- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Nashville School Shooting
Posted on 3/28/23 at 1:29 pm to QJenk
Posted on 3/28/23 at 1:29 pm to QJenk
quote:
We need guns for self defense because other bad have guns. If bad guys didn't have guns, there would be no need for good guy with a gun
What about disparity of force. Like multiple attackers, the disabled and elderly, women, etc? frick them?
quote:
We could accomplish all of that, and the only drawback is a bunch of people would have to find a new hobby.
Hunting isn't a hobby for a lot of people.
The reality is that if we didn't have guns you'd have to find a new scapegoat for human violence and somewhere else to dump your emotions.
quote:
I would personally be ok with that.
Obviously.
1
Posted on 3/28/23 at 1:29 pm to lsufball19
quote:
how many had there been over the 25 years prior to that incident?
there had been 2 total
Posted on 3/28/23 at 1:29 pm to GhostofLesticleMiles
quote:
US has increasingly become a God-less and secular society.
Adam and Eve not Adam and Zheve
Posted on 3/28/23 at 1:30 pm to TCO
quote:
The problem was a level of gun deaths that the UK found unacceptable.
Lets do this with alcohol, vehicles, etc.
Posted on 3/28/23 at 1:30 pm to ChiGator
quote:
The point I’m making is that the targeted gun violence in chicago is driven by gangs. Dudes in chicago aren’t just shooting up a street corner to kill innocent people. They’re targeting a rival street gang. It’s a difference vs random mass shootings no matter how you want to look at it. Obviously both are wrong.
Yet Chicago has accounted for 10 school shootings included in the "stats" since 2000. Seems like a lot for one city. Maybe the data actually shows that most school shootings included in the data are driven by gang violence
Posted on 3/28/23 at 1:31 pm to Centinel
quote:
Not anymore. But that's because I live in Idaho now.
Must be overrun with gun violence.
quote:
The local hubub here a couple months ago were some kids siphoning gas. Scary times. Thankfully the police were able to detain the rapscallions.
We had a "gang" that was going around knocking over trash cans. The entire community was gripped with fear.
Posted on 3/28/23 at 1:34 pm to Centinel
quote:
And when the bad guys pull a knife instead? A club?
Neither of those are nearly as efficient or effective at killing than a gun is. You have a much better chance at defending yourself against this then you could someone holding a gun.
You can never end 100% of violence. But you aren't discussing in good faith, if you couldn't admit that violent crime would not decrease in a drastic way in a fictional world where guns did not exist.
Posted on 3/28/23 at 1:36 pm to QJenk
quote:
But you aren't discussing in good faith, if you couldn't admit that violent crime would not decrease in a drastic way in a fictional world where guns did not exist.
The history of our species says otherwise.
Posted on 3/28/23 at 1:36 pm to QJenk
quote:
But you aren't discussing in good faith, if you couldn't admit that violent crime would not decrease in a drastic way in a fictional world where guns did not exist.
I don't know that violent crime would decrease in a drastic way.
Would it be less lethal? Probably.
But less violent? I'm not so sure about that.
Posted on 3/28/23 at 1:37 pm to QJenk
quote:
But you aren't discussing in good faith, if you couldn't admit that violent crime would not decrease in a drastic way in a fictional world where guns did not exist.
Do you have any fricking clue how violent history pre-gunpowder was?
Posted on 3/28/23 at 1:37 pm to RogerTheShrubber
It’s impossible to keep up with this bullshite because half of the people either partially read posts or flat out don’t read them at all, or just play the whataboutism game.
Enjoy your day. The sun is out and I’m not sitting at my computer all day.
Roger, I can’t imagine how your life must be looking at everything through the lens of D or R. Political clubs don’t rule my life or tell me how to think. Free your mind bro!
Everyone enjoy their day.
Enjoy your day. The sun is out and I’m not sitting at my computer all day.
Roger, I can’t imagine how your life must be looking at everything through the lens of D or R. Political clubs don’t rule my life or tell me how to think. Free your mind bro!
Everyone enjoy their day.
This post was edited on 3/28/23 at 1:38 pm
Posted on 3/28/23 at 1:38 pm to QJenk
quote:
Neither of those are nearly as efficient or effective at killing than a gun is. You have a much better chance at defending yourself against this then you could someone holding a gun.
quote:
You can never end 100% of violence. But you aren't discussing in good faith, if you couldn't admit that violent crime would not decrease in a drastic way in a fictional world where guns did not exist.
We have data that shows this to be complete bullshite. That's why you'll eventually need to pivot to "I was talking about gun violence."
Posted on 3/28/23 at 1:38 pm to TCO
quote:
Everyone enjoy their day.
Thanks for providing those stats of school shootings prior to 1996. I applaud your willingness to defend your assertions with unflinching factual accuracy.
Posted on 3/28/23 at 1:39 pm to ChiGator
quote:
Yeah you might be right. Again what’s killing the people in the first place is the tool being used. Unless the gangster disciple on the street corner is going to start throwing axes at his Latin King rival.
Okay. You're right.
Now, I wonder how many of those gangsters had legally-obtained guns and were legally allowed to carry them?
You advocate for more laws that would help curb gun violence. We have laws to help curb gun violence. The issue is that criminals do not abide by laws. You could enact all the laws your heart desires. If we are either incapable of enforcing, or unwilling to enforce those laws it will not matter. The only thing you will accomplish is taking guns out of the hands of lawful and law abiding gun owners. The criminal element (considered to be career criminals in this instance) ,which drives the majority of gun violence in this country, will still have guns. They will still be responsible for the majority of gun violence in this country.
You want new laws? Start by actually enforcing the ones already on the books and stop picking and choosing which flavor of gun violence gets your panties all twisted. It is all the same.
Posted on 3/28/23 at 1:39 pm to TCO
quote:
Everyone enjoy their day.
frick off, hack.
Posted on 3/28/23 at 1:40 pm to TCO
quote:"Let's do what England did" "Banning guns won't work"... Is reading hard for people replying to you, or are you just completely devoid of cognitive function?!
Reading is hard.
quote:They traded firearm violence for other violence.
England had a problem. They dealt with it and it worked.
Until recently everytime they inacted legislation murder rates actual went up, whereas the US increasing access has reduced our murder rate. Even the recent decreases showing up nearly two decades after the ban from this data set suggest it is still dropping slower than the rate in the US.
Violent crimes and the rate at which illegal firearms are used in the UK has actually risen astronomically since the ban.
quote:
We have a problem and do nothing.
What the US has done to mitigate violent crime vs what the UK and AU have done, the US is actually doing substantially better.
quote:We have a mental health epidemic and don't do a damn thing. I completely agree. Now if we were to do as England and AU did, the data suggests it would become finitely worse and revert the course we are currently on, which despite news cycle is actually better.
We are a nation of uncivilized, savage people. On one side you’ve got mentally deranged people with unlimited access to guns. On the other side is a group of people that get a hard-on about the thought of killing a criminal. Everyone wants to shoot everyone.
No one wants to see innocent people, especially children die. It's fricking disgusting and people like this c__t get off far to easy with a simple bullet to the head. The issue is, your entire argument and insinuation that England did it better is not true based on all empirical data we have. If you want to say if it'll stop school shootings then let's let only criminals and gangs have guns to commit rape and violent crimes at two to three times the current rate, then say that and let it be your stance you'd rather your child be raped or beaten and carjacked than there even be a sliver of a chance that another school shooting occurs. That's what the data says.
The 288 number is also BS. That number has been shown as partially true by the most leftwing sources as CNN used any firearm discharge within x feet of a school (suicides, gun discharge, gang killing, etc.) to inflate their data, but only for the US, ignoring the same for their other countries. They also ignored countries where the rates are theorized to be much higher because it would not be as big of a gotcha. There are far too many school shootings in the US, one is too many. Your proposition to do like England would in theory be far more dangerous to your children than arming every teacher in the US. That c__t isn't walking into that school if she knows they could shoot back. Nor would most if not all the others.
Posted on 3/28/23 at 1:41 pm to TCO
quote:
My kids have the right to go to school without the threat of being killed. Wouldn’t you agree? There are companies making kids backpacks with Kevlar shields in them. Would you say that’s something that is needed in a civilized country or a third world country?
Do you think your kids are safer in a US school or walking down the street in Mexico, South Africa or Afghanistan? Since you want to compare.
Posted on 3/28/23 at 1:41 pm to QJenk
quote:See my response to TCO above with graphs to show this is in fact an incorrect statement and assumption on your part.
violent crime would not decrease in a drastic way in a fictional world where guns did not exist.
Posted on 3/28/23 at 1:42 pm to TCO
quote:
Has an attacker in England ever killed 10–30 people with a knife?
Did you start at a 10 person minimum so you didn't have to address the mass killing in London in 2017 where 5 people were killed after being stabbed, 2 killed after being run over with a car, 2 police officers were stabbed and there were a total of 11 deaths and 48 others injured?
There have only been 4 mass shootings that resulted in 10 or more people dying in the United States since 2010. There has been one in the UK in that time frame. The United States is about 5x the size of the UK.
Since you failed to address the UK and mass school shootings prior to the Dunblane incident, I'll help you. There was one in 1988, no deaths. That's it. SO when you were told the UK fixed a problem they didn't have already, the poster wasn't being insincere
This post was edited on 3/28/23 at 1:50 pm
Posted on 3/28/23 at 1:47 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
What about disparity of force. Like multiple attackers, the disabled and elderly, women, etc? frick them?
Tasers, pepper spray still remain a thing.
As I said before, you can never get rid of 100% of violence.
Page 76 of 85
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News