The debate "Why do school shootings keep on happening in the US. it never happens in my country" was started by
July 17, 2016, 10:43 am.
15 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 4 people are on the disagree side.
People are starting to choose their side.
It looks like most of the people in this community are on the agreeing side of this statement.
Blue_ray posted 4 arguments to the agreers part.
Blue_ray, Person198, prashant and 12 visitors agree.
4 visitors disagree.
i wonder why everybody forgot columbine.
if someone buys a gun and gives it to someone, there is little we can do, but if that person then commits a crime with that gun and it's traced back to the buyer/gifter, they can go sit in jail. very easy enforcement.
most gang members don't have guns now, how will they all suddenly be armed when guns are more expensive, more difficult to get, and there are tons of sting operations arresting many gang members trying to buy guns.... yes some gang members will still be able to arm themselves... but much fewer than now.
that is my argument acknowledging that an outright national ban would have the desired affect... but I do not support a national ban for other reasons. it's called nuance, not that people who sell out their values would understand that.
And background checks are what we have in the US right now. What do you want 0 guns if that were possibly sonce many are unmarked.
And you have admitted every concern by the right: petty thieves cant afford them, and the innocent cant have them. Only big gangs can, and if i recall, they are quite the vilent types. Would you feel safe knowing the only ones with guns are the bloods and crips?
Who is talking about no restrictions? Im saying if an innocent man buys a gun for another, how do you stop it. How will you stop this rogue gunman.
I don't want to prevent an innocent man from buying a gun. I do want background checks on gun purchases and carry restrictions...
but if guns do become banned, they will become expensive. a mob boss and big shot criminals will definitely be armed whereas the small time cronies breaking it your house won't be. not worth the cost or the risk to them.
on the other hand, no restrictions will be like the wild west, and we all know what kind of orderly armed peaceful time that was lol.
You used it to draw a parallel to our 911 and its unusual occurrence. You supported your argument by calling it that in order to reference 911
And how are you going to stop an innocent man from buying anoyher a gun? Big brother?
Psychos are unavoidable. Its impossible to strip criminals of guns. its pricey for guns without serial numbers anyway. If you eant to kill, nothing else matters--youll do whatever it takes to arm yourself because thats the end of it all.
the name of an event isn't evidence...
we have had terrorist acts as well, but none of them are orchestrated by isis. the truck attack, as far as I know, was just another disgruntled psycho.
restricting guns won't stop isis, but it will stop all these nobody psychos, as well as domestic violence deaths and many crimes of passion fatalities.
guns rarely stop bombs, the favorite of actual ISIS terrorists.
But if France has more that is horrible. Wr have a way larger population.
And that is called attempted murder not drawing that one on me!
Then dont use it in your evidence. However, they have had 2 mass killings already in a short duration.
I'm not the one who named it Frances 9/11... that's why I put it in quotes.
it is dubbed that by many sources.
the point is that far more people died that day than usually do in France, and it says nothing about broader trends by itself.
Did 3000 people die in France?
based on the Donald trump eminent domain debates Republicans seem to think intent is irrelevant and if a murder fails to kill, no harm no foul, try again later.
a mass shooting is about the number of people shot. a mass murder requires them to die. they are not the same thing.
a mass shooting means several people being shot. you just want to limit the argument to murders because it helps to hide a massive number of people who get injured but don't actually die.
copied from wikipedia right?
The term was originally defined as the murder of four or more people with no cooling-off period but redefined by Congress in 2013 as being murder of three or more people. According to CNN, a mass shooting is defined as having four or more fatalities, not including gang killings or slayings that involve the death of multiple family members. In "Behind the Bloodshed", a report by USAToday, a mass killing is defined as any incident in which four or more were killed and also includes family killings. A crowdsourced data site cited by CNN, MSNBC, The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Economist, the BBC, etc., Mass Shooting Tracker, defines a mass shooting as any incident in which four or more people are shot, whether injured or killed.[11
-Wikipedia (the first thing that came up on google)
the data site with all the big media names listed count any shooting of 4 people are shot, they don't even have to die, just shot. any 4 people.
so mass shootings definition can very. I'll take the FBI's. family members don't count, and they have to die.
last year was "Frances 9/11" of course their deaths were high.
what happened after our 9/11? did 9/11 become the normal? no. stop spreading your dishonest bullshit.
let's take number killed by terrorists over population.
last 5 years for us.
last 12 months for France.
I've linked sources before (liberal sources) that said France has more deaths then the US in the above time periods. (not even acounting population
even more logical when ALL other data points in the opposite direction lol.
it's totally logical to make broad statements based on 1 data point! :/
lol Alex Asking about the present time, not 5 years ago when it's convenient for you.
it's logical to use new data and talk about what is currently happening.
lol Alex citing his only year when France had more... as opposed to every other year on record.
what 372 shootings in 2015 backup your statement.
there were 372 mass shootings in 2015. that is more than one every single day.
ar15s aren't assault rifles. but they are assault weapons. they exist only to kill people and are very useful for mass shooters. they serve little to no legitimate purpose and should absolutely not be legal.
did everybody forget about columbine,lindhurst,sandy hook,virginia campus?
High powered weapons. 5.56 AR 15s arent some special military weapon, they are just rifles.
Mass shootings everyday huh?
complicated issue yeah
terrorists are bad. terrorists kill. terrorists should be terminated. ban terrorists no deaths by terrorists.
ban guns death by terrorists.
what's the complicated part that makes it the guns fault?
how many deaths in mass shootings the past year US vs. France. France wins big.
there has been what, two attacks in Europe in the last few months? you have mass shootings every day.
it doesn't have to be a Muslim terrorist for alot of people to die. but it's just like you to try to deflect a complicated issue.
in other countries they just use trucks and bombs instead. those rediculous laws slowing them asualt trucks. lol
and some rediculous laws that allows virtually anyone to get high powered weapons.
We have some evil people in America.