15 dead at Oregon Community College, shot by a lone gunman, according to Channel 5 News. Unfortunately the most surprising thing about this is that I'm watching Channel 5 News.
Printable View
15 dead at Oregon Community College, shot by a lone gunman, according to Channel 5 News. Unfortunately the most surprising thing about this is that I'm watching Channel 5 News.
Another rendition of Amazing Grace or does he change it up this time?
Gun free zones. :harold:
Or something.
Any e-fits of the shooter yet? Turkish origin with a big nose?
More guns > Less guns
The state of that board.
What even is that place?Quote:
Originally Posted by Lewis
I think the shooter posted there before going to campus.
https://archive.moe/r9k/thread/22785073/#q22787588_184
:harold:
Those boards are the fucking worst.
Some of the pre-murder advice. :D
Also lol @ two mass shooters posting on there.
Also bigger lol @ the BBC tech correspondent posting on there.
I heard once that some people lie in there but don't take my word for it.
It really wouldn't surprise me if it was. Have you not seen House of Cards?
If you do take his word for it, I have some awesome beachfront property in Kansas that you might be interested in, Magic.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pepe
That's not even a lie, is it?
13 dead and at least 20 wounded.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MN3t3WtUO-Y
Utter madness.
Looks like LeedsRevolution.
It's just a shame nobody could have foreseen this happening
That absolute plant pot in the above video has managed to kill 15 people? I know they were all unarmed children, but he looks like he'd drop his maccies at the sight of his own shadow.
If only all the students had guns.
Fucking limp wristed lefty liberals.
https://archive.moe/r9k/thread/22785073/#q22785448
Someone's had a 'mare.
An Ed-209 on every corner.
:drool:
I wonder if there's grounds to shut down 4chan for terrorism.
:cry:Quote:
Originally Posted by Magic
He looks like he's nearly crying at the end, and you can tell even he is cringing a bit at the shit he is saying. It's all a bit sad really - I guess in other countries people with crippling self confidence issues just find camgirls to make up stories about, rather than having the easy access to guns that makes something like this possible.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dquincy
Ouch.
Least it gets them out and about.
Obama has it right on this.
He does. It's quite ridiculous that nothing will ever happen to change the situation though.
@mert
Is he here?
Did anyone hear that fucking lunatic preacher or whatever he was.
"If the students were allowed guns on campus this wouldn't have happened'
He's not interested in joining because we don't have a hook-up culture.
What is that?Quote:
Originally Posted by Dquincy
The new one that I'm hearing this time is that new laws wouldn't work, because murder is already illegal, and that didn't stop it.
Fucking hell.
Oh well, might as well just legalise it then.
Think of the LAW ABIDING CITIZEN !
If you legalised murder there'd be more of them...probably.
Only in murder free zones.
Not sure if that video is the chap or not. Could just be Internet nonsense.
It's not him.
Who's the fella in the video then?Quote:
Originally Posted by Disco
Someone else.
I go to movies at 2pm because of that cinema shooting. Can't go anywhere these days without fearing for your life.
I didn't go and see the new Terminator movie because in the back of your mind you worry you're going to get Schwarzeneggered.
I've definitely softened towards America over the last year or so but there are certain things that I just can't accept and would never live here long term. Trump getting in just as my visa expires would be beautiful.
Americans... I had a Brazilian telling me that the solution of Brazil is to copy America. Of course he is living well in the communist Norway.
Americans are.... Scrap that, people are stupid.
Brazil being the ideal place to not get shot.
Same as the US. Difference is they will shoot to steal something while in the US it is cuz someone got bored.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lewis
Their gun murder (and non-specific murder) rate is miles above America.
Don't know about that. Any Link? I don't like to comment on speculation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lewis
Research on that.
Touché!Quote:
Originally Posted by Lewis
I will later.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...ted_death_rate
Brazil's rate is nearly double the US. It's drug and poverty fueled whereas America's massacres are fueled by nutters.
Is that graph some kind of joke? Norway 3 times of the UK?
Actually, it's not that crazy when you look at the numbers. Norway has a lower homicide rate, but much higher suicide rate.Quote:
Originally Posted by Angelsaint
Suicide rate is a myth. There was a study that showed that was almost 0 suicides rate in Norway or in the Nordic countries for that matter.Quote:
Originally Posted by ItalAussie
As true as polar bears walking in our streets.
There were 9,480 recorded suicides in Norway in the period 1990-2006, or 557 per year.Quote:
Originally Posted by Angelsaint
http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6963/11/68/
In Brazil the only people who are involved in shootings are off-duty cops.
Japan had 0.00 homicides with guns per 100,000 people.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shindig
They just kill each other with vomit or asphyxiation.
Or Sarin gas. 17th in the world suicide rankings, mind.
Read again. Don't trick with the stats.Quote:
Originally Posted by elth
There are plenty of good reasons to go to a movie at 2pm, but that's just paranoid mate. That's like refusing to go on airplanes in Asia because that one Malaysian flight went missing.Quote:
Originally Posted by AE
Not a mass shooting as such but...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-34450841
I mean, what the fuck is wrong with that country?
Would never have happened if the girl and the dog had also been armed.
What I don't understand is why, beyond the child getting charged, the "responsible adult" (his undoubtedly inbred father) doesn't also get the book thrown at him. Allowing it to pass (loaded, I might add) into the hands of a child (or anyone unregistered to use a firearm, really) should in itself be a serious criminal offence.
The kid's a wanker, no doubt about it, but it's hard to see how you can go through court proceedings for an 11 year old, he'll just not understand it. Or am I underselling how much a child that age knows? I'm trying to think back to when I was 11 (Year 5 is it?) and all I thought about was playing football/skating with my mates and kissing a girls.
Another lunatic has shot up an Arizona campus.
One dead, three wounded. The forty sixth school shooting this year. It's what, three in the lifetime of this board?
More guns, please.
Hot on the back of this, as well:
http://detroit.cbslocal.com/2015/10/...t-parking-lot/
But yeah, what's needed is more wankers who want to be heroes. There were a couple of guys on that college campus with concealed firearms whose chose not to get involved because they correctly recognised that it could only make the situation worse.
My cousin lives in Flagstaff, luckily she's out of town right now. There was one planned in Salt Lake City a couple years ago that ended up being caught by the police. This shit is scary.
Come here for uni, Spoon.
McGill, mate.
Canada's Harvard and that.
Active Shooter Training for pre-schoolers :cab:
The great thing about having an unwritten constitution is that when shit needs getting done, it gets done. I saw some great stats the other day about how since we massively ramped up the stop and search in 2009 (Op Blunt), the number of teenage murders has been quartered. In America, meanwhile, you can have tens of these and their best idea is to train the public to respond.
http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_29...rings-shooting
"This guy's walking about the joint with a fucking rifle."
"You silly goose, we have 'open carry' here!"
16 people shot in New Orleans after 2 men walked into a crowded area and started to let rip.
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2...people-wounded
Y'see, that one is gang-related.
Everyone had guns and no fatalities?
:sherlock:
I know it's bad, but I found this unreasonably amusing:
Quote:
Her 14-year-old daughter was hit once in the knee and five times in her backside.
Its ok when blacks do it. It's expected and tolerated. When a white person shoots shit up it's ban this ban that.
"WORLDSTAR BABY, WORLDSTAR!!!"
Caps.
On-going thing at an abortion clinic. 4 officers shot, 1 might be dead. Several civilians dead.
White male, trenchcoat, AK-47.
Wait, were the fetuses not arm'd?
They worry so much about terrorist attacks on the other side of the world yet this shit happens on a weekly basis and they just brush it off. Bloody morons.
Can I ask how yet another white suspect walks away with his life when a kid in Chicago gets hit 17 times by a cop and it takes a Freedom of Information request to even bring the fact that it happened into existence?
Best country in the world.
By the by, I've spent the last week being peltered with abuse from internet people because of an apparent anti-black people bias in my tweeting/fbing after the Kansas/Missouri protests, it's amazing. I've been told that I hate black people and would suck them off at the chance.
I tried to explain to people that disagreeing doesn't equal disagreeing with the rest of it.Little to no interest.
What's the bottom stat, the percentage of people who can't read this chart?
Fixed.
Impeach cancer!
They should give everyone cancer, to protect themselves from those with cancer.
Err.Quote:
Originally Posted by phonics
https://www.reddit.com/live/w0nn1o5hu90y
Reddit live-thread of the new one.
Sounds like some kind of neo Nazi mentalists.
Muslims, it is Muslims we need to worry about!
They're now apparently turning over a hospital.
Gunmen, not terrorists.
http://www.broadcastify.com/listen/feed/12443/web
Pretty good listen.
What a shit world.
The biggest load of propaganda that Americans go on about is that Australian gun laws were to stop homicides not mass shootings.
Well 352 mass shootings in 336 days in the US compared to 0 mass shootings in Australia in 336 days.
To be fair to them, there's also the problem that America has a greater proportion of bent-headed fuckwits than any other western country.
Not doing anything about the gun laws is another thing on the Obama charge sheet actually. Doubt anyone will ever do it if he doesn't.
How could he do anything about it?
Apart from the attempts he made that were blocked by the Republican controlled House?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmy Floyd
:jeniferlawrenceokaygif:
You need to stop with that gif.
Hence why I didn't use it. It's being put into storage.
How was he meant to do something like that? The idea of implementing gun control in the US is as ludicrous as banning tea in England. Opposition to gun control in the populace increased after the Sandy Hook massacre. If you can't get it then, you'll never get it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmy Floyd
Obama spent his political capital on healthcare, and that was the right call. History will see that as a big success, in face of serious political opposition.
Allusions to it still count.Quote:
Originally Posted by phonics
We'll use it on him the next time he's patronising and authoritative on a subject he knows little about.
We really shouldn't have to wait that long. :eyemouth:
There's a shootout going on, and they're also in pursuit of another vehicle.
Yeah, but tea isn't killing us, Litvinenko aside. People will grow tired of that in the end. If they don't, then they deserve it.Quote:
Originally Posted by ItalAussie
Preaching to the choir here. Although noone deserves that. :(Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmy Floyd
Not sure you really understand how American politics works.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmy Floyd
My friend in America sez that every time they get a shooting, or some terrorism happens, Facebook gets swamped with 'This is why we need Bernie...' essays.
Do American news stations stream these police chases live?
Really? That is a bit odd, given that gun control is probably the one area where Hillary's actually further to the left than Bernie is.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lewis
Bernie, mate. Bernie. He'd solve it regardless.
Oh I do. I just like slagging off Obama because everything about him screams useless twat to me, and yet he is fawned over here to an absolutely ludicrous extent. His 'approval' among Brits is up in the 70s or something even though in the one area that affects us, foreign policy, he's been crap. I think it's race guilt.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spoonsky
I still don't understand why photographers take so many pictures during press conferences. Have we not seen Obama's face before?
I just heard that the mighty USA has had more than 1 mass shooting every day in 2015.
But yeah, there's no problems.
The Onion just re-posts this everytime now:
http://www.theonion.com/article/no-w...larly-ha-51938
You could call Obama a lot of things but I don't think useless is one of them. I'm not really sure what you expect from him. He got Obamacare done which even old Clinton couldn't do, and the Iran Deal was one of the few foreign policy successes in the past fifteen years or so. I hope the Trans-Pacific Partnership fails but that would be another one. Given the extent to which Republicans have controlled Congress I think he's done pretty well for himself.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmy Floyd
In terms of his popularity you have to consider that anyone would seem like a savior coming off the back of Bush.
This was an Islamist attack then. The bloke behind it had pledged allegiance to IS. Sorry, Daesh.
I'm surprised there aren't more Islamist attacks in America given how easy it is to get access to guns.
I'm surprised people aren't fighting back given how many residents have guns.
I thought this might go that way. They had bombs and guns, the FBI didn't rule out terrorism which they would normally do immediately, and the attackers had Muslim names. It being a workplace dispute sounded far-fetched to me.
IS-inspired rather than IS-organised though, you'd think. There has been no claim and it's a rubbish target.
Nah, it was his Wife who did that. A few of his co-workers said he was a normal guy until shacking up with her.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee
Seems to come across as very much a self radicalised thing. The bombs made were from a Al-Qaeda magazine article called 'How to make bombs in your Moms kitchen' which, I have to say, is more infortmative than the majority of Cosmo articles.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee
I've tried adding a California flag to my Facebook picture, but that big fucking bear in the middle means people won't know it's me grieving. Please advise.
In other Gun related news. America will have a QVC-esque Shopping Channel dedicated to shooting people in the face.
"The ease and convenience of purchasing firearms will be as simple as consumers calling a toll-free number and placing their order,"
Sounds fantastic.
http://europe.newsweek.com/guntv-24-...l-400319?rm=eu
Paranooid gun nuts will have their heads explode now. Hatred of Muslims versus love of weapons. Ohnoes!
Yeah I've just seen. That's like me being into sewing and clothes shopping, the soft twat.Quote:
Originally Posted by phonics
"Only Christians can purchase weapons"
If you get the transparency right you will be able to show your support for COMMIEFORNIA while also being able to ask for reparations. Win-win.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lewis
The female Muslamics baffle me. You can understand the likes of Taz going out there for a bit of adventure and self-esteem, because you can't get your certainty-backed, macho beheading fix elsewhere; but there must be easier ways for a disenfranchised young lass to get smacked into servitude (right Hammer?).
Reading a few surveillance sites and the interesting thing they're noting is the Facebook post (under a different previously unlinked account) wasn't found via an IP but actually Facebooks internal facial recognition program that it uses to suggest friends to tag in photos.
We should swap surveillance websites, I think I'm missing a few.
And to make it even more weird his brother is a decorated US Navy veteran.
Emptywheel is my favourite on surveillance/cyber security stuff myself.Quote:
Originally Posted by John Arne
MSNBC is currently going through their house. It's a total shit show. Highlights include rummaging through childrens toys, showing the; driving license, credit card and social security numbers of the sister. Many jokes ensue online and then a guy straight up walks out of the house carrying this:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CVZlvAkWwAAuzgH.jpg:large
There's no need for satire any more.
Surely they are trespassing? Where are the police?
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CVZm21HWEAAeXYR.jpg:large
So, so good.
I'd love to watch them watching this stuff back.
Anderson Cooper is presenting this nightmare unfolding while wanting nothing to do with it. It's a post-modern art installation on 24 hour news created by 24 hour news.
I saw a clip of Anderson Cooper trying to handle the shit-show. He constantly looked like he wanted to yell "this is a bad idea, you know that right?". :D
Could you link it. I've been mostly following through Twitter. Politics Vine game is poor.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bernanke
Amazing Storyville about undercover FBI informants. The guy didn't notify the FBI he was filming all this.
edit : Holy fuck plot twist.
Lads you need to watch that on iPlayer.
Bump.
So Obama is now considering what powers he can use with regards to gun laws without Congress' say so. Does anyone (including Mert if he can stay off the ANTI-LIBERUL rhetoric) know exactly what he can do without approval from Congress?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-35211294
Not much constitutionally, but Obama doesn't care much for legality. Curious to see what he'll come up with.Quote:
Originally Posted by Byron
Guns don't kill people, legality does.
Actually, he has leeway to do essentially what he wants through Executive Orders. Of course if he does something crazy there are legislative repercussions, but in theory he could issue an order that says anythinb
...that's not true. He can act only within the boundaries of the enumerated powers given to the Executive branch in the Constitution (and Executive Orders in particular are subject to judicial review i.e. can be deemed unconstitutional).Quote:
Originally Posted by mokbull
I guess theoretically since he's commander-in-chief he can do whatever he wants and then say "watcha gunna do about it'" but that would probably lead to him immediately getting impeached.
The Court is not going to deem an executive order on gun control unconstitutional.
I mean if it was unconstitutional they would. That's why I'm curious to see what exactly he's planning on doing, because I'm not sure how much leeway he has to do anything meaningful.Quote:
Originally Posted by mokbull
Have you forgotten where you are?Quote:
Originally Posted by mokbull
Surely he could just red-tape the shit out of the process? Technically, everyone can still own a gun - but the process is a bureaucratic nightmare/clusterfuck...
Either way, this whole things feel like too little, too late.
Yes one of those crazy nations that believes in the democratic process over tyrannical decrees. Backwards I know.Quote:
Originally Posted by John
Uh no. He doesn't get to decide how gun ownership is regulated, that's left to the States and Congress.Quote:
Originally Posted by John Arne
Looks like you're fucked then.
Do you own a gun, Mert?
Lol I know democracy and checks and balances are so stupid hahaQuote:
Originally Posted by John Arne
Can't own one on campus so I do not. Will 100% buy one once I graduate.Quote:
Originally Posted by Boydy
I'm talking about the idea of gun control, not the process of government.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
Apologies for hoping that your country could become safer.
Your soul and lifeblood Ronald Reagan issued more executive orders than any president in the last 50 years. Suck on it, you bitchQuote:
Originally Posted by Mert
The chimpouts if he goes ahead and bans guns. :drool:
Would even make the next debate worth watching. Maybe.
Why will you buy one? Do you feel scared?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
Because freedomz!
Yes and the means by which you're hoping it gets accomplished is undemocratic.Quote:
Originally Posted by John Arne
I have no issues with Executive Orders (as long as they are Constitutional), there is a firm historical precedence in their use and they are a fundamental tool in ensuring the "Take Care" clause is responsibly executed.Quote:
Originally Posted by mokbull
He can't. He has no power whatsoever to do so. An executive order cannot contravene the Constitution.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pepe
Why not? So I can protect myself and for recreational use.Quote:
Originally Posted by John Arne
Mert, given that you value the Constitution so much - if they were to make an amendment and outlaw the ownership of guns - would you the support the ban on gun ownership?
Protect yourself from what? Would you keep the weapon locked up somewhere safe, or hide it under the pillow?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
If the gay business is anything to go by, it's easier for the Supreme Court to re-write the dictionary than cause the government problems.
When the Republicans are quite happy to just obstruct and let everything go down the shitter, he'd probably have been better served taking this approach much earlier on.
I mean it would be the Law of the Land. I wouldn't agree with it, just like I don't agree with other laws, but that doesn't mean I wouldn't support its enforcement.Quote:
Originally Posted by John Arne
In an accessible safe.Quote:
Originally Posted by John Arne
Ehh kinda, the original intent of the 14th Amendment almost certainly was never intended to apply to marriage equality (but it kinda sorta could if you squinted hard enough; deliberately vague language to apply to unforeseeable future circumstances and all that). With the case of the gun regulation, there is far far less flexibility. But then again the Commerce Clause was never meant to be used to force desegregation of private businesses and yet you had the Civil Rights Act of 1964 upheld. So yes there are cases where the Supreme Court will twist itself into a doctrinal pretzel to get out the outcome it desires, but really only does so in practice when the compelling moral/public interest/consensus is so undeniable that to rule otherwise would seriously damage the integrity/legitimacy of the Court itself in the public eye.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lewis
tl;dr: The court won't let Obama get away with any sort of significant Executive overreach on gun control
That's what they're supposed to do you realize? Checks and balances exist for a reason. Maybe Obama would have been better off and the government more productive if he was more willing to meet the Republicans half way with desired legislation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Davgooner
You should be right, but if he has the balls to try it I reckon they will let him get away with it. They will always take the cowardly decision, and 'legitimacy' these days means how much grief they get in the trendy newspapers, so it will end up being easier to come up with some nonsense decision and ride it out.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
Would you support enforcement for an amendment to the Constitution, whether you personally agreed with it or not?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
I don't think we're quite there yet (court has rebuked Obama on some more minor less controversial power grabs), but we're close enough that it's not totally unfeasible. Which is why we need to elect King Trump to clear out all the cuckservatives and cuckliberals and make America Great Again.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lewis
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CRL9M3oWsAAAztB.jpg:large
I wouldn't support the Amendment, but after it passed of course I would support its enforcement (although I think if guns were banned I would be living in the newly seceded Republic of Texas at that point).Quote:
Originally Posted by John Arne
'Cuckservative' is the word of 2015.
Serious question: if the government wanted to subjugate and oppress the people, is an armed populace really going to be able to stop the full might of the US WAR MACHINE? Or does the line of thinking go that an armed populace acts as a deterrent? Because for me, the smart money is with heavily trained soldiers, automatic weapons, etc.
It's a deterrent which raises the potential cost of enforcing a policy of subjugation/oppression; who would be easier to subdue, a populace armed to the teeth or one which has no means of fighting back? And additionally, it provides the capacity for sustained guerrilla warfare even if/when major population centers were brought under control.Quote:
Originally Posted by Luca
And anyways it's a fundamental Natural Right to bear arms, amirite guys?
Do you think the soldiers of the US would go along with a Government instruction to take control of the streets (which they already have control of anyway)...
You are not rite.
It's not checks and balances, it's an ideological desire to stop the government functioning. That's literally their aim. You only have to look at the flak Ryan's receiving at the minute.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
If people had actually voted for these Republican majorities than you could argue that people want them to obstruct the government; but the fact they were just installed by Fox and the Koch Brothers makes them illegitimate as far as I'm concerned.
No. The Congress is acting exactly how it's supposed to act and there is plenty of historic precedent on both sides of the aisles of similar periods of seemingly intractable partisanship. There are more Republicans right now holding public office than at any point since Reconstruction Era following the Civil War. This is how democracy works, Obama's policies have been totally repudiated at the ballot box.Quote:
Originally Posted by Davgooner
I would have maybe gave credence to this a year ago, but the Establishment's total failure in bringing down Trump shows that the Republican base has far more of an independent streak than Democrats would claim.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lewis
If the government ordered wide scale confiscation of weapons there would be a revolution. So no.Quote:
Originally Posted by John Arne
That reminds me of something... I was watching a video and some presenter mentioned the Civil War clearly in the context of the English Civil War, to which the American guests all assumed that 'Civil War' was the American Civil War, and didn't understand why the American Civil War had been involved in this context. The presenter had to remind them that there has been more than one Civil War. God, some Americans are dumb.
Not even related to the point I was making. Well done.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
These nutters who have taken over a wildlife refuge seem like they have the potential to shoot a few people.
History will judge that Obama's biggest mistake was attempting to work with the Republicans. They don't want any of it and he was a fool to try that approach.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
Err what? His mistake was trying to take part in the democratic process instead of ruling unilaterally like a dictator? Are you listening to yourself, this is why people think all Leftists are crazy authoritarians who see democracy merely as an inconvenience standing in the way of them implementing their deluded world view.Quote:
Originally Posted by Davgooner
"And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants."Quote:
Originally Posted by John
- Thomas Jefferson
"Whenever the Legislators endeavor to take away, and destroy the Property of the People, or to reduce them to Slavery under Arbitrary Power, they put themselves into a state of War with the People, who are thereupon absolved from any farther Obedience, and are left to the common Refuge, which God hath provided for all Men, against Force and Violence. Whensoever therefore the Legislative shall transgress this fundamental Rule of Society; and either by Ambition, Fear, Folly or Corruption, endeavor to grasp themselves, or put into the hands of any other an Absolute Power over the Lives, Liberties, and Estates of the People; By this breach of Trust they forfeit the Power, the People had put into their hands, for quite contrary ends, and it devolves to the People, who have a Right to resume their original Liberty."
- John Locke
They have no interest in working with him and never have. As such, he's only played into their hands by trying to do so.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
Anyway, you actually going to vote for Trump?
Mert genuinely thinks everybody who doesn't agree with the every single one of the Republican doctrine's is a "leftist", doesn't he??
Those quotes make sense if you take in to account the times they were made. Fucking stupid now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
Anything from the last 200 years?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
Mert - I think it's fair to say that pretty much everybody on this forum disagrees with the majority of your political views - do you think that we are all left wing nutters? Do you think, for one second, that perhaps your views are so entrenched in the Rep. dogma that you could possible be diving off the other end of the scale?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magic
"Progress, far from consisting in change, depends on retentiveness. When change is absolute there remains no being to improve and no direction is set for possible improvement: and when experience is not retained, as among savages, infancy is perpetual. Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."Quote:
Originally Posted by John Arne
- George Santaya
You realize Republicans say the same thing about Obama right? You realize that it's consistently Republicans who have been forced to concede and compromise in the last 7 years, to the extent that the base has gotten so sick of compromising that they are about to nominate Donald Trump? The Left has never had any interest in compromising or moderation, only in an unhalting march towards achieving their vision at all costs.Quote:
Originally Posted by Davgooner
If he's the Republican nominee, I will absolutely vote for Trump over the criminal sociopath queen of cronyism which is Hillary Clinton.
Absolutely not. There are a number of valid points that could be made in response to the arguments I present, however nobody is informed enough to make them (which leads me to believe that most people on this forum are very ignorant as to the actual underlying principles informing the ideas they espouse; it's all emotions and environment).Quote:
Originally Posted by John Arne
Is mert saying he is too clever for us? Fuck me. :D
No he's saying that nobody is informed enough to prove him wrong.
Wait, that means the same thing? Well fuck me.
And here I thought the thread would be about this at the moment: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/04/us...for-years.html
It was for a little bit. Check out my quotes they're good.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spoonsky
What I'm saying is, there are real legitimate arguments you could make where I would go, 'well, yes, I guess there is some ambiguity and I can see how rationally you could interpret the facts to come up with this contrary conclusion', but all I'm getting is 'Obama should just fix gun control by royal decree' as if that is something that is feasible or desirable.Quote:
Originally Posted by Byron
That's bollocks. The conservatives naturally want nothing to change; their donors are doing really well from it, thus they're happy to try to shutdown government. Did you see Graham's exit announcement? "Please please don't change anything." Alas it's Sunday night and fuck it, believe what you want. The race thus far has been top viewing and the build-up to the election should be immense.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
I meant more the caucuses. No idea where you are in the country though.
Imagine, just imagine if they were Muslims wot done it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
Nothing would be different if they were protesting tyrannical local intrusion by the federal government in contravention of the 10th Amendment.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spoonsky
You realize the Democrats used to routinely shut down the government too right? The government was shut down five times under Reagan; that's the entire point of giving Congress the Power of the Purse and having Congressional elections every two years. Checks and balances.Quote:
Originally Posted by Davgooner
https://twitter.com/IanKullgren/stat...24884484390912Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
If Muslims were doing it it would be a terrorist crisis. You know that's true as well.
Here's a quote for you: "Terrorism: the use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims." - The Dictionary
No it wouldn't. Just totally baseless conjecture. This is as much of a 'terrorist crisis' as BLM occupying the president's office in Princeton, except in this case there are legitimate existing redressable grievances at issue.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spoonsky
The people in Princeton are non-violent. There's a massive different between the two.
Yeah how many injuries and deaths in Oregon so far?Quote:
Originally Posted by Spoonsky
There's plenty of historic precedent for this sort of localized rebellion against tyranny anyways, it was encouraged by the founders and one of the underlying justifications for the right to bear arms. Here's an example:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Athens_(1946)
Here is an academic article discussing the insurrectionary theory behind the 2nd Amendment:
http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/...ty_scholarship
It's the same logical process to that which has certain Islamic clerics arguing that because certain conditions prevailed at the time of the Prophet, they should prevail for all time. God, I hope we never have a written constitution.
Except for the minor detail that you can amend the Constitution as social norms evolve :nuts:Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmy Floyd
Anyways, how's that increasing criminalization of free speech treating you there buddy?
A post of mine in here has disappeared.
Best part is that the whole thing is like three pages long. I lolled when I first saw it. Even our constitution is a mammoth document.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmy Floyd
Which has happened just 27 times in 230 years? Sure thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
It's treating me alright actually.
Yeah it was that good.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmy Floyd
"First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me."
:thbgrin:
I'm pretty sure citing that poem is unconstitutional.
Obama and Anderson Chicken Cooper are gonna talk live on air in a little bit about guns and the executive actions. Keep your eyes peeled boys and girls.
I'll wait for Fox to tell me what to think.
I'm sure you will all be pleased to know that the other day while riding my bicycle a black Mercedes passed me awfully close despite having a full empty lane for him to use. Lo and behold, he was donning a TRUMP sticker on his back window. If that doesn't change mert's mind I don't know what will.
#factsarentracist on twitter is amazing.
Give us the highlights.
Mostly moaning about liberals. I haven't really seen any liberal tweets though.
Facts are all fun and games in furthering your political cause until you start realizing that scientific racism and eugenics were totally rational fields of study with a lot of basis and relevance to the modern world.Quote:
Originally Posted by Magic
Then it gets uncomfortable (and dare I say, immoral). Maybe best to pretend to be liberal/idealistic on some issues for the sake of social harmony/equality.
When I made this thread I didn't think there would necessarily be echoes of Reinhard Heydrich as early as page five, but it's good to know his spirit lives on.
Honestly bro I just want to hold hands with people of all religions and ethnic groups under a rainbow and then afterwards be allowed to exploit them in peace within a minarchist governing framework using my privilege and superior economic value in the global market. That's all.
"Clinton: Aliens may have visited us already"
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefi...ted-us-already
Could you expand on your remarks regarding eugenics?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
Nah.Quote:
Originally Posted by John Arne
Bruh, you can't be President and cry.
The big thing he's introducing is background checks for all gun purchases? How was that not already a thing?
Fucking hell.
True. Grow up, Barry.Quote:
Originally Posted by phonics
It's a violation of rights and unconstitutional.Quote:
Originally Posted by Boydy
You can buy sub-machine guns in some states without even showing ID, no?Quote:
Originally Posted by Boydy
You need to do that to buy a fucking tv in the UK.
You can buy a small rifle and ammo at convenience stores whilst you're getting milk and eggs.
Introducing background checks now is like Sweden implementing border controls. :harold:
When will this go in effect? Need to stock up before!
Surely you need to show ID so it's at least registered to you? No?Quote:
Originally Posted by Yevrah
Not quite walking into a grocery store and buying one but:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_show_loopholeQuote:
Under federal law, private-party sellers are not required to perform background checks on buyers, record the sale, or ask for identification.
BREAKING: Somebody described as 'looking like a right little div' has opened fire at an organic cafe in Salt Lake City, Utah, before turning the gun on his badly-dressed self. There are no reports of others being killed or wounded.
Ffs Spoons, what have you done.
Why would he shoot up an organic cafe? Those are his people.
Why should there be a government registry of gun ownership, that's fucking madness.Quote:
Originally Posted by Boydy
Do you own a gun Mert?
Exactly. Take that, mom and dad.Quote:
Originally Posted by Boydy
I've answered this a number of times. My school does not allow gun ownership on campus, therefore I temporarily do not own any guns. I have shot many and will own numerous once I have graduated.Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie
Give your fucking head a wobble, son.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
Was probably @randomlegend proving a point to me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lewis
Just to flip this, could you tell me what would be fundamentally wrong with a database showing who owns what guns?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
Remember seeing that Elliot Rodgers video and thinking this is probably what mert is like. No wonder he likes guns and I wonder what his kill count will be?
Gross violation of privacy, and creating an easier pathway for gun confiscation/criminalization.Quote:
Originally Posted by Byron
Slight difference; I am not severely depressed and have no issues finding female companionship.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mellberg
What a bizarre reason.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
The Government already know where you live, where you work and who your family is - they have a record of the car you drive (hello drivers license), and the overseas travel you take (hi Mr Passport) amongst a myriad of other data currently being collated. The only thing a ownership database will do is increase the ability to find criminals quicker, and hopefully deter anyone thinking of committing a crime in the first place.
You're a nutjob.
You are 100% deluded if you think a gun database would deter any criminals. Also not sure you're aware of this but guns can already be traced back to owners after a crime has been committed through their serial number. Regardless, having such a database would be entirely unfeasible as criminals would simply obtain false identification or give false information. And that's the point, if the government did have a database and they wanted to criminalize gun ownership, confiscation would become far easier.Quote:
Originally Posted by John Arne
So in summary:
1. Not a detterent to commit crime as criminals would use stolen guns or evade the system in other ways such as by providing false information while buying guns
2. Totally unfeasible in a nation with 300 million firearms
3. Less invasive tracking systems already exist
4. A gross violation of privacy and step towards easier confiscation of guns
You're the nutjob who apparently doesn't care about liberty or rational thought.
10th most homicides by firearms in the world. 1st in the developed countries.
LIBERTY!!!
I hope you're not stupid enough to take that figure at face value, you would want to look at per capita homicides not simply the total number.Quote:
Originally Posted by John Arne
Anyways a gun registration system would do absolutely nothing to alleviate that issue. Let me know when you come up with an actual logical rebuttal that convincingly argues otherwise.
Don't forget, White Americans are subject to about the same level of very low gun violence as the 'civilized' Western European countries. It is the urban enclaves with ongoing gang warfare that inflates the figures.
That is per capita, numbnuts.
As for the comments about race... I'm out.
How would you alleviate the high gun crime in urban enclaves?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
Genuine question so I'd appreciate a genuine answer instead of some 'lol libtard' nonsense.
The numbers in support of these proposals, even within the NRA, are massive. From the way the media cover it you'd presume it was split down the middle.
I've seen that stated, but I've never seen figures to back it up. Honest question: could you support that?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
The closest I can come is this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_vi...tates_by_state
When you sort per capita deaths by state, it doesn't seem to support your point. Maryland is high, and Michigan just cracks the top ten. But if what you're saying is true regarding centers of urban development, I wouldn't expect Louisiana and Missouri to round out the top three. Let alone South Carolina and Delaware at five and six.
Gun Murder States (blackest state):
1. District of Colombia (not a state but very, very black)
2. Louisiana (2nd blackest state)
3. Missouri (19th)
4, Maryland (4th)
5. South Carolina (5th)
6. Delaware (8th)
7. Michigan (16th)
8. Mississippi (1st)
9. Florida (11th)
10. Georgia (3rd)
Missouri and Michigan look like the outliers, but their blackness is concentrated in death hubs like St. Louis and Detroit.
Remember when I was championing racial issues on the old boards and posted FACTS that showed a direct correlation between gun crime and high ethnic populations?
Surely everywhere is a high ethnic population :)
It's a small sample, but you get the point. What sets the Finns off?
Which proposals? Support for guns rights is generally higher than its been for decades.Quote:
Originally Posted by Davgooner
Do you need further evidence or has Lewis done enough?Quote:
Originally Posted by ItalAussie
So you're using "urban" as racial shorthand for black?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
And Lewis' numbers still have white American deaths as being 25% higher than the highest Western European nation (Finland). 47% higher than Belgium. 78% higher than Norway. 127% higher than the UK and France (and Australia). 177% higher than Sweden, Italy and the Netherlands (and New Zealand). So actually, even the best figure there is still dramatically worse than developed Western European nations.
In Finland it's dark all the time, cold all the time, and nothing happens. They also have the highest drinking and suicide rates I believe.
Not quite there for drinking.
http://www.itv.com/news/channel/upda...ems-in-jersey/
I've been drinking with Finns and, anecdotally at least, they put everyone else I've ever drunk with to shame. They drink like it's their last night on Earth. And not in the party way - in the "I'm going to ingest as much vodka as is available, with a minimum of frivolity or fuss." And then they will.
That said, two of my Finnish friends are among the most lovely and cheerful people I have ever met. So I guess you just can't pick 'em.
I'd rather know what the deal is with Lithuania.
Let me introduce you all to the Triangle of Doom.
http://i.imgur.com/EcnJrtz.png
Nothing other than total, abject misery has ever happened inside the Triangle of Doom. The peoples within always rank ridiculously high up on every misery measure there is. Auschwitz and Stalingrad are both in there, as are most of the pogroms and a lot of darkness and suicide and drunkenness and death.
EDIT: Stalingrad is further south actually, but I'm not drawing it again.
Might as well make it the Diamond of Doom and include the Middle East.
Those nations don't have black on white crime.Quote:
Originally Posted by ItalAussie
And anyways it's 'close enough' that the 1 extra death per 100,000 isn't really too high of a cost for the added liberty enjoyed by American citizens.
Hard to argue. Belarus goes under the radar on this stuff, but it's a terrible place to be at the moment. Repressive absolute dictatorship.
EDIT: At Jimmy
It's basically anything touched by Russia. Poland still votes almost perfectly in accordance with the 1914 German/Russian border.
I centred my map by whacking 'Minsk' into google.Quote:
Originally Posted by ItalAussie
Yo ital, why do you think there are a disproprotionately high number of math geniuses from these areas? Belarus had the IMO winner a couole years back, all the best (non-asian) math students here are from Bulgaria or Russia or Belarus. Half the theorems you learn have Russian names. Is it just all the social inept kids who have no Western distractions and are forced to devote their lives to solving proofs?
Leftover non-assimilated into American culture pure Ashkanazi Jew genetics IMOQuote:
Originally Posted by mokbull
Chess as well. And musical geniuses. It leads to intensity and massive focus on one (indoor) thing.
There's a reason why Spain has loads of great footballers and fuck all great composers.
There was a massive intensity in Russian mathematics and science during the Cold War. One of my old professors brought in their high school texts, and it was seriously advanced stuff. They pushed them hard from the get-go.Quote:
Originally Posted by mokbull
Conflict spurs on development, because it demands technological and intellectual progress. It's the same reason that the Dutch intellectual golden era coincided almost perfectly with the phase of their history where they were at war with England, and that physics experienced its greatest progress for 400 years in the first half of the 20th century.
Couple that with the rigour on which Russian mathematics is built (different educational traditions "do" mathematics in different ways, and that can lend itself to strengths and weaknesses in different areas - nobody beats the French for analysis, the Japanese are right at the front when it comes to algebraic geometry, etc.), and they spent most of the 60s and 70s being outrageously productive. I live in constant concern that everything I've done has already been done by some obscure Russian mathematician in the '70s and just hasn't been translated yet.
EDIT: It's also interesting how it changes over time. Right now, you'd say that the French lead the way in modern pure mathematics, and by a fairly comfortable margin. It's probably to do with the fact that their mathematical tradition emphasizes rigour and abstraction (due to the Bourbaki group, and its influence on French mathematical education), which become far more important than things like intuition or visualization when you get to the cutting edges of the field.
Spain, not us; but our development of a honking great navy to bash the Dutch with helped to drive our rise by hoovering up ideas and material.
I wonder how much the Soviet emphasis on maths/science/number things was also down to the restrictions they placed on word things. You were hardly at liberty to publish whatever you liked in the humanities/social sciences, lest it fall foul of the official government line on whatever you were doing, so maybe, as well as wanting rockets, they pushed the other fields as a 'safer' outlet for intelligent people.
They did have scientific purges as well. Lysenko came down heavily on anyone pushing evolutionary biology/genetics, in favour of a Lamarkian approach. Lysenko did such a degree of damage to Soviet biology that it wasn't really repaired for over three decades. He also interfered with the rest of the scientific establishment - there are a number of physicists who attracted his ire. But still, it's true that it wasn't nearly as bad as the arts and social sciences.
EDIT: My mistake on the Spain/England thing too. I've never looked too closely at Dutch military history. As, I suspect, has anyone not Dutch. :D
It's not that bad.Quote:
Originally Posted by ItalAussie
Are you being paid to say that?
No. My best mate has family out there and has been out a couple of times. You can't go out protesting against the government in the streets but it really isn't that bad.
So you can't show peaceful dissent?
Yup sounds like a perfectly democratic country.
Democracy is overrated.
I didn't say it was perfectly democratic.Quote:
Originally Posted by Byron
Ital said it was a terrible place to be. I said it wasn't that bad. In an all-round sense. People have the things they need - jobs, houses etc. The not being able to protest is a downside obviously but it's not the totalitsrian hellhole it was being painted as.
It's worth noting that those figures wheeled out above are only homicides. Also, I don't know how much you can tout 'added liberty' based around gun ownership. It's technically another right for citizens, but the society it creates is far more oppressive.
Also, Mert, you're a cunt.
6 dead. Shooter in custody.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...kills-randomly
7 confirmed now.
My parents met there, long before the days of Uber and shotguns though.
Was it ISIS inspired? If not then we don't care.
For those of us who would like to arm our police
Is that true? If so then that is fantastic. :D
Clearly we need to arm our journalists as well.
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2...esston-wichita
Kansas lawn-mower killer. Four dead, 20 injured. Shooter dead.
Why do we need the phone records for the San Bernardino shooter but not for every other shooter?
Can't they just have exhumed the body and used their fingers to unlock it?
It's an iPhone 5 so doesn't have it.
That Apple case is an absolute travesty. If the world isn't corrupt it'll be thrown out within 24 hours of going to court but I think this is the beginning of the end.
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2...legheny-county
Quote:
Police say five people have been shot dead in an “ambush-style attack” in suburban Pittsburgh and at least two gunmen are at large.
Allegheny County police said four women and a man were killed late on Wednesday during a backyard party in the borough of Wilkinsburg. At least three others are in hospital, where two men are in critical condition and one woman is stable.
Police said people scrambled toward the house as bullets began flying. Four of the victims were found dead on the back porch. The other died at a hospital.
At least two suspects fled on foot. No suspects are in custody and a motive was not immediately known.
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/pro-gun-mu...085518113.html
It's bad that I was a little disappointed she hadn't died, isn't it?
I would give her a shot.
If only she was armed, she would have been able to defend herself.
She should have tazered the little cunt.
https://www.eveningtelegraph.co.uk/2...stman-slipped/
An update on the FBI/Apple case. Just goes to show they can do anything.
Hell of an update.Quote:
Originally Posted by Magic
I basically posted it to indulge phonics' tin hat syndrome.
You might want to check what it is you posted, Magic.
Oh for fuck's sake. :D
EDIT: Here's the correct one: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-35914195
#Saint
Hah. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Magic
Magic. :D
This is better than the actual story tbh.Quote:
Originally Posted by Magic
Man walks into Orlando gay bar with handgun and an assault rifle. Opens fire on the crowd, takes hostages when the police show up. Then starts again so the SWAT team take him out.
20 dead so far with over 40 hospitalized.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/36510272
Calling it an act of terrorism and saying the bloke seemed to like a bit of radical islam.
Fucking hell, 50 confirmed dead-
http://news.sky.com/story/1710850/fi...tclub-shooting
Confirmed terrorist.
Great for Trump.
There's no arguing with too many Americans on the second amendment, so unfortunately this is just what happens. Grim.
This was a terrorist thing though, can you argue that?
One imagines it would be quite difficult for him to proceed with the terrorism if he couldn't just pop down to Walmart to buy a gun with the weekly shop.
Really? Well it happened in France rather easily multiple times, don't recall them having the second amendment.
They're saying he wasn't on a terrorist watchlist.
Sounds more like a nutter. Apparently his dad is telling the media that "he got very angry at seeing two gay men kissing in public". Bit of an overreaction mate.
Religion + access to military weaponry = problems?
Surprising news.
It's fair to say that head cases going about shooting people, whatever their motive, is a bit more of an exception in Europe where you can't pop down to the supermarket to buy an assualt rifle.Quote:
Originally Posted by Magic
Mert's having a shit day. He's watching his national team play like a bunch of feminised westerners and he'll get back to find one of his islamic brothers has taken advantage of his American freedoms.
This seems to be the main concern on Twitter.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kikó
If I was a betting man I'd say that's because he's not allowed to, classic repression right there.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee
It would be less likely to happen in Europe if the Schengen zone wasn't a massive sieve through which terrorists and weapons can seep and then move freely across internal borders, yes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Magic
There's a difference between organised groups bringing illegal weapons into the country and it being possible to legitimately pop down to Woolies for some pick n mix and an AK.Quote:
Originally Posted by Magic
50? :serious:
I guess since the shooter was Muslim we need to care about this shooting, as opposed to all the ones done by non-Muslims, which go under the 'shit happens' category.
Even in France you need to spend a bit of time organising yourself the right contacts to get weapons, you can't just pop into Carrefour and come home with an AR-15 and a case of ammo.
50 people were killed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pepe
This is it. The IRA had significant 'military' capacity, but that's because it was a highly organised operation with support from states such as Libya. Gaddafi supplied weaponry, including Semtex. The supply chain is highly vulnerable to intelligence, and any sort of 'bust' rendered some of the cells 'militarily impotent'.Quote:
Originally Posted by elth
There's a clear difference between organised terrorism like Paris (and IRA, ETA etc.) and this sort of nutter.
That the shooter is a Muslim is largely irrelevant in the context of fifty dead, I suspect. It's the worst atrocity in America since 9/11.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pepe
Fourteen were killed in that San Bernardino shooting, which admittedly is more that the nine that were killed in the Charleston church one. The difference in reaction was massive. Not saying that the current events are not a tragedy, just pointing out that there is a big double standard in the way this all too common tragedies in the US are treated based on the perpetrator, which is why they'll never even get close to trying to fix the issue.
Wait until the 'proposed solutions' start popping up, then we'll see whether it is relevant or not.Quote:
Originally Posted by GS
The shooter becomes an issue because people look for reasons why they did it. It's not really a double standard - a self-declared 'follower' of Islamic State / someone who claims they were 'inspired' by them is a bigger story than 'white nutter shoots blacks'. The former is a relatively new phenomenon in America and thus carries more coverage given the supposed link between this sort of thing and American foreign policy. I think most just assume the latter sort of event happens because nutters can buy guns.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pepe
I mean in terms of the coverage this particular shooting event is going to receive. There's fifty people dead, so the shooter's motives are going to be relentlessly raked over in the media. It would get the same level of coverage (direction is a different matter) regardless.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pepe
I do find American media coverage to be uncomfortably macabre in events such as this. I don't really understand why 'local law enforcement' are required to give an on the spot briefing to the press where they stand there and say 'local law enforcement' a lot.
Do we need a countdown until some asshat says they deserved it for being gay? It's America so I suspect it won't be long.
Does anyone else find GS's 'this is it' post opener really irritating?
That is exactly the issue right there. Billions are spent to 'stop' the former, while the latter, which is far more common, is just thrown under the 'shit happens' category.Quote:
Originally Posted by GS
It's not like you to moan. Is everything okay?Quote:
Originally Posted by Boydy
I don't give a shit about 'media coverage,' I don't really follow the media. I give a shit about what politicians do/say in response. Jeb Bush saying 'well there's nothing we can do' after one shooting and then the Republican debate after San Bernardino focusing 100% on keeping all arabs out is what I give a shit about.
Anyways, I've said my part. Feel free to move on. Very sad event regardless of motive/response/whatever.
Listen Ian and Gerry, let's not start the sectarian sparring just as your lads are about to kick off in a major championship.
It's been more than half an hour since it happened so that ship will have sailed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Disco
People getting preemptively annoyed over the direction the coverage might take is orders of magnitude more annoying than the coverage itself devoting an extra thirty seconds to talking about his religious background.
We're both prods.
Lots of Republicans feeling pretty conflicted about this I'd imagine.
What a shithole.
I don't disagree with your point, by the way. I just think it's inevitable that the coverage will be skewed and I can see why. They believe the former can be controlled if they take necessary steps, but the latter is a necessary evil for the second amendment to stand. I think it's insane, you think it's insane, most sensible people think it's insane, but America isn't yet ready (seemingly) to bin the second amendment.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pepe
Don't ruin my shit crow-barred joke with your facts, for fuck's sake.Quote:
Originally Posted by Boydy
:DQuote:
Originally Posted by Lee
Sorry.
I'm sure many do, but the unfortunate reality is that the NRA wield huge influence and they all want to be elected again.Quote:
Originally Posted by Davgooner
You couldn't live in America - it's a shit country, all things considered.
I do think it is about much more than gun availability but I agree. What a country. :*)
The only way to stop the latter is to limit access to guns, which I think everyone needs to accept at this point America just isn't going to do. The former being a relatively new thing means that people will still see a hundred different ways they might be able to prevent it, but in thirty years' time if it's still happening once a month it'll likely be on the shit happens pile too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pepe
Cheesy chips, anyone?
Well that's Trump elected.
Lesson to liberals: maybe time to put away with the 2nd Amendment phobia and put yourself in a position to defend yourselves. You don't see this shit happening at a Texas church; there's a reason for that.
Ben Carson practically did on Fox.Quote:
Originally Posted by Disco
http://i.imgur.com/DAIg5VN.png
This twitter-account is a goldmine.
America has lots of guns and lots of homophobes; but nobody has ever taken it upon themselves to shoot fifty people in a gay bar. I don't think guns are necessarily the issue.
Larry Ashbrook.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
Also, this happened in a nightclub. Are there nightclubs anywhere in America where the patrons are allowed to carry?
True. You do have to wonder whether it would've happened without the easy access, but they are, ultimately, so rare events that it is really hard to tell.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lewis
The question is why nobody bothers with this type of shit anywhere else. Can't be just guns, surely? Guns are not legal in Mexico but it would be piss easy to get one.
Pepe's desperate attempts in this thread to basically shift the blame on to white people is laughable.
Yes, that is exactly what is going on. Glad you're having a good laugh mate.
It's about access. The Mexicans are shit at preventing smuggling. The Americans let you buy it at Walmart. Neither is okay, and both are the largest contributing factor to this sort of event.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pepe
In the UK, gun access was drastically cut after Dunblane and it worked. It's not rocket science.
It's obviously the gays who are to blame. If those two blokes didn't kiss in public FFS.
Great day for the NRA and the industry it promotes. The usual post-shooting spike in sales, and a whole new demographic to scare into making themselves less safe.
And Australia, they are the perfect example of how it can work.Quote:
Originally Posted by GS
Why doesn't it happen in Mexico then?Quote:
Originally Posted by GS
EDIT: Worth noting that available as they might be, no one is carrying around a gun just for lulz in Mexico as they do here.
Nothing to see here, just more shit happens.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pepe
We never really had any mass shootings before Dunblane, but we've had Raoul Moat and Derrick Bird in recent years, and the overall firearm death rate has barely changed. We're not a great case study for gun control.
The Americans have too many mentals. I don't know whether their healthcare system and society generally (Beta Uprising) contributes, but where guns are the issue is that we don't have the easy out of gun rampages, since there is surely some cycle there, as if it's the 'done thing' if you're off your head.
Mexico isn't a safe country.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pepe
There was Hungerford about 10 years earlier.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lewis
I forgot him. It was still rare that we had them, and we've had them since.
Of course, you can't ban people from being unhinged, but I think it makes a difference that you can no longer get your hands on a firearm that takes more than a couple of rounds at a time.
Both are fucking islands. The example doesn't apply to the US.Quote:
Originally Posted by Disco
In the US the state with the lowest gun crime rate (Wyoming) has one of the highest gun ownership rates. It. Is. Not. Guns.
Yeah it's not guns... I'm sure he could've achieved the same body count with a pen knife mate.
Yes I suppose the amount of coastline would make a difference.
He would still be able to purchase a gun if it was legal or if it wasn't legal.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lofty
It's pointless even bothering when you can post that kind of rubbish, at least Harold put some effort in.
Some politician in Texas posted a bible quote claiming men reap what they sow. Classy.
What I've always said is just how normal this shit has become here. Yeah it will make the news for a few days, Obama will do his karaoke but after that it's back to status quo. Nothing is ever considered on anything more than a very superficial level with guns. It gets forgotten very quickly.
Two guys were shot outside a shopping center two minutes from me a few months back. Didn't even make the local news.
Except this is totally different.
Gun crime rate in America, if you take out Blacks (who are concentrated in a few urban enclaves), is roughly equivalent to Belgium. Cities / states in America with the highest gun ownership often have very low crime (I'm at a bar so don't have access to the exact statistics; I'm happy to play this game in a few hours). It's not guns. If you think that guns somehow translate to more crime, you are an ignorant moron who refuses to accept the exhaustive empirical evidence to the contrary.Quote:
Originally Posted by Disco
Thanks for the clarification.Quote:
Originally Posted by Magic
It is though. Feel free to elaborate how it's the same as two blokes getting killed in an argument or whatever it was though.
Possession of a gun is the only way some twonk is walking into a room and killing fifty people though, so whatever the statistics say about crime in general it's worth having a conversation about limiting access.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
Since It. Is. Not. Guns. what do you think is behind America having a hundred times as many mass shootings as the rest of the world combined?
He didn't say it was the same. You're a constant embarrassment to yourself, but you're not that stupid.Quote:
Originally Posted by Magic
Black on black gun crime.
If someone is nuts and determined enough to kill 50 people, he's getting that gun regardless. The only way to stop him from killing 50, is for someone else with a gun to stop him.Quote:
Originally Posted by John
America doesn't have 100 times more mass shootings than the rest of the world, if I'm not mistaken America ranks something like 110~ of all countries in gun crime.
America doesn't have a gun crime problem. Certain self-contained groups have a gun crime problem.
He did. How normal Islamic terrorists murdering 50 people is and how it'll only get like one day in the middle of a newspaper just like two blokes killing themselves outside of a 7-11.Quote:
Originally Posted by John
Something something liberals. Clearly.Quote:
Originally Posted by John
Stats are stats, well done. Whatever societal issues make people want to go out and kill lots of other people are exacerbated by the proliferation and ease of access to very effective weapons. If no-one can work out why they do it then it is sensible to limit access to the most effective weapons many of which don't have any civilian applications anyway (and don't say hunting, if you can't hunt with a shotgun or a simple bolt action rifle then you're rubbish at hunting). You could even give them all back afterwards if you do end up working it out. Also, the argument that people can still get hold of illegal things is laughable. I'd imagine someone within a short drive of my house could sell me some great drugs but to equate finding them with popping to a shop and buying something over the counter is about as silly as it gets.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
Also, stop equating gun crime in general with mass shootings, they are clearly very different and doing so makes you look a bit silly.
No, the point was very clearly that mass shootings are now so commonplace and gun crime has become so normal to people that two people getting shot doesn't even rate highly enough for a place on the local newsQuote:
Originally Posted by Magic
We can talk about this 'in a few hours' when you're prepared to actually address the points people are making. You can tell me about how shootings never happen at Texas churches then too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
Did seven mean local or state news?Quote:
Originally Posted by John
But yeah don't recall 50 gays being gunned down all the time.
There's no such thing as 'state news'.
Eh, there's really no point in being outraged over gun laws anymore, nothing will happen. Sandy Hook did nothing, this will do nothing.
This. If they aren't prepared to admit their system doesn't work then just let them shoot each other, keeps the news ticking along nicely.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bernanke
Our system works to provide safety on par with Central Europe for White Americans. Liberals can freak out as much as they like but there are simple demographic realities, fuck giving up my liberties because of the issues of communities I am not responsible for.
And of course, the states / cities / areas with the strictest gun ownership restrictions have the highest levels of gun crime. Pray tell me, what constitutionally permissible regulations would you implement, that haven't already been tried and failed?
Apparently some bloke with an assault rifle and explosives (as well as camouflauge and a security badge) has been arrested on his way to LA Pride.
Mert. Have you got yourself a gun?
I live on Gtown campus and am not allowed to have one, once I move off campus I'll buy one.Quote:
Originally Posted by P_3
Can you please post on here before you go on a rampage. We do need new members. 4chan have enough already.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
Bugger that, we'll get blamed.
Even better.
When you have a family, a wife and children, and a criminal enters your house; would you rather be able to protect your loved ones or stand by impotently as you watch them raped / executed?Quote:
Originally Posted by leedsrevolution
You're not in Turkey any more.
Yeah, how likely is that? Seems to be a right-wing fantasy over there.
Fucking hell how many people are breaking into houses to rape married women over there? Seems a lot of trouble to go to.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
As a well renowned cuck, I'd probably invite the invaders to have intercourse with my wife as well.
'He's got six Best Poster trophies on that shelf, Leroy. We should go rob that Turk instead.'
Keeping a gun in the house probably makes it more likely that your kid will accidentally shoot your wife than you'll ever shoot an intruder.
Lauren does the inviting around these parts.Quote:
Originally Posted by 7om
Alpha kid though. :cool:Quote:
Originally Posted by John
:DQuote:
Originally Posted by Spoonsky
Doesn't matter. If it happens I will be prepared and I will defend my family as it is my Natural Right to do so.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee
Don't agree with giving me that freedom? You can go be a cuck with all the socialists in Europe who don't believe in Man's capacity to provide for himself without the help of other men.
I'm not a half American/Turkish softy. I'm a true Brit. So i would politely ask them to stop then make them a cup of tea.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
Tony Martin says hi, then he lets you out of the beartrap at the bottom of the stairs.
Are you from the 18th century?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
Tbh humanity peaked with the Enlightenment.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee
Who paid for your college tuition mert?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
We came home the other day and the front door was open. Fuck knows who opened it. Point is I ended up going round the house with a bread knife when what I really wanted was a sawn off shotgun.
The house was empty.
Voluntary exchange to family members for mutual long term benefit is not what I'm referring to. My parents have the right to use their money as they wish.Quote:
Originally Posted by Disco
They took it all? Cunts.Quote:
Originally Posted by 7om
Coulda been raped you got lucky breh.Quote:
Originally Posted by 7om
Isn't it almost laughably 'beta' to reckon your family will be raped and murdered in front of you, and you'll be powerless to stop it unless you have a gun? Learn how to fight and keep a bat somewhere if you want to protect your family. Your kid isn't going to accidentally kill itself with a cricket bat.
But you'd have been completely unable to provide for yourself without their help. Fucking socialist.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
I wouldn't rule it out.Quote:
Originally Posted by John
A bat would work fine in the UK. But if the rapist had a gun it isn't going to do much good is it?Quote:
Originally Posted by John
Have fun defending yourself with a bat when the criminal in your home has a gun. Idiot.Quote:
Originally Posted by John
Charity exists in capitalist societies you realize, it's greatest beneficiaries are often the greatest philanthropists (see Carnegie Mellon).Quote:
Originally Posted by John
I would have been fine, either taking on loans or going to slightly worse schools with scholarships.
Yeah I can't believe you just made that point. A cricket bat is enough you see when not every man and his dog is running around with a hand gun.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
If having a gun is made criminal, only criminals will have guns; you think laws will magically force criminals to use bats instead of firearms?Quote:
Originally Posted by leedsrevolution
I was going to post a preemptive lol at that very line of reasoning earlier. There's middle ground between just completely criminalising all gun ownership and putting sufficient restrictions on their sale that someone who's been investigated as a nutjob twice by the FBI can't buy them in a supermarket.
If your kid shoots you with your own gun has he cucked you?
Only a first class beta would allow such faggotry.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lofty
Can we stop with the usage of derogatory homophobic slurs?
You don't understand, it's a hilarious impersonation of Mert so it doesn't count.
Raoul seething that he was rejected as a staff member when we moved over. :drool:
:harold:
Well this has been a great read :D
The only people those restrictions would apply to are law abiding citizens, disadvantaging them in any confrontation with criminals, don't you get that?Quote:
Originally Posted by John
How? They all have phones and can dial 911. We do something similar in England and aren't crimed to bits.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
This example is always used, seemingly due to fear of Viking raids or the plot from a 1980's JCVD movie - but I have to question... How often does anyone experience a violent intruder in their home whilst they are at home?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
Again, a quaint analogy - this one appears to allude to shootouts outside the ol' saloon, perhaps in front of the half constructed clock tower, whilst the sheriff is incapacitated?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
I'd be genuinely interested as to how often the law abiding citizens use those guns to defend themselves successfully. The very fact that there are potentially guns on both sides escalates the risk for BOTH parties.
Also, reduce the legal guns and you'll reduce the illegal arms too.
Actually fuck it, let's pretend Mert used that other wonderful cliche that those in his camp (the NRA) so often use too -
Except, today Tyranny will come at you with F-15's and helicopter gunships.Quote:
Originally Posted by mert
Futility = Freedom.
They could always fight a guerrilla war where their cousin-wives secretly bring food into the swamp at night for the freedom fighters.
You laugh, but history suggests that the Americans would lose that war.
The federal government would probably end up massacring and / or forcibly expelling those who were left alive.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lewis
The home of the brave.
:(
Everything is just shit.
Shit, we forgot about bruhnaldo.
He'd already pulled and was long gone.
lol at Owen Jones storming off Sky News.
I appreciate Lewis' faith in me. Ask early and often, my tactic.
What happened?Quote:
Originally Posted by Lewis
He didn't seem to like any discussion about the Florida shooting that didn't make it entirely about gay people.
The news man and Julia Hartley-Brewer were attempting to put it into the general context of Muslims attacking things Muslims don't like (music, cartoons, gays), but he just wanted to call it homophobic terrorism and quote the bloke's old man saying that watching Eurovision set him off.
He's such a twat. I really dislike the little prick.
"You don't understand this becase you're not gay"
Someone punch this twat in the face, please.
I'm only two minutes in, and it's gold, he really is a monstrous twat.
I wish I could say this was a troll.
Terrible tragedy but I laughed multiple times reading this thread, you horrible cunts.
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefi...m-is-pro-trump
Well that's... something.
She dons him at 4:30 and he just seethes silently from then on. Textbook WDYTOE meltdown.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yevrah
He's so fucking desperate to be a victim. Fuck off you dickhead, nobody tried to shoot you.
Didn't even know he was gay. Given that I suppose you can understand it.
Lol this isn't '91, mate.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Merse
John Howard :cool:
Ya I'm sure that the person about to murder you will wait for the police to show up to protect you before proceeding. :wall:Quote:
Originally Posted by Shindig
Who's showing up to murder me? My house has been robbed twice and they've run the moment I turned up/they were aware of my presence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Merse
It's not relevant how often it happens, it's the unqualified right I have as a human being to protect myself and my family from harm. Period.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Merse
Drugs are illegal, and yet they are very easy to come by if you are determined. Guns would be the same.
1. There are plenty of historical examples of the 2nd Amendment being used to combat tyranny in the United States. (Such as this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Blair_Mountain and this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Athens_(1946)) This is not a hypothetical scenario imagined by dead white men in the 18th century, it has been validated by actual application throughout American history.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Merse
2. It's not about defeating the government (although eradicating guerrilla campaigns can be a bitch), but about raising the relative cost of imposing tyranny so that it acts as an effective deterrent. The first thing the Bolsheviks and Nazis did before embarking on their mass killing / subjugation of population groups, was to disarm them; it's not a coincidence. Could you imagine how much harder perpetrating the Holocaust would have been if Jews had been armed like Texans?
You guys are just wrong. Any argument you make I can very easily counter, at the end of the day it just comes down to, 'well emotionally I just feel that gun control should work, it works in the UK, and because I have an inferiority complex due to my countries relative poverty compared to the US, I will continue irrationally believing that my country is right on this issue even in the face of overwhelming logic, reason and evidence to the contrary.'
Just replace the gas ovens with the golden arches?
There's something so very quaint about Americans and their paranoia.
There's something so very alarming about the Europeans and their arrogant belief in their immunity from the human tendency towards tyranny and repression, etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by Disco
If only the native Americans had had assault rifles.
If you want a proliferation of guns, you'll just have to accept that there will constantly be mass murders - I'm making the 488th post in this thread - and if you're fine with that, then enjoy living in America. I hope your friends and family never get caught up in one.
Liberal logic:
"If you ban guns then society will be safer because people won't have access to guns"
"If you ban abortions then women will be less safe because they will still access abortions illegally"
Gunmen, they fire, Mert's five chins are terrified.
I'll keep working on it.
Mate, he'd have sex with your girlfriend.
You should just stick this in your signature and be done with it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
6 music are having gay disco fest because of Orlando. If only they knew these are the sort of side effects their rampages cause. Bloody Moslems.
What if they have a tank? Or there's 10 of them?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
It's not relevant how unlikely that is to happen, you should still be protecting yourself and your family from it.
A shot fired from a legal gun does the same damage as a shot fired from an illegal gun.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
The only variable with guns is how many shots get fired.
How many times do I have to say this, mass shootings do not happen in suburban America, any more than they happen in Europe. An example, America's safest city over a population of 250,000 is Plano, Texas with a homicide rate of 0.4 (which is lower than the countries of Switzerland, Germany, Austria, Denmark, etc.). I'm at work so I can't be bothered to find the exact numbers, but Texas almost undoubtedly has a higher incidence of average gun ownership than the US as a whole, and the US has the highest civilian gun ownership rate out of any country in the world, by a lot.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmy Floyd
So the main take away: there are places in America where crime is lower than nearly anywhere else on earth, where the citizenry is armed more heavily than anywhere else on earth.
Guns. Are. Not. The. Problem.
We just going to pretend deterrence doesn't exist or?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmy Floyd
There's a difference between 'unlikely' and 'impossible'.Quote:
Originally Posted by randomlegend
mert's schitzophrenia must really be getting to him on this one, what with having to consider all three angles - gays, gun rights and Muslamics.
Right, and the price you pay for that is the fact that a dangerous nutcase is easily able to kill 50 people in a bar because they can easily access the weaponry needed to do so.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
We have the same nutters in other western countries but they simply don't have access to that killing power.
Apparently there were armed police in the club, so I wonder how many people died in the crossfire as opposed to being directly targeted by the madman.
Think the Death Penalty has kinda proved that one true.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
There is, but neither of those things are impossible.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
Where exactly do you draw the line?
Before the gunman attacked? Are they that afraid of gays?Quote:
Originally Posted by Davgooner
I'm sure every gun-carrying criminal in the US immediately jumps to murder.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
I don't understand why you don't get this. Our gun crime levels are very similar when you compare European nations and the US along demographic lines. There is no problem.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmy Floyd
Link.Quote:
Originally Posted by Davgooner
Just goes to show that police men aren't sufficientnly reliable to protect citizens and that private individuals need to be armed to protect themselves.
The point is simple; you don't have time to wait for the police to protect you if your life or the lives of your family are in danger.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shindig
'We have no crime issues, except where we do. But apart from those places, yes, no crime issues here.'
The point is there are areas with very high gun ownership with very low crime, lower even that of European nations with gun control. If little or no gun regulation is the independent variable responsible for higher rates of gun crime, these anomalies would not exist.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pepe
No link; heard it on the radio last night so could be bollocks. Just interested in the possibilities rather than making any specific point.
Everyone but you is focusing on mass shootings, not general crime. While I don't think gun availability is the #1 reason for the stupidly high amount of mass shootings that occur over here, I find it hard to believe that it has nothing to do with it. Then you have to consider the number of accidental gun deaths that happen every year.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
As for 'general crime,' I would think gun availability is a secondary factor and not just a matter of more guns = more crime.
I understand that (some) Americans like the feeling of self-reliability that guns give them. I just don't think that feeling is enough of a positive to balance the negatives. Still, gun control isn't one of my top priorities, there are many more issues I would prefer were tackled first and if anything, the fact that the response to every shooting (how many do we get? something like two a month?) is yet another shoutfest about gun control gets a bit boring.
He didn't listen 3 pages back so don't get your hopes up.
Well if we're focusing on mass shootings only, there's the whole debate about how to define a "mass shooting", how the vast majority of them happen in gun-free zones, etc. It gets messy and I don't think non-Americans are really equipped to go that deep into the gun debate.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pepe
And yes, I am happy to concede that it is established beyond any reasonable doubt that higher gun ownership does correspond with higher suicide rates and accidental shootings. The morbid / dark side of me might half-jokingly respond that that's just Darwinism at work.
I would argue that even if the negatives outweigh the positives (in terms of short term safety), this does not justify taking away our freedom as individuals. Heck, you could probably argue that a society which implemented sexual segregation outside a heavily regulated / monitored mating process / IVF insemination would probably suffer from far fewer sexual assaults as a result; but what's the point of safety without the freedom to exercise your freewill? Maximum safety shouldn't even be a desired end in and of itself.
Four or more is the definition of 'mass' in this context.
Deaths or casualties?Quote:
Originally Posted by Disco
https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R43004.pdf
Quote:
There is no broadly agreed-to, specific conceptualization of this issue, so this report uses its own definition for public mass shootings. These are incidents occurring in relatively public places, involving four or more deaths—not ncluding the shooter(s)—and gunmen who select victims somewhat indiscriminately.
Sorry, it's the definition of Mass Killings initially put forward by the FBI and then re-assessed by Congress. They seem to disagree if it should be three or four so I'm taking the higher number.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentis...ando-sexuality
Now I might be being thick, but my take on Jones having a mardy last night was that it was because he wanted it to only be reported as a homophobic attack. When watching I thought he was a knob and that whilst it was clearly a homophobic attack, it was also some other things too.
Now he is making the opposite argument to the one I thought he was making.
You know, I do have some respect for the 'freedom' arguments and a few people out there do manage to show at least a degree of consistency with it. But it seems that the only 'freedom' right-wing Americans care about is the freedom to own guns. They are happy to jump aboard the 'ban abortion/gay marriage/drugs/anything-I-don't-like-train,' freedom be damned in all those cases. How about shit like, say, the speed limit? Why is no one chimping out about that clear violation of our freedom to drive as we please? Society is built on the premise of resigning some freedom in the name of stability. I don't think giving up the right to own firearms is that big of a deal. Obviously about half of the country disagrees with me, that's fine. I would gladly take something like universal healthcare over any sort of ban on guns, for example.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
"Today, the 'we only care about LGBT rights if Muslims are involved' brigade are out in force."
Yeah, fuck off mate.
That's pretty lol.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee
A lot of truth in that sadly.
'Out in force' is such a shithouse phrase.
It was not so much only wanting to portray it as homophobic as not making it about Muslims, which the other two were groping towards without also really wanting to say it (like this bloke lives for).Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee
In fairness, it is morbidly interesting watching social conservative figures express their condolences while carefully tip-toeing around the LGBT component of the crime.
Sick bastard to get off on something like that. Mea Maxima Culpa.
Also, this guy really does seem like the type who wouldn't be able to get a gun if they weren't easily for sale. He seems to have been a lone operator with a very short fuse. It's not like had a network of criminal contacts who could import it for him.
The "bad guys will still get guns" argument seems to collect everyone into a great big criminal bloc, with all the access that provides. The reality is that a lot of these loners are quite isolated, and would never be able to find that kind of equipment in, for example, the UK.
Has anyone mentioned he actually had a firearm license?
This sort of thing breaks various people's brains, as depending on which side of the spectrum they're on, they think Muslims and gays are both violently evil / can do no wrong (delete as appropriate) and find it difficult to add nuance.Quote:
Originally Posted by ItalAussie
Drugs are illegal and easy to buy. Don't know why guns wouldn't be the same.Quote:
Originally Posted by ItalAussie
That's a fatuous argument because drugs are far harder to buy than normal groceries.
Yeah but if you wanted to buy drugs you can easily do it. If you wanted to buy a gun you could easily do it. I would think that if you have the resolve to kill a bunch of people, you're not going to be deterred by having to put a little bit extra effort.Quote:
Originally Posted by Disco
Those 'conservatives' are frauds; the issue isn't the ideology.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pepe
I agree there should be democratically/legislatively delineated restraints on freedom, but last time I checked the 2nd Amendment still existed.
The lack of gun proliferation in countries with gun restrictions like Australian and the UK suggests otherwise.
However, I do agree with you on the second amendment. As much as I wouldn't write it if I were writing a constitution, it's definitely there. I mean, you could argue what constitutes a militia, etc., but it seems like the current interpretation has generally held up in court.
So because people could still break the law there's no point in having one?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
You're going to have a lot of spare room in your statute book if you follow that logic.
The 'criminals will still get them' argument is pretty weak. At least use the 'how are we going to remove them?' one, it is a bit stronger.
They are islands, it is much easier to control your borders.Quote:
Originally Posted by ItalAussie
US v. Heller (2008) :checkit:
It's about reciprocal application. If I have a traffic law, everyone is safer if most people follow that law. If I have a gun regulation, those who follow the law are less safe than those who don't.Quote:
Originally Posted by Disco
Toggle Spoiler
Okay let's go with that:Quote:
Originally Posted by SvN
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/...ones-full-data
There have been 81 mass shooting in the last 35 years; or about 2.3 per year with an average of 17 deaths per year. Hardly an epidemic. Yes every death is a tragedy, but to put that into perspective 450 people die falling out of their bed per year in the USA; it is literally 2,600% more likely for you to die getting out of bed than you are from being a victim of a mass shooting.
Nice spoiler. Considering how many durwoods shoot themselves by accident I would imagine it is total bollocks.
It's about safety from others, not from yourself and/or something about intent.Quote:
Originally Posted by niko_cee
I'm fairly sure it's been shown that your overall 'safety' goes down if you own a gun (ie it is more likely to cause you harm than save you from harm). You can't only assess it's relative value in an armed intruder situation. Even then, seeing as I would imagine any sane individual would keep it locked away somewhere it's probably still fairly useless. You should just scatter landmines about before going to bed each night.
Yes that's why I was precluding injury done to self and/or requiring intent.Quote:
Originally Posted by niko_cee
So let's spin this for a second and say that there's a mental health crisis in the United States. For the sake of that, gun restrictions seems like a good idea, right? You have to stop seeing guns as a defence weapon and see it more as a weapon that can end more lives quicker than knives or homemade explosives. I mean, look at the perps of these massacres. All headcases. Headcases with easy access to firearms.
Britain arguably has a similar issue but, without the access, our headcases maybe get away with one brutal murder, rather than 20+.
The liberal media and its usual BS:
http://www.thenation.com/article/com...inger-fantasy/
I could quote half of the article, so you should read it instead. I will, however, quote this part:
:harold:Quote:
A case in Texas two weeks ago highlights the risks of civilians intervening in chaotic situations. Police say that as two carjackers struggled with the owner of a car at a gas station in northeast Houston, a witness decided to take action into his own hands. He fired several shots, but missed the perpetrators and shot the owner of the car in the head. He then picked up his shell casings and fled the scene. Police are still looking for the shooter.
Imagine opening fire at a petrol station. What could possibly go wrong?
Whats the hymn/song referenced here? My ears are absolutely awful at understanding lyrics when sung by crowds.
Bridge over troubled water. Sounds pretty clear.
It probably does. Just been one of those things I can't hear. Failed a French exam because of it once.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gray Fox
It couldn't be any clearer...well maybe If it had subtitles. Sake, phon.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gray Fox
Group singing is an odd way to deliver an exam.Quote:
Originally Posted by phonics
It was probably on how to surrender en masse.
I dunno. I can get on board with Corbyn leaving home and never returning because of who he is.Quote:
Originally Posted by phonics
The self-indulgence on show there. It's not nice, but - gay or not - you're not part of it. Three weeks ago ISIS blew up 184 Syrians in an afternoon. I don't remember being expected to stand in solidarity with them and the two-hundred injured.
That's why Owen Jones looked such a twat last night. He was more gutted not to have been in the club when it happened than anything else.
All my Facebook needed was another excuse for LGBTs to force themselves down my newsfeed. Bastards.
I still don't understand how the T got involved.
Isn't it LGBTQ now? The Q being for Queer which is apparently okay in the US.
Why do they need gay and queer? Surely it should be LGBTNB?
We're at LGBTQA now, actually.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee
What about FDL?
What about it?
LGBTQIA, I last heard. Fucking hell.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pepe
I meant FDP.
You are right, my bad.Quote:
Originally Posted by 7om
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/36514358
Absolutely heartbreaking stuff.
Shii. :(
Imagine the fear. Fuck me. I don't think I'd be able to text, I'd be drenched in my own tears. Horrible cunt.
Am I too distant from it to be thinking that if you've got time to text then you've got time to make a better go of escaping?
You could give it a try, sure.
What are you gonna do, just run out the cubicle past him and hope he doesn't react in time?Quote:
Originally Posted by Lewis
You could throw your milk in his face.
It's a difficult one.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lewis
On the one hand there must be a part of you that's hoping beyond hope that the shooter(s) won't make it to you before the armed forces get to him/them, but on the other hand you'd obviously know that if they do and you're in a toilet cubicle you're fucked.
I can't imagine many people would be going out of that room if they hear there is shooting going on outside it.
Yup. The chances of being killed in a mass shooting are still far less than being killed in your car on the highway. Not that the shootings aren't a problem, but they're no reason to flee the country either. I'd rather leave because of how much I have to drive everywhere.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmy Floyd
@Mert, I think you conflate gun violence with mass shootings. Gun violence is a huge problem in this country, but like you've said it's got to do with a lot more than just the 2nd Amendment (like gang violence, race, housing, the general state of society) and outside of the inner cities it's not a huge problem. These mass shootings are different though, they happen just as much in the suburbs and in affluent places, and they do happen here far more than in Europe. So yes, these shootings are fundamentally a gun problem (as well as a mental health problem); they're not gangs just shooting each other up.
Spoon, did you choosing McGill have anything to do with a potential Trump presidency or is it just a happy coincidence?
Probably subconsciously hearing everyone threaten to move to Canada made me want to actually do it. Certainly I admit that the rise of Trump and this presidential election in general has made me more amenable to living in a different country for a few years.
You're so fucking annoying.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
posted this on another forum just thought i'd share.Quote:
That girl I work with just found out one of her brother's best friends passed that she hung out with all the time.
I'm not going to lie this is one of the hardest things I've had to deal with. Like I don't know what I'm supposed to even say. S
I took her outside and just kinda let her cry into my shoulder for a minute and tried to just tell her to be strong and that it's okay to be upset cause it's all so so so so fucked but we gotta be strong for the people around us and etc.
She's literally crying talking about she used to see these people all the time and now she'll go out and they just won't be there. that she spent her birthday with these people. people whose names you may not remember but faces you know. just gone.
and i'm out here trying to say some shit about well we gotta just think about the lives they DID get to lead and how we have to honor them by making sure we stay strong and just being there for our community and standing up in the face of evil.
that's the 3rd person she'd lost that she knew. i told her honey, it's probably going to get worse before it gets better. but you gotta be strong
i'm honestly not trying to attention whore i really just don't know who to talk to right now and i don'tk now if i'm doing the right thing but trying to be supportive or if i should just shut up and not take the lead.
it's going to be such a long week.
i realized that i was literally .4 miles away from this club getting tacos about the time this would've started.
I didn't hear anything and drove the opposite way home but just very surreal to think about that I might have crossed paths with this person right before he did that, considering my route of travel.
Shit is crazy right now.
Always had my suspicions about you, Bruhn.
Can't imagine how messed up that kind of thing makes you. I suppose she's too old to start a tennis career?
Apparently the shooter had previously visited the club often. Definite repression case.
He looks gay as a window in most of the pictures that have appeared.
Called it.
Top comment on the thread about his gayness on Reddit:
"Apparently he also claimed allegiance/membership to Hezbollah, Al-Qaeda, and ISIS... despite all three organizations being enemies of each other."
:D
Edit:
"How's this: Aspiring member of Hezbollah, Al-Qaeda, ISIS, the NYPD, and the LGBTQ community."
:lol:
17 deaths a year due to mass shootings. There is more of an epidemic of people dying from fall off their beds, than from mass shootings.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spoonsky
https://www.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/..._his_house_to/Quote:
Originally Posted by niko_cee
Family members knew about impending attack and did nothing about it.
*links to /r/The_Donald*
lol
Christ it's even better than I thought. Here's the original source website.
https://i.imgur.com/duGvA7h.png
:D
It's like when Harold used to link to that weirdo neo-nazi site as a source.
edit: Lol people in that thread are claiming that there was multiple shooters and it was an army of muslims that did it and the media are covering it up to help muslims take over the world. These people are absolutely mental mert. Genuinely mentally deranged. Surely you have to see this? You're not so dumb.
That seems low given there were 50 killed this week alone.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
Fall off your fucking bed, then.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
Oh god, he's just been lifting arguments from that sub for the last however long hasn't he?
What with his "I literally just made that up" edit the other day, he's not even hiding the fact that everything he posts is just copied from something he's read.
He's probably doing an average over the last thousand years.Quote:
Originally Posted by Disco
EDIT: Well, some retard on r/the_donald is anyway.
As long as you realise that your stance on guns means there will always be deaths from mass shootings.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
I found the sub like 2 days ago after the Orlando shootings got it a lot of press. I never go on reddit normally to the extent that I'm unaware that linking to that website is somehow not legitimate.Quote:
Originally Posted by randomlegend
Average based off of Mother Jones spreadsheet of the last 35 years I linked to on the last page which records all "mass shootings" as defined by the FBI (over 4 murders).Quote:
Originally Posted by Disco
*insert Ben Franklin quote about giving up liberty to gain security means you will lose both*Quote:
Originally Posted by Yevrah
So you do then. That's fine.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
But where else would you gather your cunning memes?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
Would the right support studies (by the CDC or otherwise) into causes and mitigation strategies for gun violence? Because arguing is all well and good, but since considering other countries is apparently off the table, nobody has anything but ideology to back themselves up.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iIVDYJ9S7rI
Even though Harold will sign up later to post it: 'Doug-las! Doug-las! Doug-las!'
Imagine this being called in:
"Reports of shots fired in Pulse nightclub"
"Oh, did someone say Louboutins are out of fashion?"
"Haha, meow!"
"Hellllooooo!"
"I'll transfer you to the fashion police over"
Some Somali bloke has opened fire in a Texan Walmart and has taken hostages.
I hope he bought the gun there and then. Should be a test for the armed vigilante theory.
What sort of creative accounting has been applied for that seventeen a year figure? It's over a thousand in the last five years.
Did this shit happen all that much pre-Columbine? Other than Waco I can't really remember anything of the sort, and that was more just a lunatic siege.
Maybe it wasn't reported as much?
But according to seven it's never reported at all. :(
Yeah, looking at it, apparently it did happen, although perhaps with less regularity and the death counts were usually lower. Still a few big ones in 1984 and 1991.
Peak of mass shootings in the US was in the 1920s, US is actually experiencing the lowest levels of crime in recorded history at present.Quote:
Originally Posted by niko_cee
0 deaths, 0 injuries; the Texas difference.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee
I bet they happened more frequently in the good old days of the wild west.
They didn't even need to get the police involved or anything.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
There was a big spike in gun violence in Europe during the early-mid forties, not sure why.
Pretty sure it was all those refugees.Quote:
Originally Posted by Disco
They should have held a referendum.
http://i.imgur.com/meftV0q.gif?noredirectQuote:
Originally Posted by Disco
That gif is mesmerising. :D
They look to have stretched the "active shooter" definition a bit with this one.
Someone put John McCain to sleep ffs.
http://www.mccain.senate.gov/public/...E-81ECF4F608AD
John McCain is one of the most alright Republicans going.
Are you just going to keep spouting this without ever addressing the many exceptions to this rule you seem to have invented? There was a time in the not too distant past when the worst mass shooting in US history was in Texas, and it was still the worst to have happened outside a school until that wanker the other day. Waco probably couldn't have happened anywhere but Texas. You also mentioned without evidence the other day that shootings don't happen at Texas churches, then ignored when mentioned that Texas also had the worst church shooting until Dylan Roof.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
What?Quote:
Originally Posted by Spoonsky
He withdrew troops from the Middle East, so an American born citizen decided to murder some gays. Couldn't be any more straightforward.
And he didn't particularly withdraw them either. There's still fucking loads of them over there.
Yes, but he has GUTTED the military! Moar bombs!
How much time did it take you to research all that, be honest :harold:Quote:
Originally Posted by John
Suddenly knowing what you're talking about is something to be scoffed at.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
Maybe three minutes total, and that's being generous for the amount of time it took me to Google 'church shooting Ashbrook' to find the full name of the guy I remembered being mentioned when Roof went nuts.
Now, how about you address what was said.
Johnny John John, self-proclaimed poster extraordinaire and fountain of hilarity, still determined to out Mert's bullshit. Oh you young summer child
I mean what's your point, that gun crime also occurs in Texas, in particular on a few occasions 15+ years ago? Okay? I'm not sure what you think you've proven?Quote:
Originally Posted by John
Bloody hell :D
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Clmxyt7XIAAN22a.jpg:large
Shoot them.
Yes but Republican's are still the ones responsible for Congressional gridlock, right? Sorry they refuse to pass clearly unconstitutional legislation, but the headlines well play will to the uninformed base so who cares...
What did you think of them changing the fiduciary (sp?) rule, mert?
Surely that's promoting malpractice?
A trump supporter whining about the 'uninformed base'. :D
I read today that those wankers have voted down 100+ bills in the last five years aimed at tightening gun laws. At a time when money in politics is a big issue, that nothing can be done about this despite a huge majority of Americans wanting it, highlights quite nicely how bought their politicians are. The Democrats have not been left with much choice and fairplay to them for going in.
The majority of Americans do not want more 'gun regulation' (whatever that means), what nonsense are you talking about? Support for gun rights are equal or higher among millenials (who often get even more conservative as they get older) over older generations and in general the most popular its been in decades*. And anyways, gun regulations are largely left to state legislatures anyways under their police powers, Congress is pretty limited in its enumerated powers to constitutionally act on the subject anyways.Quote:
Originally Posted by Davgooner
*http://www.people-press.org/2014/12/...or-gun-rights/ and http://www.cato.org/blog/millennials...ve-gun-control
Trump supporters are better educated and earn more than Clinton supporters you ignorant idiot:
http://qz.com/679589/trump-voters-ea...ical-american/
Just so fucking wrong, how do you confidently state opinions when you are utterly and exhaustively uninformed? What sort of disease is liberalism where 'how I feel about the subject' is somehow akin to a legitimate opinion in any way related to reality?
The proposals Obama proposed earlier in the year were overwhelmingly backed, even amongst NRA members. Unfortunately the money the latter provides mean the argument is often seen as 50/50.
Clinton supporters are fucking drones. Trump's whole movement has been built on winning over fucking idiots.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
Anyone can also grab a weblink and state it as fact or to support their argument...like you do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
For example one of your links dates back to 2014. This link is more recent (haven't read it all)
http://uk.businessinsider.com/r-poll...un-laws-2016-1
Okay I know you keep saying "Trump's whole movement has been built over winning over idiots" but even though emotionally you REALLY BELIEVE this is true, the facts point in the opposite direction. Do you get that? What you 'feel' doesn't supersede the reality that Trump supporters are more educated and more financially successful than Hillary supporters (who by extension are bigger idiots).Quote:
Originally Posted by Davgooner
Are you capable of revising your opinion when confronted with facts or are you not at this basic level of maturity / intelligence?
One poll versus analysis of decades of polling trends. It's not an argument. It is a widely accepted truth that Americans of all ages are increasingly in favor of gun rights to the deeply satisfying chagrin and mystification of the "liberalism is the inevitable end point of societies!" crowd.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dquincy
I've been following the election closely from the start. His rallies resembles fascist gatherings, and his policies are such that only ignorant, easy-solution-seeking wankers are going to be drawn to supporting him. Are you really arguing this, given you normally spend your time on here confirming everything I've said. Post another vaguely homoerotic endorse of your messiah.
It's hardly a secret is it.
The right often jump to the 'they're coming for our guns!' argument as a way to energise their base, as in most issues. The reality, which is tightening laws to close some stunningly stupid and dangerous loopholes, while not touching the rights of law-abiding gun owners, isn't scary, but would cost the companies the NRA represents money, and thus must be avoided.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
I think the latest polling post-Orlando had 61% in favour of banning the sale of assault weapons, for example. On the issue of the no-fly list and the background check loophole, past surveys have higher percentages still.
Okay. I'll try one more time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Davgooner
I know what you described is how you feel about Trump supporters. However, how you feel is contradicted by the fact that they are MORE EDUCATED AND WEALTHIER than Hillary supporters. Ergo, they can't be more stupid now can they?
A normal mature human being, when confronted with facts that contradict his feelings, revise his feelings to reflect the facts. You are wrong. Period. You can say 'lol Trump supporters are ignorant, idiot fascists!!!' but the reality is that means Hillary supporters are more ignorant and stupid than his.
What confuses me about that source you linked was that every candidate had supporters with a median household income higher than the US average. Am I missing something?
1. Let's see where polling is a few months from now; and out of curiosity what is an assault weapon? Are you aware that 'assault weapons' are only actually responsible for a minuscule of the actual violence / crime caused by guns, here is an article to educate yourself, it is an entirely empty political proposal*Quote:
Originally Posted by Davgooner
2. The no-fly list regulation is 1. Unconstitutional violation of Due Process clause; 2. Would alert suspected terrorists that they are under investigation
3. There is no 'background check' loop hole; google it
4. 1 + 3 are the purview of state legislatures anyways under separation of powers
*http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/14/su...myth.html?_r=0
And Trump's is higher than Bernie's or Hillary's. Time to work on that reading comprehension buddy.Quote:
Originally Posted by SvN
"The median household income of a Trump voter so far in the primaries is about $72,000... higher than the median income for Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders supporters, which is around $61,000 for both."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
That's not what I asked at all. I wasn't refuting your point (lol at the idea of getting involved in this debate), merely curious as to how the median income of every candidate can be higher than the US median.
Bert, I think you're missing SvN's point.
And yet...Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
I fucking hate Hillary's mob for a multitude of reasons and there would be lols involved in she somehow managed to use, but at least they're not fascists. The idea we should respect the views of the latter because of their educational exploits or salary is proper Republican talk.
Poor people don't vote and are more likely to ineligible due to being felons/incarcerated.Quote:
Originally Posted by SvN
Mert, in all seriousness, you been to any of his events?
You wouldn't find any 'ignorant, easy-solution-seeking wankers' at a 'Bernie' event.
You might have some on the right who wish to portray them as such though. :henn0rz:Quote:
Originally Posted by Lewis
That's one reasonable explanation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
But that doesn't make it fact. Perhaps people were inflating their income when asked during the exit polls. Perhaps the inferred medians aren't as accurate as the author thinks they are (given that income was reported as falling within a range rather than participants giving an actual value).
I mean maybe, but it's a pretty well established phenomenon that poorer people vote less, and that this is exacerbated further for primaries:Quote:
Originally Posted by SvN
http://www.politico.com/magazine/sto...e-polls-113997
"It so happens that the gap between voters and non-voters breaks down strongly along class lines. In the 2012 election, 80.2 percent of those making more than $150,000 voted, while only 46.9 percent of those making less than $10,000 voted. This “class bias,” is so strong that in the three elections (2008, 2010 and 2012) I examined, there was only one instance of a poorer income bracket turning out at a higher rate than the bracket above them. (In the 2012 election, those making less than $10,000 were slightly more likely to vote than those making between $10,000 and $14,999.) On average, each bracket turned out to vote at a rate 3.7 percentage points higher than the bracket below it."
Yep, not debating that specific point, just suggesting there might be other reasons for the discrepancy in the statistics. It could be all three.
Yeah, and tbh Americans lie / exaggerate like motherfuckers when it comes to their income, I wouldn't be surprised if the figures were therefore inflated...Quote:
Originally Posted by SvN
Not really a mass shooting. but a one man execution.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-36721584
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOH9Ltcoqis
Mental. It's like a parody you'd see on Family Guy with Cleveland and racist cops except it's real life and it's funnier.
Than Family Guy I meant. Oh...oh God.
I bet he gave them sass.
"He's got a gun!" = carte blanche.
I feared for my life!
Walks free.
"I probably would blow up a subway if I was offered $100m"
Jailed for 35 years for conspiracy to commit terrorism.
What kinda dipshitted comment is this to make?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
Convicted drug dealer and sex offender, resisting arrest after committing crime, had been tasered twice, yelled "I'm going to kill you", had an illegal gun on his person, was warned "don't reach for your gun", he then proceeded to reach for his gun, and got shot.Quote:
Originally Posted by SincereTheRebel
Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. I don't know what else you want the cop to do in that situation.
Let's try this again then. Not really a mass shooting. but a one man execution.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zgtvop59kRI
If he had a gun then... oh wait.
It's a really tragic state of affairs and I find it really sad that there are so many people that want to pretend there is not an issue.
I mean statistically there isn't an issue, at least a racial one.
Not sure what the relevance of him having a gun is? A gun isn't supposed to be a tool to resist lawful arrest.
The fact that the NRA aren't going all, all out for this guy who stated he had an open carry permit, being asked to reach for his wallet and then being shot just goes to show that actually, it's not about gun ownership in the slightest.
I mean, he's pinned to the ground. Any shot's going to fuck him up at point blank. Let alone the four-ish we heard.
I was talking about the other guy. Phil Castille. Stopped for a broken tail light, keeps hands up, officer asks him to show registration, he informs cop he has a carry permit multiple times, reaches for his wallet, dead. From the video it sounds like the cop thought he was genuinely reaching which just goes to show how much these cops are hyped to shoot the fuck out of someone.
Who gets stopped for a broken taillight, tells the cop they have a gun and then goes 'Ya know I should kill this guy'.
How hard is it to follow explicit instructions? Police officers have a right to protect themselves.
Which instruction would you like him to follow? License and Registration please?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
As do citizens. If a police officer is intimidating and you see him reaching for his gun, as often seems to be the case according to the video coming out of the US just about every day, should you be able to shoot him dead?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
He's still struggling, they have not been able to restrain him and he attempts to reach for his gun. What do you want the officer to do there?Quote:
Originally Posted by Shindig
Police officers don't just resort to lethal force out of the blue, there is an escalating hierarchy of physical responses they're supposed to employ proportional to the threat posed by the suspect. If you're not threatening the police, you have nothing to worry about.Quote:
Originally Posted by John
If the police says something, you do it. If he's overstepped his authority you can contest that in the courts. That's how a civilized society operates.
You can't contest it if he's put 4 bullets in your side and you're dead because of it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
Which is why you don't resist arrest and follow the instructions given to you. It's not that difficult.Quote:
Originally Posted by phonics
In that second video upthread the police officer tells him to get his wallet then shoots him through the window of the car when he reaches for it. He's dead.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
Mert, not sure if you know this but a broken tail light isn't an arrestable offence and he did follow instructions.
This is the disconnect I'm talking about, this guy is a card carrying NRA member with a completely legal open carry permit, he is in a car with his wife and daughter, he informs the police officer of the presence of a gun, he proceeds to follow the police request for registation. He's shot 4 times.
What happens there where Mert is attacking this guy. This guy is Merts dream of an American citizen using his rights, and he's shot to death in front of his family for it and Mert and co attack him. I don't get it. I just don't get it. Oh wait, he's black. I get it.
Okay no one in this thread knows how exactly that interaction escalated. I'm pretty sure the officer would have a different version of events; believe it or not cops don't want to have their entire lives ruined either.
Also a broken taillight is an arrestable offense; see Atwater v. City of Lago Vista (2001).
I'm pretty sure there's a slight difference in quality of life between getting paid leave for 3 months while a grand jury fails to indite you and being dead.
PS. Lol at Mert telling us exactly how every one of these issues happened and then follows this one up with 'we can't be sure'
Fuck off you troll.
His life will never be normal again because of the Internet lynch mobs. Sure it's not as bad as dying (which is why he acted the way he did in the first place), but it's definetly not an ordeal anybody would want to go through.Quote:
Originally Posted by phonics
In the Baton Rouge video, the evidence is in the recording itself. My statements are based on evidence derived from the public record. In the second video filming only starts after the shootings; you can't claim to know the sequence of events. The timeline of these incidents often ultimately end up being very different than initial reported (see the Michael Brown 'hands up don't shoot' narrative); it is better to suspend judgment until the facts are clear.Quote:
Originally Posted by phonics
I always tell myself that you are not that stupid and that it is all this lame persona you try to carry around. But then I remember that you are American and I'm not so sure anymore, you could be this stupid, most of your compatriots are after all.
Look shit is fucked up, police are human and make mistakes, but they are under unimaginable stress and deal with the lowest scumbags in society every day. People need to recognize this and be overly compliant and respectful to make their job easier. I have dealt with asshole Durham cops who hate Duke students many times. Regardless, I will give them the benefit of the doubt every time under these circumstances.
The reality is if you haven't committed a crime you have nothing to worry about. Your Constitutional protections will ensure that your legal liability will be aptly limited and the officer punished if he goes beyond certain relatively strict boundaries.
How is 'being smart' working out for every other country on earth with inferior standards of living and military power?Quote:
Originally Posted by Pepe
Let's revisit this statement when the verdict comes in this latest case.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
There is a clear and institutional problem with firearm use by US police.
What there isn't is any willingness to recognise it's an issue by the people who could do something about it.
It's a country you should probably avoid at this stage, given it's completely fucking batshit.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...d-line-of-duty
"Since 2010, 11 officers of the Metropolitan police have lost their lives in the line of duty."
So about 2.2 police officers are killed per year in the UK.
http://www.nleomf.org/facts/enforcement/
"A total of 1,439 law enforcement officers died in the line of duty during the past 10 years, an average of one death every 61 hours or 144 per year."
Compared to an average of 144 police officers killed per year in the US.
Population of UK is roughly 60 million and the population of the US is roughly 300 million. That means that proportionally there should be about 10 deaths in the US per year if cops were killed at the same rate as in the UK. Instead it's 144; nearly FIFTEEN TIMES higher than expected.
How do you expect them to act in such an environment?
Now some wanker's been shooting police officers in Dallas.
CNN are reporting four cops shot, one dead. Fuck me, this is mental.
Now ten shot, three critical, three dead. A fucking sniper apparently.
I might not go outside for a while.
Beyonce paused her concert in Glasgow tonight to put up a screen full of names of American police brutality victims as well. Good timing. Get the dead policemen up there next you fucking wench.
The shooter will be a liberal student white apologist.
Some nerd on reddit has been listening to the police radio and apparently the shooter is black.
Civil war :drool:
That's horrifying. I have a friend who was going to school in DC during the Beltway sniper attacks. Apparently it's utterly nerve-racking to know that every time you step outside, you could be at risk.
Open carry. :drool:
Look a little down that conversation chain and Brian Redban has posted a photo of him. That's a serious weapon that bloke is carrying.
It's clearly a tool for hunting Elk.
How mental is that?
A geezer is walking down the street with a massive assault rifle strapped over his shoulder and that is okay under open carry laws. Alright, a pistol for home self defense but fucking hell what has it come to that this is permissible? The U.S. States south of Virginia genuinely scare me.
Four officers dead.
That dude is in this video the whole time while shots are being fired
https://twitter.com/dallasnewsphoto/...35966505881600
Holy shit you're right. I wonder if there were more shots fired after this video was filmed?
Yeah that conversation chain had him convicted and exonerated within about ninety seconds. Now people are kicking off because some reports have said one of the shooters was white and they only posted a picture of a black man. This is going to get much worse before it gets better.
Doesn't seem like there are any shots being fired in that video though. The noise is just the wind hitting the phone mic.
Get John Luther in. His magic thinking sorted out someone sniping police in two hours.
God help them if that bloke who's turned himself in leaves with so much as a burst lip.
Whoopsy doodle
I'm getting the fuck outta here.
If only the policemans guns had guns.
Taze, choke him out? Anything that doesn't involve shooting him in the head from six inches. You cannot arrest a corpse.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
That 2nd Amendment must be looking pretty good to all those WASPs right now.
It's nice to see that the Americans can still out-retard us even after the couple of weeks we've had. Cheers, guys.
The freedom fighters out there are causing chaos.
Really though this is shit.
A fifth copper has died. Looks like they're now going in on the last remaining suspect. Wonder how many times he'll fall over in custody.
It's basically at the point now where it resembles a 3rd-world country in some parts
Those flights of stairs can be tricky I hear.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee
This seems a great example of why the state shouldn't have a monopoly of lethal force. Any American can have a dream that through hard work and talent, they too might gun down a series of innocent people.
Just close that country down, for fuck sake. Horrible place.
Oh shut up.Quote:
Originally Posted by GS
What's wrong now? :harold:
What makes it a horrible place that needs shutting down?
We should be shutting down China first, among others.
Fucking animals. Officers getting shot at while trying to protect the people protesting them.
But yes let's keep irresponsibly promoting false narratives and villifying the police, what could possibly go wrong? Obamas America in full display folks, Trump needs to be president.
There is a lot more I would like to say but won't because I would immediately be banned. There is clearly a side of good and reason and a side of evil and irrationality; I'll leave it at that.
Civilians feel police are shooting them unfairly. Now the police feel civilians are shooting at them unfairly. Sounds fair if you ask me.
Doesn't help when you spend 250 years promoting such a divide, the first 100 through enforced subservience.
For fuck sake.Quote:
Originally Posted by phonics
My turn. What's wrong now?Quote:
Originally Posted by GS
You don't have to take everything literally, you know.
More the 'Horrible Country' bit which I legitimately cannot understand.
You can buy a gun with the weekly shopping - and the legislative bodies aren't prepared to do anything to stop it - and the state routinely put people to death. That there's a thoroughly unpleasant current of racism running through certain sections of the country is also evident.
I here ya mate, fucking black cunts and their savagery.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
You're a fucking savage, this is exactly the attitude I'm referring to above.Quote:
Originally Posted by SincereTheRebel
Those cops were INNOCENT HUMAN BEINGS TASKED TO PROTECT THE CITIZENRY. The people shot by the cops were CRIMINALS RESISTING ARREST AND REFUSING TO COMPLY WITH LAWFUL ORDERS.
If you can't tell the difference, stay out of my country.
Broken taill lights do not warrant a gunshot.
It's the entire country, some regions are simply more politically correct in their public speech than others, and it goes both ways. I don't know what the solution is or if it's a problem that can ever be fixedQuote:
Originally Posted by GS
Nobody is condoning lethal force being used against the police, just like nobody is condoning the police use of lethal force in situations that aren't explicitly life-threatening.
Both sides should stop painting the other as their worst proponents.
Do mistakes happen; YES. Do they happen statistically to both races in a roughly comparable fashion; YES. Do we know the details of that particular interaction; NO!!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Shindig
Second Amendment groups are already calling for an independent investigation:
https://reason.com/blog/2016/07/07/s...form=hootsuite
If the law feels it is justified doing what they do over and over again. They have to answer to the freedom fighters who feel otherwise.
That is purely the reason the decision was made to live in england, instead of america.
NRA still silent.
I could believe that, but I'd like to see the numbers first.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
There's also the issue that laws aren't always enforced identically. Marijuana use is the typical case:
https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs..._race_year.pnghttps://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs..._race_year.png
(source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...n-nine-charts/)
It doesn't matter which way you cut those numbers, the massive disproportion suggests that there's inaccurate profiling going on in enforcement, which means that even if lethal accidents occur with equal probability in every case, it will naturally follow that it occurs in a racially disproportionate fashion.
EDIT: I'm not claiming that the profiling consists of deliberate acts of racism, incidentally.
NRA as policy doesn't comment on incidents until the facts come out. Black or white.Quote:
Originally Posted by phonics
Drug dealers vs. recreational users.Quote:
Originally Posted by ItalAussie
And I'm at work so don't have time to really find the sources but the short version:
2x more white people than AA killed by cops per year, 4x more white people in America, white people commit per capita 1/2x the crime, per police interaction roughly comparable rate of lethal interaction.
Ignoring the insults, I'm in agreement with Mert here. The "they shot us, so we're shooting them" mentality is no different to terrorism.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
I don't see how dealers verses recreational users affects those numbers? I'm open to an explanation though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
As for the rest, I'm going to have to see the numbers before I take your word on the details. I believe the first two points you made, but I'd like to see the precise wording on "committing the crime" as opposed to "number of police interactions". As well as the racial spread on crimes verses arrests, like the numbers above.
I'd really like to see racial disparity on actually committing the crime, as opposed to being charged for it, for a range of crimes. Like the figures above. Because that's where I'd suspect the real problem is. Those numbers above are undeniably a problem, whatever their cause happens to be.
Another problem that seems to occur in the US system is that police get an easier run through the justice system when charges are brought. Police officers have built-in protections within the system, and the conviction rate is known to be particularly low even when that is taken into consideration.
To be honest, I think it should go the other way. If you are in a position of authority and you abuse that position, you should face harsher consequences. Not only have you committed a crime, but you've done it from a position of power which is required for society to function. Orderly society needs us to trust police to act appropriately, and eroding that trust has to be treated as a serious issue.
There are so many grey areas though. Maybe less so in America where they are more trigger happy than elsewhere, and I'm not saying that as a piss take, they just are.
The prevalence of guns is surely largely responsible for the large number of people killed by the police. Every time they pull someone over, they're aware that the person could conceivably put a gun in their face out of nowhere, which means that they're constantly on edge. Any sudden movements and they've grabbed their gun and shot 5 bullets before they've even thought about it.
I remember watching a video about a year ago about a guy (black, obviously) who was at a petrol station when the police asked him for his license. He reached into his car to get it and the policeman fired about 5-7 shots at him out of nowhere, despite the guy shouting that he's just getting his license. I don't think the guy suffered serious injuries, but I don't think the police officer approached the situation with the intent to shoot the guy. He was just in fear for his own life and overreacted quite ridiculously.
Edit: Here it is:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vXmVPxQGTsE
At least one shot fired while he had his hands in the air.
I appreciate your open mindedness on both issues, I will make a more detailed post after work on the latter.Quote:
Originally Posted by ItalAussie
In general, police resources are not committed to arresting recreational users with small amounts of marijuana in their possession, instead it is directed at catching larger volume violent distributors, especially those also involved in gangs / organized crime. White and black people may use marijuana at comparable rates, but, due to whatever number of factors, AA's are more often within the 'targeted' violent distributor category. As a consequence, AA's are arrested at higher rates for possession.
Then police officers would simply not do their job. See the "Ferguson Effect"; it's already happening.Quote:
Originally Posted by ItalAussie
Agreed.Quote:
Originally Posted by ItalAussie
Pay them more, train them better, punish them more harshly.
With what money; America has $20 trilion in debt? You willing to divert funds from welfare?Quote:
Originally Posted by Bernanke
Some of the money that bought the military equipment they stroll around in could be put to better use.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
All of that 'military equipment' is donated from the military once their use becomes obsolete, they don't really 'cost' the police departments anything.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bernanke
Militarization of the police really seems like part of the problem of eroding trust, not part of the solution.
I'm not suggesting that police should be unarmed, but there's no reason for police to have vehicles like this:
http://www.gannett-cdn.com/-mm-/5ead...olice-tank.jpg
It fosters an image of enmity and separation, rather than being a key part of society. Seeing that rolling down the street induces fear rather than solidarity.
It should be treated as a respected calling. People joining the military are told they understand the risks when they signed up. The same should be true of police officers. The military are held to a much higher standard. If police want to militarize, they should have to take on the associated responsibility as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
It's like when those pictures were shown of police using military weapons and equipment, and a bunch of military officers wrote articles pointing out that they were doing it entirely wrong, and would be sanctioned if they did things like pointing their guns while moving, or aiming at targets they weren't prepared to shoot at that moment.
If they want military equipment, they should require military training and military consequences. Without those, it's people playing army with real guns.
If you want to see what happens when certain sections of the community lose trust in the impartiality of the police, look no further than here.
The police cannot go about shooting people, predominantly black people, for no justifiable reason.
I actually agree with you about the militarization of local police departments; I'm more of a Ron Paul / constitutionalist guy when it comes to law enforcement powers.Quote:
Originally Posted by ItalAussie
From a legal perspective however, I think you are sorely sorely mistaken about the wisdom of lowering the burden of proof required to hold cops legally responsible for certain actions. That would be literally insane and inevitably lead to an immense waste of resources dedicated to defending cops sued by literally everyone ever handled in a somewhat rough fashion. Believe it or not the vast vast majority of cop interactions are very professional and result in no harm to any party.
This. Isn't. Happenning. Holy fucking shit.Quote:
Originally Posted by GS
Yes, it is. They reach for a driving licence, and they're shot. That's not a justifiable reason, because the police officer's life isn't in danger. He may be "on edge", but that's part of being in the police. If they can't control the situation, there are some very, very serious questions that need to be asked about the level of training and the type of individual the police force are recruiting.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
I'm sure plenty of white people are getting wasted for lol reasons by the useless police. Has anyone written a proper article about that? Is there room for an 'Actually, the coppers are just shit' narrative', or would conservatives lose it and start calling you coal burner?
The one that springs to mind is this one:Quote:
Originally Posted by Lewis
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_James_Boyd
He had a knife, but non-lethal force should really have been possible if you watch the video from the shooting.
You are generalizing all police officers on the basis of one freak incident for which he will serve jail time (if that is in fact what happened). Moreover, RACE IS NOT A FACTOR BASED ON STATISTICS.Quote:
Originally Posted by GS
Please educate yourself:
http://www.dailywire.com/news/7264/5...-aaron-bandler
"Cops killed nearly twice as many whites as blacks in 2015. According to data compiled by The Washington Post, 50 percent of the victims of fatal police shootings were white, while 26 percent were black. The majority of these victims had a gun or "were armed or otherwise threatening the officer with potentially lethal force," according to MacDonald in a speech at Hillsdale College.
Some may argue that these statistics are evidence of racist treatment toward blacks, since whites consist of 62 percent of the population and blacks make up 12 percent of the population. But as MacDonald writes in The Wall Street Journal, 2009 statistics from the Bureau of Justice Statistics reveal that blacks were charged with 62 percent of robberies, 57 percent of murders and 45 percent of assaults in the 75 biggest counties in the country, despite only comprising roughly 15 percent of the population in these counties.
"Such a concentration of criminal violence in minority communities means that officers will be disproportionately confronting armed and often resisting suspects in those communities, raising officers’ own risk of using lethal force," writes MacDonald.
MacDonald also pointed out in her Hillsdale speech that blacks "commit 75 percent of all shootings, 70 percent of all robberies, and 66 percent of all violent crime" in New York City, even though they consist of 23 percent of the city's population.
"The black violent crime rate would actually predict that more than 26 percent of police victims would be black," MacDonald said. "Officer use of force will occur where the police interact most often with violent criminals, armed suspects, and those resisting arrest, and that is in black neighborhoods."
There's been some interesting analysis of the shooter by military/SWAT people and they say he's very well trained when it comes to firing/firing while moving/tactical positioning and assuming from that that it's disaffected veterans doing the attack.
Quote:
This is a clear instance of Fire Team Terrorism. We’ve had a few prior events like this, both successful and thwarted.
- D.C. Sniper – lots of single deaths, but a two man team
- Hutaree militia – double tap bombing & fire team attack averted
- San Bernardino – husband/wife team
There is no information yet, but I’m going to speculate this is something I’ve long anticipated – an attack by disaffected U.S. veterans.
We had thirty eight days of ground combat during Desert Storm, which brought us the Oklahoma City bombing and the D.C. Sniper. Our war in Afghanistan and Bush’s adventure in Iraq have produced men who’ve spent thirty eight months in hardcore urban combat or long distance counter-insurgency.
The worst decision we made was the discharge of over 30,000 veterans using PDO (personality disorder) discharges to avoid giving them benefits. The vast majority of these men have closed head brain injuries due to IEDs. They’ve given up their health and well being for this country, and we abandoned them.
The particulars will change over time, but attacks like this are going to keep happening, because we laid the groundwork for them.
https://nealrauhauser.wordpress.com/...ror-in-dallas/
and this guy https://twitter.com/MalcolmNance
You need to learn from the Northern Irish example. Nobody cared when the police did their job correctly - that's what they're paid for, and what they're expected to do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
People cared when the police were perceived as not doing their job correctly and the perception, real or otherwise, was that they were not wholly impartial where Catholic communities were concerned. The perception in America is that there is a serious problem with how the police interact with the black community. When that view becomes widespread, trust in the police force steadily erodes. You end up in incredibly unpleasant territory whereby the police, who should be pillars of a secure and safe living environment, are treated with suspicion and distrust, where every decision and the motive behind it is questioned. Race is clearly a factor, because it's the black victims who are getting high profile media coverage and fuelling this sense of injustice.
You can twist yourself into intellectual knots to deny it if you want to, but until such time as everybody accepts it's happening and takes the necessary steps to address it it's only going to get worse. The matter is, of course, exacerbated considerably by the ready availability of weaponry in America.
This is the problem, not the racial disparity you keep coming back to.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
If the majority were armed in some way then by definition some people were shot who weren't armed at all. Which is the precise scenario you keep telling us Is. Not. Happening.
Isn't this a manifestation of the 'we need guns so that we can defend ourselves when the evil government comes to get us' lol argument? Mert and his gun nut crew should be proud. Law abiding citizens standing up to a regime they feel oppressed by.
I don't want to lower the burden of proof. I'm a big believer in burden of proof. I don't, however, think that the burden of proof should be higher than normal either. It should be exactly the same as any other crime (which it currently isn't, due to special dispensation within the legal system put through by "tough on crime" politicians).Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
But any police officer who is found breaking the law in the course of their duty should be subject to particularly harsh sentencing, as social order depends on us trusting police officers not to abuse their authority. Their crime was not only a crime in itself, but also a contribution to the overall breakdown in public trust of the police as an institution. There should be a predisposition towards the harshest end of the punishment range in such cases.
Main difference between civilians and police officers is that the former aren't empowered with maintaining social order, detaining suspects, and physically subduing non-compliant individuals. Accordingly, they need greater legal protections (otherwise they would be guilty of assault, battery, unlawful imprisonment, etc. every time they took a suspect in custody) to be able to be able to execute their duties with confidence and absent delay.Quote:
Originally Posted by ItalAussie
Yes. Except the evil government wasn't trying to 'get' anyone.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pepe
That's your take on things, they see it otherwise.
Pretty blatant from Mert, this.
What a cunt.
Facts aren't subjective.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pepe
I agree - police do sometimes need to perform acts that would otherwise be crimes. But that is a very serious responsibility, which is why it should be treated very harshly when abused.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
Anyone who is granted special legal dispensation in the cause of doing their job should be punished severely if are found guilty of taking liberties with that dispensation.
What colour would you say this dress was....Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
From the press conference: The dead shooter didn't kill himself, he was killed by a bomb detonation. That shooter said he was upset about BLM and wanted to kill white police officers. Acted alone.
Apparently they sort of did a drone strike on him with a bomb disposal robot.
I could live with / would probably support higher legal burden combined with harsher penalties for abusing the responsibilities...Quote:
Originally Posted by ItalAussie
Oh boy, source? If internet forums / up votes on comments on articles are anything to go by, things are going to get much more uglier and polarized...Quote:
Originally Posted by Bernanke
Not that any abuse has occurred of course, amirite?
I don't remember the Civil Rights Movement participants executing cops as part of their protests...Quote:
Originally Posted by Pepe
All this shit is so sad, for real. On both sides. But you cannot abandon logic and reason...
Talking to mert about gun law is as productive as talking to Harold about immigration. Or talking to GS about religion. Waste of time.
Dallas PD latest update:
https://twitter.com/NBCNightlyNews/s...97195954286593
Apparently the shooter wanted to kill white cops and was upset at the latest shooting incidents. So there you go.
:henn0rz:Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
Which begs the question: why are the media not covering white cops killing white civilians when it is obviously happening? Never underestimate the media to keep pumping out the narrative and fueling these fires. Especially over here, it's a free for all with their news coverage.Quote:
Originally Posted by GS
I'm amazed that Mert doesn't have another forum where people actually care about his shit opinions.
I do, but I feel it's my duty to expose you close minded liberals to alternative perspectives :hat:Quote:
Originally Posted by bruhnaldo
It's the opposite over here, media coverage-wise. You have to be young, white and preferably physically attractive before your murder is widely reported in the media.
Ya I'm nothing close to a liberal, but watching some barely educated child masquerade as an intellectual.. well.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
I mean as if it's not painfully obvious you've been turned away by those more inclined in every other facet of life.. setting up shop on THE THIRD HALF! to bestow said "knowledge".
Now, I'd imagine, you'd thought if there's anywhere you could impress anonymous strangers and be considered an "expert".. it's a forum full of people who don't live in or give a flying fuck about America on the topic of America... on the contrary.
Wasting everyone's time with ridiculous hubris and conjecture just doesn't pass as intelligent thought. The only "exposing" been done is that of yourself, a fool to yet another set of people in your life, anonymous or not.
Barely educated? Eh? Do you even know my background?Quote:
Originally Posted by bruhnaldo
My other forum is almost entirely Americans. Socially I do pretty well for myself. Ad hominem attacks are the purview of the insecure.
Here let me break it down for you
"You're an annoying little cunt that has never brought anything of substance to any discussion on this website and should probably just shut the fuck up."
Yes let's dismiss and silence mainstream Second Amendment / pro-Police arguments held by large portions of the US population because some people disagree with them. Sounds about on par with your average intolerant liberal.Quote:
Originally Posted by bruhnaldo
Keep sucking up to the Europeans on the board, maybe with enough of their approval you will manage to successfully distinguish yourself as a 'different sophisticated American' !
AKA beta cuck pussies?
It always makes me lol when Mert talks about 'silencing' things, as though someone here telling him to shut up and fuck off in some way damages the wider discourse. It's like when Harold bleats about free speech from behind a proxy or that time Chinny wanted to go to 'a higher power' to challenge an infraction.
I would say I disagree with the shouting down of mert. Even if Mert only posts here about his views, so what? If we all thought the same, it would be worse than reading MJ's posts.
I wonder how much the of the identity politics bullshit contributes to the general climate of mistrust. I would be inclined to say that it doesn't, but if Brexit killed that MP then the logic would follow that any and all attempts to divide people along cultural lines will foster this sort of atmosphere.
Bitch not even tagging before bagging.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kikó
This might hold more (read: any) weight if you yourself ever respected a position you don't personally hold and didn't bleat catchphrases at those who do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
This whole thing is incredibly sad and just leaves me feeling that the police aren't adequately prepared for these situations. Even if people are insistent that there's systematic prejudice the fact that those people bring it up out of hand in every one of these events isn't much better. Not every policeman who shoots a black guy when it could have been avoided is a racist murderer any more than every black guy with a gun and a prior is a threat to an arresting officer.
If a guy gets shot reaching for a license he's just been asked to produce there are bigger issues there regarding the policeman's readiness to do the job.
Edit: all that wasn't aimed at you, mert. In terms of the sad state of the escalation of this one I'm with you.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...-shooting.html
The guy's sort of annoying, but he makes an interesting point. I think people would have a lot more respect for the police in general if they ever spoke out about this sort of thing. Instead when I see a cop I already half-make the assumption that he approves of it.
Also this has been the best / most civilized Mert-fueled gun debate that I remember on TTH so kutgw.
There needs to be a mentality shift around the perception of guns in the United States but I really don't know what could possibly trigger that. They're no longer a threat (defensively or otherwise) when ownership is so high. Imagine some guy going to plan a small robbery. He'll be packing because, well, why wouldn't you? Meanwhile you'll have police going into a domestic disturbance strapped because both, one or neither those involved could be carrying.
9/11 'but with guns' can't really transpire. And that's probably the one thing it would take. Unless you maybe get the NRA to treat guns as more specialist equipment licensed to the chosen, qualified few. That'll never happen though as the NRA makes too much out of it.
America. Land of the fucked.
Why are you all so binary about this? Stop thinking about this as either / or and accept it can be both / and.
Data on a graph can explain both Mert's and Eric Garner's truth if instead of looking at the overall pattern you focus on what makes up the data that clusters around a specific point.
When people tell you the truth of their life as they observe it (which is all BLM
Is asking of you), there is a shock when it does not match yours because your own is so immediate. It comes in through your eyes; theirs needs to be explained to you.
Your choice is do you judge or do you ask why do I experience mine differently? It is not identity politics wank, all those characteristics just help define different data clusters / vectors / whatever. We are not the center of the universe, just points on a graph. It is pretty arrogant to constantly assert that only you can define how someone else sees the truth of their life.
Otherwise, Sincere is right. You get two competing truths and the dominant one denies other people even the right to experience their own lives in a fashion other than how you dictate it. Which is the fundamental wound at the heart of America (and everywhere else).
Yeah but what if their 'experience' is empirically wrong, and a psychological defense mechanism as a reaction to their own failures as a community. It's like me saying 'I'm a cat' and expecting public policy to be oriented around my feelings rather than fact.
Parting thought: Even if AA are treated more harshly by the police, maybe it's just a racial tax they have to pay in return for living in a more secure society, in the same way Whites pay a racial tax in the form of affirmative action to live in a more equitable society.
Global Peace Index
http://www.visionofhumanity.org/#/pa...-index/ranking
USA 103rd out of 163.
Typical left-wing fascist, beta cuck, poor people methodology.
Wake up to the conspiracy that the socialist media is feeding you! Only God-Emperor Trump can save us!
UK is 47 behind Sierre Leone and Malawi. Are you kidding me with this nonsense?Quote:
Originally Posted by Dquincy
Interesting piece:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.11c95030a4b5
After that abortion of a post, I found this from the Dallas Police Chief.
But yeah, more guns = more safetyQuote:
“You can carry a rifle legally and when you have gunfire going on, you usually go with the person that’s got a gun,” he said. “And so our police grabbed some of those individuals, took them to police headquarters and worked it out and figured out that they were not the shooters. But that is one of the real issues with the gun rights issues that we face – that in the middle of a firefight, it’s hard to pick out the good guys and the bad guys.”
Just grab the blackest ones. Wait, don't grab them, that might be dangerous. Just shoot the blackest ones.
What a lovely place, isn't it?Quote:
As of Sunday, 1,502 people have been shot and killed by on-duty police officers since Jan. 1, 2015.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CnFYxM4WYAAmBCe.jpgQuote:
Originally Posted by Pepe
Lovely.
Eh the shooter was described as using a rifle. So people who fit that description became suspects; pretty straight forward.Quote:
Originally Posted by phonics
I knew this whole thing was a ruse by feminazis. Their empowerment has meant the end for the male population.
So what you're saying is large amounts of guns made it harder for the police to do their job and potentially delayed them in finding the real suspect?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
Yeah in the same way as if everyone wore red colored shirts.Quote:
Originally Posted by phonics
Harvard Study by Liberal Black Economist: Blacks shot at less than White by Police
"When it comes to the most lethal form of force — police shootings — the study finds no racial bias.
“It is the most surprising result of my career,” said Roland G. Fryer Jr., the author of the study and a professor of economics at Harvard. The study examined more than a thousand shootings in 10 major police departments, in Texas, Florida and California."
Link:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/12/up...shot&smtyp=cur
I've never once portrayed myself as sophisticated nor do I tell you you're shit for the benefit of others.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mert
I just truly think you're a dull pull-string doll of a human being whose never once came up with his own thoughts or ideas.
Being a parrot for Fox is no better than being a parrot for MSNBC, no matter how you want to dress it up.
I understand your sentiment but that's not it. He doesn't have "his views". He has catchphrases and hot takes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kikó
There is nothing to gain from discourse that has no hope for middle ground. It's like arguing with a Liverpool supporter that Man United are "bigger" than them. Or with Harold that immigration may have benefit. It'll go nowhere no matter what.
When you encounter these robots, it's best to try and turn them off entirely instead of giving them a platform to bore everyone with.
He trusts 'The Liberal Media' when it agrees with himQuote:
Originally Posted by Mert
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CnHLCZRWYAA9Xt9.jpg:large
Breh they found no racial bias in fucking Texas, tour is over boyo.
Another couple to fill that midweek lull: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-36770136
Quote:
A defendant grabbed a gun from a deputy, according to local reports.
Based Texas:
http://www.houstonchronicle.com/news...47-8365342.php
"Man who tried to rob Waffle House with an AK-47 shot by customer"
He would, of course, not have an AK47 to rob the waffle house in the first place if he hadn't been able to buy one with the weekly shopping.
Reggie Yates inside Bear county Texas.
Kids in jail for a few months for tagging on a school projector.
Texas.
BBC 1 now.
Three police officers have been shot dead in Baton Rouge, apparently.
Ah fuck.
CNN states at least three officers were killed, seven total who were shot.
#blm
Thank God Black Lives Matter have made it to Britain. Yes, they have to focus on deaths in police custody (not really a race issue) and 'inequalities' (if not the same, then it is surely counter-productive for left-wingers to break these things down ethnically) rather than police shootings that don't happen here, but I'm sure they've got some valuable insights to share with us all. lol also at Owen Jones trying to get in on the ground floor for when Momentum start editing him out of old photos. Twat.
Their protest today was about that guy whose shooting kicked off the London Riots five years ago. What the fuck's going on?
Some twats will use any reason to be outraged.
Public opinion overwhelmingly on your side? Make them late for their holidays just to really drive it home.
Them riots made for some Classic TTH (lol at SG). Classic TTH, and then the courts slamming people for all sorts for the rest of the month. What a fitting end to the Establishment Summer of 2011.
If only they had the same passion about being gainfully employed.Quote:
Originally Posted by 7om
SG posting Marcotti tweets about the riots is one of my biggest lols in the history of these boards. It was amazing.
All these twats have done is made me hope that the next time some racist arsehole is picking a black person to murder, they pick one of those wankers lying across the M4.
It's fucking madness. I saw a tweet from this #BLM cunt the other day. Basically she went to a BLM rally and there was this older white lady with dreadlocks there.
She got someone to take a picture of her basically dressing the lady down because of her hair.
Mind you, I think white people wearing dreadlocks is inherently corny, but what kind've world do these people live in where posting
"Saw a 'POC ally' today at the BLM rally but I was just not having it with these dreads #CulturalAppropriation"
As a caption of a picture you had someone else take of you while arguing with some old lady who was there to SUPPORT YOUR FUCKING CAUSE.
"Nah take a picture of me talking shit to this elderly woman. I'm 19 years old and know everything about the world." My God.
Personally, I'm a firm believer that #NoLivesMatter and we are all insignificant specks on the Universe's windshield. Not that any of you asked. But GOD that shit grinds my fucking gears.
Black Lives Matter UK closed an airport down today because 'climate change is a racist crisis', and even the commenters are lolling at them (also, everyone involved in the protest was white).
Unauthorised entry to the 'secure' area of the airport like the apron or the runway really should see you tasered immediately and / or forcibly removed before you're summarily imprisoned.
Every time this thread gets bumped I get sad cause I think someone else in my country has been shot :(
Wind it down, lads. It's getting a bit Fathers 4 Justice.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lewis
I didn't think anyone could be more obnoxious than the more out-there elements of Black Lives Matter in the US, like Ta-Nehisi Coates claiming someone was racist when they proposed a black actor other than Idris Elba to play Bond because that black actor wasn't actually in the running so he was a safe 'white' choice, but our branch has outdone them in about two months.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lewis
There's a growing trend of people undermining their own cause by trying to portray it as a symptom of something bigger, or as something bigger than it is. The earliest example that immediately comes to mind in this context is Serena Williams telling anyone who'd listen that she was a victim of racism when someone said she looked a bit masculine with her twenty inch bisceps, but it's probably been quietly going on for years.
This place hasn't been that busy for years.Quote:
Originally Posted by bruhnaldo
Looks like they finally caught someone alive.
And yes, when the article said, "20 year-old Turk" I did wonder if it was Mert.
Well on that basis, all those of Turkish heritage should be expelled I think. The Donald would probably agree with me.
They aren't sending their best, they're sending killers and cuckers.
When that was first flashing up the other day the early reports described him as Mexican. Yeah right, mate. Mexicans haven't got time for this.
'I think he was a Muslim.'
'Well, you know... Could it have been a Trump supporter with a tan?'
'No.'
'I'll put "Hispanic", "possible Trump supporter", right?'
Two active shooters at Ohio State University. Fuck sake.
EDIT: So I'm watching a live feed on Youtube and the guy doing the voice over just said, "this is currently trending number two on Twitter."
Is this what it's come to? Fuck me what a fucking shambles of a country.
Why is it always schools in America being shot at? Is there a reason?
All thanks to Trump. Where is my sanctuary?
The live chat on the feed I'm watching really is something. It's like a zoo.
Racist.
Because guns are plentiful and their school system breeds social alienation in a way ours doesn't even come close to.Quote:
Originally Posted by Smiffy
And now he's just asked all viewers to like and subscribe. I'm done.
Having a megathread for U.S. mass shootings is fucking funny.
It was a Somali refugee, and he never used a gun. Gutted.
Mate, you were watching a live fucking feed. Big, shiney, fuck off, glass house.Quote:
Originally Posted by 7om
"To go over the curb and strike pedestrians, and then get out and start striking them with a knife — that was on purpose,"
No shit.
Surely it's harder to get a knife than it is to get a gun over there.
I don't get your point.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spikey M
You're expecting ethics out of some random bloke on youtube?
Well it was a Fox affiliate. I know they're wankers but come on. I have a relative who studies there, hence my desperation to find out the current news.
Is s/he okay?Quote:
Originally Posted by 7om
Toggle Spoiler
Please be real.
It's on their website, so I'd assume so: http://thelantern.com/2016/11/from-t...of-ohio-state/
I'd imagine driving a car into them and running amok with a knife might make them uncomfortable tooQuote:
“I wanted to pray in the open, but I was scared with everything going on in the media. I’m a Muslim, it’s not what the media portrays me to be. If people look at me, a Muslim praying, I don’t know what they’re going to think, what’s going to happen. But, I don’t blame them. It’s the media that put that picture in their heads so they’re just going to have it and it, it’s going to make them feel uncomfortable.
Is it appropriate to highlight that this "has nothing to do with Islam" or does it, in fact, have something to do with Islam?
Mental health issue (tm).
Yeah, back home safe and sound. Cheers, Baz.Quote:
Originally Posted by Baz
That shooting at an airport has been rather untalked about considering someone literally shot up an air port.
I wonder why.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C1qtjPLVQAETaPf.jpg:large
Oh.
MK Ultra still going
I've seen quite a few posts on r/conspiracy (its mostly stuff like this, as opposed to lizard people) about that and it really does make you wonder. I've seen quite a few theories regarding false flag attacks (attacks set up by the government for various reasons), but this is significant. Given some of the tactics the American government has used in the past, I don't think its far-fetched to think they might orchestrate terrorist attacks for their own benefit.
Nobody forces me to watch Islamic State videos. I watch them entirely of my own accord. What a chump.
In 99% of cases, it would be far too hard to actually orchestrate without somebody leaking it or the 'plot' being discovered later on. It's just wishful thinking and people believing what they want to believe.Quote:
Originally Posted by Offshore Toon
And that's just a guy shooting up an airport. There are people who think 9/11 was false flag. I mean, come on.
Look how far technology has come since the 50s. If they were trying to control minds back then, it isn't ridiculous to think they may have achieved that goal.
Jesus Christ looks like phonics will have to start sharing that tinfoil.
Fucking hell, Offshore :D
Lay off the Acid for a year or two.
Welcome back Lurch.
I'm just open to the possibility. There obviously isn't enough evidence to state such claims with any conviction, but there's enough there to make you wonder.
There isn't any actual evidence at all though, is there?
I don't spend my time digging through declassified reports, but there's evidence that the MK Ultra tests took place, isn't there?Quote:
Originally Posted by Yevrah
Yeah, MK Ultra was an actual thing. They released a load of documents about it and supposedly stopped it in the seventies.
And it didn't work.
Neither did your marriage, but you're carrying on with that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Magic
And it is working.
Maybe there's something in this after all. Instead of mind control via dehumanisation, abuse, psychological warfare, they should use praise, positive reinforcement and honesty.
There's also a chance he was a mentalist who said batshit crazy things
See, things change.Quote:
Originally Posted by Magic
Anyway, I'm not sure how certain of anything you can actually be in this day and age. In all likelihood any conspiracy theory is bollocks, but I don't see how anybody in our position can sit there and say they know 100% what is going on and what isn't. Watching HyperNormalisation and reading about Snowden and Assange has definitely had an effect, but its not like distrusting powerful people is a new idea.
See you in Brazil compadre.
So that's why you married a Portuguese lass.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kikó
There is a black man (probably a white supremacist of some sort) streaming himself shooting random people in Cleveland over some bird. That's a new one.
Jesus. I've still got a way to go, clearly.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VtKzm957sfk
Just saw the video of him shooting the old guy - it was genuinely horrific. Not because of gore - but the defenselessness of the victim.
You're not wrong there, SvN. That's cold.
Probably why it's not plastered all over my newsfeed. Sloots gunna sloot.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lewis
I find it horribly sad that you can make it to that age, only to be executed by some nutter while walking back from the shops.
It's a shame he wont get taken alive.
I thought it was Uncle Phil at first. Turns out he's dead too.
http://www.newsweek.com/guns-kids-th...e-death-627209
Guns are now the third highest cause of death for American children.
That's a bit contrived, no?Quote:
(behind illnesses and unintentional injuries like drownings or car crashes)
You all hear about the mass shootings, what you don't hear about is the wife/husband murder-suicide that's happening every other day in Buttfuck Utah. Always hidden somewhere in the local section of the newspaper.
Incredibly contrived. Lumping all 'illnesses' together is laughable enough, but to then have a separate category for 'unintentional injuries' when most instances in which a child is killed by a gun will be unintentional and the only three gunshot victims mentioned are described as accidental is just clear manipulation of the numbers. I'd lay down money that study was manufactured to give exactly that headline.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ian
Isn't everybody in Buttfuck Utah a smackhead now anyway?
Or all those heroes preventing crime with their concealed carry permit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spoonsky
Isn't everyone in a rural area? Or a urban one?Quote:
Originally Posted by Lewis
lmfaoQuote:
Originally Posted by Ian
Imagine putting together a poll and needing to lump together basically every common type of death just to be able to say "guns" are the third leading cause of death in children.
Well if one considers not doing a crime because they're likely to be blown away before actually committing it... that's what we like to call a "deterrent".Quote:
Originally Posted by Pepe
There's a reason why most of these things happen in "GUN FREE" zones.
A gun debate again. Yaaaay.
That's twice today someone has hit a Mert touchstone, namely boasting about wealth he doesn't have and gun free zones being the devil. If someone volunteers to call everyone posting in the relationship thread a 'beta cuck bitch' once a fortnight we can probably do away with him.
I didn't say gun free zones are the devil. I said a crazy person who wants to hurt a lot of people is going to be more likely to go to a place where there supposedly aren't any guns to do their crazy person business.
Not really a difficult concept. People tend to go away from things that are a danger to them.
Let's see if you can take this to its logical conclusion.Quote:
Originally Posted by bruhnaldo
By all means, genius, after you.
I love gun conversations. Talking to an American about gun laws and how they should be changed is the same as talking to a catholic about religion being fucking stupid. Nothing changes but people still moan when they get raped or shot.
All of that is nice in conversation but it's wildly impractical.
You're not gonna take all the guns away from the criminals. The only people who would turn their guns in are law-abiding citizens. In turn, making those people less safe.
If you want to find a gun, you'll find a gun regardless of how the laws change. These conversations are pointless.
It's not quite like that. Someone once said to me when I was single "if you ever want to text your ex, have a wank first". I think a similar outlook can be applied here. In England, if you want to fucking shoot someone in the face, it would take a long fucking time to get a gun and shit togethor to be able to do that. In fact, anyone who gets shot in England, probably deserved it. However, in America, you wona shoot someone in the face, it's so fucking simple.Quote:
Originally Posted by bruhnaldo
In some states you can just pop to a local supermarket and buy a semi automatic. Whilst your shooting that one guy in the face, might as well shoot some others i suppose. I mean I have two hundred rounds for the same price as my monthly wage. Won't need another monthly wage after I've shot all these faces. Etc etx
I mean, i am far from intelligent and if I can see that gun laws in America are dumb then god help you all (no pun intended).
You're 100% right.Quote:
Originally Posted by leedsrevolution
If they can't use a gun, they'll just create a makeshift bomb and detonate it after an Ariana Grande concert.
If they can't use a gun, they'll just drive a truck into a crowd of people.
There is no easy solution.
7212 deaths in 2017 and counting.
Not that I understand the original stat contrivance point. Was it that guns should be higher or lower than the other categories?
Solution:
1. Guns for coke program
2. People hand over guns, you hand over coke.
3. You hold up them for the coke.
4. Guns and drugs solved.
5. SELL BOTH FOR MAD PROFIT.
John covered the contrivance pretty well with one exception. Not only did they separate out unintentional gun deaths from all unintentional deaths but my understanding is that they also grouped in gun deaths from gang violence.
But all American gun conversations are overblown so why ruin their fun.
Of course there isn't an easy solution. That's not the point, an obvious solution to reducing murders would be to ban guns. Surely reducing murders is a good thing and of course banning them would do that. Proper fucking simple you stupid American cunt.Quote:
Originally Posted by bruhnaldo
I love gun conversations.
The problem with the US is that there are already so many guns floating around that any sort of ban wouldn't achieve much.
Well in that article they seem to have gone "guns are third, literally every other type of accident is second if you combine them all."Quote:
Originally Posted by niko_cee
Opposite of here - even hardened criminals and terrorists often just can't get hold of them for love nor money.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pepe
The criminals that do have them have usually 'drilled out' a replica that has a 50% chance of going bang in their face.
Not instantly, but then again this logic isn't used when discussing any other type of law.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pepe
Well, there's already loads of drugs, might as well decriminalize them
In fairness I have heard that exact opinion voiced.
It's an example fuckface, apply the same logic to anything else and the argument against gun restrictions looks ridiculous.
:harold:
I'm not allowed to obtain gun licence where I live.
Well we've had 2 of those incidents in a year, and prior to that nothing for a very long time.Quote:
Originally Posted by bruhnaldo
You guys have biweekly mass shootings.
Sensible measures for a safer Australia.Quote:
Originally Posted by Queenslander
:DQuote:
Originally Posted by Disco
I do agree with it though.
What part of the people committing murders aren't just going to turn in their guns is so fucking difficult for you, you remedial English dipshit?Quote:
Originally Posted by leedsrevolution
Talking dumb shit because you live in la-la land where everything is simple and everyone just says "Hey sure, I totally agree with this gun ban! I'm deffo going to give you my gun now!"
We should ban drugs next! That'll get them off the streets!
Bruh, you're coming off as a giant, incoherently angry dumbass. Quit while you're ahead.
"biweekly" yet we haven't had a mass shooting for a year. Which isn't to say that's something to be proud of but let's not overstate the problem.Quote:
Originally Posted by randomlegend
Unless of course you, unlike every politician, wants to acknowledge the problems in Chicago + gun violence. Mind you, those guys are deffo gonna just stop being gang-banging dickheads because some rich politician drafts legislation saying "turn in your guns, please!" I sure hope we get on that soon.
A guy opened fire at sitting congress members last week...Quote:
Originally Posted by bruhnaldo
There's actually been 14 mass shootings in the last 10 days. Only 2 in Chicago (although I guess you can throw the St. Louis one in if you really want)
http://i.imgur.com/XmBrXj6.png
Because "let's ban the guns! that'll show those criminals and crazy people!" isn't the most incoherently dumbassed "solution" there is.Quote:
Originally Posted by phonics
Constantly just people providing extraordinarily simplistic and even more unrealistic solutions coupled with a hilariously pretentious tone but I'm the bad guy for pointing this out.
Depends how you define ' mass'. Some guy went mental in Orlando a few weeks ago at his old workplace, didn't he?
I guess we have a different interpretation as to what constitutes a "mass" shootings.Quote:
Originally Posted by phonics
But again, let's nevermind Chicago where gun violence is actually the problem.
If you're not counting 4 or more people shot at once as a mass shooting. You have a mass shooting issue.
I'm on the same website and you literally have to go 17 pages and one full year to find an incident where more than 6 people were injured.Quote:
Originally Posted by 7om
"Mass" shootings every day guysm! It's the wild wild west out here! Ban all the guns! Ban all the trucks! Ban all the nails/bits of plastic!
Well the FBI apparently says four or more deaths. There's two on Phonics' screenshot alone and the one I cited had six which was on 6th June.Quote:
Originally Posted by bruhnaldo
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Orlando_shooting
2 people were killed and 5 were injured on June 9th in Fort Worth, Texas. You can't read.Quote:
Originally Posted by bruhnaldo
Again, how do you get the criminals/crazy people who want to use guns for gun violence to turn in their guns?
I'm not even talking about law-abiding citizens at this point, cause that's an entire lol in itself.
How, in this hilarious utopia, do you suppose this would practically be done?
How are you defining 'mass shooting' to come up with that? The official definition is four or more people shot in a single incident, and that happens about three times a day.Quote:
Originally Posted by bruhnaldo
If you'd like to move the goalposts some more we can move from whether it should be done onto how it's done once you calm down.Quote:
Originally Posted by bruhnaldo
I've just clicked on to that site and the very first incident listed has seven injuries.Quote:
Originally Posted by bruhnaldo
It's gang violence, not "some crazy person grabbing a gun and shooting a bunch of innocent people for no reason" violence.
If you can't differentiate between the two maybe it's you who has the problem.
I can assure you that the solution to one (gang violence) is not the same as the other (gun violence).
A couple dudes shooting at each other over "gang turf" isn't something that's even remotely in the realm of "Let's put a bunch of nails and bits into a homemade explosive device and kill a bunch of little kids leaving a concert".
Lmfaoooooo that was the entire point from the beginning. Get fucked.Quote:
Originally Posted by phonics
So let's say "killed", then. Again, the point is, how do you enact this "so easy! so simple!" solution to fix our country?Quote:
Originally Posted by John
Come on lads let's hear it.
Everybody's a genius until it's time to actually employ these so simple solutions. Fancy how that works.
I'm not sure who he's even arguing with at this point so I'm going for a cigarette. I'll probably come back to find out he's had another breakdown. C'est la vie.
That would be June 5th in Orlando, Florida as stated earlier in the thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by bruhnaldo
Ya i didn't think so.
I don't see where anybody has professed to being a genius.
if 6 people is a "mass" in a country of 350 million people I mean idk what to tell youQuote:
Originally Posted by phonics
talk about moving goal posts yet you're stuck on this irrelevant bullshit
Well it's SOOOO simple? I don't understand? Everyone can talk down to others but magically they don't have the fucking answers.Quote:
Originally Posted by 7om
I'll wait.
I just think you don't like being pulled up on your shit.
If arguing over whether 5, 6, or 7 deaths is a "mass shooting" is me being "pulled up on my shit" as opposed to me asking all of the people who constantly talk shit about my country for a legitimate answer as to how they would employ this "oh so simple" solution then by all means, enjoy.
https://i.ytimg.com/vi/cDDEhLw1PVI/hqdefault.jpg
"Leave America Alone!"
Ya'll can spend all day telling me how I'm dumb and I ain't shit but if only you'd spend that time coming up with these simple ass solutions maybe you'd do some great for the world.
I'll be patiently waiting for your fault-proof plan.
Nobody has said ' you ain't shit'.
:D Let's not.Quote:
Originally Posted by bruhnaldo
You don't have to know how to fix a problem to acknowledge that there is one. The incredible thing to us outsiders isn't that your country hasn't yet fixed gun violence, it's that there isn't a top down acknowledgement that there's even a problem with guns, let alone a concerted effort to improve the issue.
Your reaction here actually speaks quite a lot to why that's the case. The moment someone mentions gun legislation to a certain section of America you get an incredible dose of fuckwit flavoured screeching and if you don't have a full solution immediately ready to go which fixes the problem, complies with a two hundred year old parchment, and mollifies the hooting bellend in front of you then tough luck, YOU LOSE, and there's a smug whopper to deal with.
A good start would be to make full background checks mandatory for all guns and in all states, so a mentally ill headbanger can't just pick up a rifle from his local shop on ten minutes notice. You'd probably cut out a few deaths just through letting people cool down for the fortnight waiting period too.
You're all acting like I'm okay with my fellow citizens getting murked every other day.
The point is it's not as simple as your cheesy little banter makes it out to be. I was having a perfectly level-headed discussion until this dickhead from Leeds decided to turn it up a notch.
Since we can't have respectable discussion this is what we'll have. I'm literally begging you all to bless my country with your knowledge as to save the lives of my fellow countrymen.
There's certainly a gun problem in this country. Sitting around pretentiously talking down to people because there aren't no easy solutions is, ironically, also not a solution to it.Quote:
Originally Posted by John
That's all I was trying to say.
1) Crazy people will always do crazy shit. If you take away the guns, they'll mimic other shit they've seen.
2) Getting law-abiding citizens to turn in their guns is one thing, getting known criminals to do so is another, getting "underground" gun runners to stop running guns to gangs and whoever the fuck else is an entirely other.
3, 4, 5, 6, people getting shot over stupid shit is not something I want for my country.... but completely ignoring the points above to bang on about these incidents happening "bi-weekly", instead of acknowledging that yes, the people who want to hurt people will always find ways to do so, is a red herring at best.
You ban all guns. Granted it will take time but it will stop people who are fucked off at there boss etc,nipping to a shop and going in and shooting them.Quote:
Originally Posted by bruhnaldo
Absolutely this. Brilliant post.Quote:
Originally Posted by John
There are probably more guns in this country than there are people. This is not a viable solution.Quote:
Originally Posted by leedsrevolution
The law-abiding citizens of this country aren't going to want to turn their guns in. You can't have police raids to take away "suspected" guns from "suspected" gun-owners.
I don't understand why you won't get passed the very first part and see how insane your "plan" is to actually attempt to implement.
Turned it up a notch. Fucking lol.Quote:
Originally Posted by bruhnaldo
There is a waiting period for some guns in a lot of places and it surely has done a lot to let people calm down in these instances of rage.Quote:
Originally Posted by John
That doesn't solve the problem of illegal gun purchases, but it's surely a step in the right direction.
Going from reasonable discourse to "you stupid American cunt" when you provided no real solution is "turning it up a notch" to me. Sorry my idioms aren't in line with yours I guess.Quote:
Originally Posted by leedsrevolution
This is going to be a battle of the intellectual heavyweights.
This saying gets used to often around here but you're on the ropes. When can we expect to see you leave for the 50th time?. Anyway, I was of course drunk when I posted that so more fool you for even taking the time to acknowledge it.
No battle here, I'm more than happy to have a reasonable conversation about the solutions.
Soon enough, trust.Quote:
Originally Posted by leedsrevolution
I'll say it again then. A good start would be to make full background checks mandatory for all guns and in all states, so a mentally ill headbanger can't just pick up a rifle from his local shop on ten minutes notice. You'd probably cut out a few deaths just through letting people cool down for the fortnight waiting period too.Quote:
Originally Posted by bruhnaldo
That people will always find a way to hurt eachother isn't a reason not to at least try to take away one of the most simple and effective ways of doing so, particularly since it's something with no use other than to hurt people. We'll not be so silly as to pretend Tyler is hunting elk with his handgun, so spare me that kernel of bullshit at least.
Just to pop back to this for a second. The official definition of a 'mass shooting' is four or more people shot in a single incident. Not killed, just shot. So there is no argument over that point, and six people is 'mass'. If you define it otherwise, you're wrong.Quote:
if 6 people is a "mass" in a country of 350 million people I mean idk what to tell you
Quality meltdown.
I initially responded before you added the last part, I did go back and respond to it though.Quote:
Originally Posted by John
I appreciate you having a real discussion, though. I agree with your point, though. There should be something done to eliminate one of the easiest ways people hurt each other.
I just don't see how it could be done. Like I've said several times, there's not just the law-abiding citizens who we have to worry about.
I realize you guys went through this same shit in 1996 or whenever it was when that loony shot up that school. You enacted a gun ban and it has worked very well in the sense that gun violence is probably irrelevant.
At the same time, "violent crime" has also apparently spiked. Now, I'm not saying it's better to be shot than stabbed or vice versa, but there's always unintended consequences that come from these types of things.
Would I like to live in a world where gun violence doesn't exist? Of course! Hell, the grocery store right by my house had a shooting inside of it a few months back. It was gang related bullshit, but stray bullets have killed tons of people too!
It's all fucked up and I don't know how we truly fix it.
There's just so many guns. If even 80% of the population said "fine, here are my weapons Mr. Government. Thank you!" that still leaves millions of guns on the streets.
I'm not saying what you're suggesting isn't a bad practice, in theory it would be great, I just don't think it's practical to expect the cooperation necessary to make something like that work.
Though again, the background checks business, hey man, I have no problem with that whatsoever. I certainly agree it shouldn't be so easy to just walk in, grab a gun, and walk out. Now, like I mentioned previous, there are many cases where you buy a gun, have to wait a period of time, and then get it, but it's hardly nationwide and/or for every gun.
Things that fuck me off: The term 'law-abiding citizen.'
I live in University City. It could have been me. Really makes you think.Quote:
Originally Posted by phonics
Well what term should I use so you can focus on the point, Pepe? I really don't know how else to describe one who would follow the law simply because it is the law.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pepe
James Holmes was a 'law abiding citizen' until that night.
If guns were banned, by definition you could only be a 'law abiding citizen' if you turned in all of your guns.
Exactly?Quote:
Originally Posted by Pepe
As for your 'it's hard' argument:
1. No shit, of course it is.
2. I said the exact same thing a page or two ago, before your meltdown.
Phonics can you bully him off the board again please.
Yet another moron american who won't accept anything less than a gun strategy that offers total overnight success without annoying anyone and also can't think logically for two seconds in a row.
So you agree with me. Awesome.
I'm sorry that when people say stupid shit to me I respond right back to them. I will "meltdown" every time, I don't give a fuck.
No one except John has provided any strategy whatsoever but keep up the fine work, dipshit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Disco
Do keep on. It is entertaining.Quote:
Originally Posted by bruhnaldo
I like how a "meltdown" is basically defending yourself from some dickhead calling you a stupid cunt without actually providing anything remotely insightful to the discussion.
I also like how "bullying off the board" is me choosing not to post here because I called Marine Le Pen's niece her daughter and some asshole changed a thread title to "Bruhnaldo's incompetence" over such a simple mistake.
As if I should just be fine with either instance.
It's not our place to know how to fix it, that's down to the legislators and LAW ENFORCEMENT, SIR. And you have said that several times, despite it being a complete non point in the first place. We're talking about gun violence, do you think we're all so stupid as to think the problem is those who aren't shooting people?Quote:
Originally Posted by bruhnaldo
It took one headbanger to shoot up a school and we decided, as a nation, that guns were for the bin. That's why we look at a nation with several school shootings a year and wonder why it isn't doing anything at all, let alone putting up a united front on the issue.
Background checks are the only thing I've suggested, so I'm not sure what it is you think I'm expecting impractical cooperation for.
Going tonto over that thread title was you being unable to take a joke and flouncing off. That was a genuine meltdown. I changed the thread title, by the way.Quote:
Originally Posted by bruhnaldo
Thank you for having a reasonable discussion regardless of how stupid you may feel my points are.Quote:
Originally Posted by John
There was one a couple of months ago, and I definitely remember another one in a community college or somesuch much more recently than Sandy Hook. And those are just the ones we hear about on our little island.
Bruh, you might enjoy this:
https://www.counterpunch.org/2017/06...te-opens-fire/
I didn't mean "small island" as an offense. I'm just saying it's a more densely populated area where these types of measures can be better regulated and enforced.
Though I guess one could counter by saying these types of incidents generally occur in densely populated areas and there's no real need to worry about Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, the midwest in general, where houses are miles apart with dozens of rifles between them.
Stop being so prescious and just be thankful I didn't call you a fat stupid cunt.Quote:
Originally Posted by bruhnaldo
You did indeed.Quote:
Originally Posted by bruhnaldo
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/02/u...y-college.html
Ten dead, less than two years ago.
Haven't read yet but the police in this country is also a huge problem. We honestly have so much shit going on here it's unbelievable :(Quote:
Originally Posted by Pepe
It's not the words that bother me it's the idea that you think you're so above reasonable discussion that you have to resort to this childish bullshit instead of continuing the level-headed tone we'd been talking in. We were at a 3 and you took it to a 10 just because you're an anonymous dickhead on the internet who can get away with it.Quote:
Originally Posted by leedsrevolution
You being drunk or not doesn't really matter to me. I was being respectful and then you took it to that level without offering anything to the discussion to give you the right to be so crass.
I don't have to put up with that shit and I won't. Call it a meltdown if you want. Doesn't bother me in the slightest.
Fair enough but also not exactly "several a year" either I'd contend.Quote:
Originally Posted by John
Do you want me to say sorry, babes.