quote me I never said anything about this

""Oh and your previous posts about armed citizens not being able to defend themselves against government tyrants shows your ignorance of recent history including the battle of Athens and numerous cases of citizens successfully defending themselves against mistaken government raids.""

Gladly:

Good luck against there tanks, fighters, navy + drones etc. You can shoot at them with your piddly little gun.

How did i move the goal post ?

First you said,

Look at the deadliest mass shootings, the weapon of choice a rifle. The least deadly mass shootings pistols

then when I pointed out that if rifles disappeared the weapon of choice would be a handgun and it would be just as deadly.

Then you said,

No shit you moron ofcourse they would use a hand gun.

followed by this train wreck of a sentence:

Much less fatalies with hand gun mass shootings, what would happen less people killed when a mass shooting occurs.

My only arguments was regarding not all guns being the same, which i provided evidence clearly showing they are not. Nothing more nothing less.

Which is factually wrong, as I said, a semi-auto handgun can fire just as many rounds just as fast as a semi-auto rifle. If there were no rifles all your stats would simply shift to show that mass shootings would be just as deadly and just as bad with handguns.

Did i mention gun laws then ? NO Did i mention anything else then No ? Did i ever say this ''that being total confiscation of all guns. '' NO.

Clearly you are looking for some sort of "reasonable gun restrictions" on rifles. My point was that the goal of a vast amount of anti-gun nuts is total confiscation of all guns. That goal cannot happen in one move, therefore the strategy is to move in that direction one step at a time, starting with "reasonable gun restrictions".

How is taking away the most deadly weapons, equal total confiscation ? You understand what total means 100% ? you are again saying things which are clearly not true. I DO NOT THINK TAKING AWAY HAND GUNS IS GOOD.

See the above. If you are concerned with safety, banning rifles will not fix things, and could potentially make them worse. See below.

I argued with what you said as it was incorrect, you said hand gun were better, this is not true.

Clearly you do have an English language writing and comprehension problem. I made the point that from a mass shooters perspective, a handgun could be better since it is easier concealed. Just so you get it, that means from a public safety perspective a handgun could be much worse since it can be transported and deployed with much less visible presence.

I never said Japan was 100% applicable, i posted one video as a point of reference that could be looked at . I made no comment on the video or compared gun violence.

Actually you did:

Yes nothing can be done ?

Clearly implying that Japan's laws should be applied in the US.

So what if schools are safer than previous decades ?

So there is nothing broken thus nothing needs fixing. Sounds like you got a knee jerk reaction and demand that "something, anything" be done. And that something is apparently banning rifles which won't fix anything or trying to import Japan's laws to the US.

LOL idiot you said 'A handgun is even better because it is easily concealed'' it is better in terms of it can kill more as in it is more effective (better ) in killing lots in a mass shooting scenario. I said it is not better ' As above stats prove hand guns are not better. hand guns are much less deadily. '' They are not better at killing lots of people they are much less deadly in a mass shooting scenario therefore an assault ban is useful. Do you understand what you said ? Idiot.

LOL. Calls me an idiot and doesn't understand the basic mechanics of firearms, namely that pistols can deliver just as many rounds, just as fast as a rifle. The only edge a rifle has is accuracy long distance. These mass shootings are mostly close range point and shoot, not sniper picking off specific individuals. Oh, and keeps yapping about "stats" which I've already pointed out are meaningless in the context that handguns would simply replace rifles as the instrument of choice and the rest of the numbers would be the same or worse. But hey, let's go down the slippery slope of banning rifles, that will surely make things better, and everyone will be satisfied at stopping there on infringing on the 2nd amendment.