Sad week in Orlando

Oh please. It's all propaganda to make them look better. They only care about the headlines by touting 'gun control, gun control' as if it's some magic word that will eliminate gun violence. According to statistics provided by the FBI only 3 percent of gun violence is from legally purchased guns. 3 percent. Gun control wont, and is not a means to control the 97% of gun violence orchestrated by illegally purchased or procured weapons. They just want to attach their names to a hot topic issue and drain headlines off of a tragedy rather than addressing the real concern: why was this allowed to happen, why didn't the checks and balances work and what can we do to prevent it. Just saying gun control wont stop a thing; it certainly would not have prevented this tragedy from happening as they are not talking about 'banning' weapons from jobs that demand the use of them.
 
brinkster130
brinkster130
Do you ever wonder why they don't just pass a few gun laws and then when they don't work stick their tongues out and say "told you so"?
Well, they're a lot more peaceful than I would be. If I saw even one of these jerkbags protesting at the funeral I would likely be the one heading to prison. This makes me sick to my stomach, the Westboro Baptist Church is no better than the shooter.

Yeah, but by doing something like that, you would be playing directly into their hands. It's attention that they want, however they can get it, exactly the same as the mass shooters. Denying them that will do far more to discourage both situations than all the hoopla by the news media and insincere rhetoric of the politicians. These people crave headlines. Without that, they will eventually simply go away.

Oh please. It's all propaganda to make them look better. They only care about the headlines by touting 'gun control, gun control' as if it's some magic word that will eliminate gun violence. According to statistics provided by the FBI only 3 percent of gun violence is from legally purchased guns. 3 percent. Gun control wont, and is not a means to control the 97% of gun violence orchestrated by illegally purchased or procured weapons. They just want to attach their names to a hot topic issue and drain headlines off of a tragedy rather than addressing the real concern: why was this allowed to happen, why didn't the checks and balances work and what can we do to prevent it. Just saying gun control wont stop a thing; it certainly would not have prevented this tragedy from happening as they are not talking about 'banning' weapons from jobs that demand the use of them.

Add to that, the crime rate involving firearms in the U S has been steadily declining since the early 90's, and the previous assault weapon "ban" contributed not one thing to the numbers.

Mass shootings have increased, almost certainly because the news media turns every one into a circus, flooding the airways with the very sort of fame and recognition that these people crave. If the news report was reduced to the bare essentials ("X" number of victims died in a mass shooting at "X" location. The perpetrator was killed onsite. Period. Nothing else) it's a pretty good bet that fewer psychos would consider that form of suicide so appealing, and actual terrorist organizations would be denied the recognition that they seek.

Does it really matter what type of gun the killer used? Any repeating rifle, pistol, or shotgun could have accomplished the same thing under the same circumstances. Neither increased magazine capacity nor ease and speed of reloading are all that important a factor when you're the only one in the entire mall, school, church, or airport carrying a gun. Unarmed people, basically in a state of panic, rarely think about setting up an ambush for the person shooting at them, despite what movies, TV, and popular fiction display. Oh, yeah, id might happen, one time in a thousand. or ten thousand.

As for the demonized "assault rifles" so popular with mass murderers, newscasters, and politician, there is absolutely no functional difference between them and a perfectly legal sporting rifle or target pistol. Flash suppressors, shrouded barrels, and folding stocks are cosmetic. They neither add nor detract fro the function of the gun in question. And PLEASE don't even bother with bayonet lugs. Any mass shooters who really feel the need to attach a blade to the end of their rifle can do it quite easily with duct tape.

Is any politician actually stupid enough to commit political suicide by suggesting that the United States adopt a gun control policy even vaguely similar to Australia or Great Britain? We have this thing in the United States called the Bill Of Rights, which takes precedence over any contradicting law, and one of the things that it recognizes is the right of the individual citizen to own firearms. That's "right," not "privilege." the only way to change that is to reinterpret the entire Bill Of Rights or suspend it completely. That just plain ain't gonna happen.

Total cliche that it is, guns don't kill people, other people do. Guns might be the currently favored method of accomplishing the task, but it isn't the ONLY method available. There are alternatives, some far more destructive than an AR15 and a few 30 round magazines. Eliminating the guns won't stop the mass killings.

(And now I'm gonna go stand in a corner and try to get my heart rate back down.)
 
Yeah, but by doing something like that, you would be playing directly into their hands. It's attention that they want, however they can get it, exactly the same as the mass shooters. Denying them that will do far more to discourage both situations than all the hoopla by the news media and insincere rhetoric of the politicians. These people crave headlines. Without that, they will eventually simply go away.

My brain might know better. But my heart doesn't really care. If I saw someone protesting at a gay person's funeral, I could not just stand by.
 
Banning guns in the US similar to how they did in Australia, just won't work. Aussies have this dumb trust in government, and a sense of safety, that people in the US (or other parts of the world) do not. It's simply not safe enough for people in US to risk it.

If I listen to the media, police are stopping terrorist atracks a few times a year here?

02 was the Sari club bombings, my friends were going there for leavers (end of school celebration) after graduation. Lucky graduation wasn't until November! Over 200 people killed in late October, we all knew someone who knew someone, it was a huge shock. Those were BOMBs made by people who could barely read - and have since been put to death.

Lindt cafe "terrorist" got access to guns alright in Australia. He even openly threatened the public and government!
 
Such terrible news...The blow was felt, even here, in the Netherlands as well. There were national vigils in many European countries and they showed their solidarity with LGBT+ community. I take comfort in this during this saddening time.
 
Aussies have this dumb trust in government, and a sense of safety, that people in the US (or other parts of the world) do not.

To paraphrase Ben Franklin, anyone who surrenders their freedom for (the illusion of) safety loses both, and probably deserves neither. I know that a lot of people might see that as cold blooded, but it's a fact illustrated many times throughout history.
 
Honestly I doubt that anything will ever convince the government to ban guns here. There could be some crazy tragedy with 1,000 people (mostly children) shot dead at an NRA convention that doubled for a Republican National Convention and still nothing would happen. 🙄
 
This should be self explanatoryView attachment 7412

The most dangerous places to be in the United States are the places where guns aren't allowed. Who would have guessed?

Be careful trusting statistics though. Like I said they can be twisted to suit a political agenda or they can only reflect one side of a story etc...
 
GwenRaiden
GwenRaiden
Really!!!!??? I don't think anyone knew THAT.
Well, that supports MY agenda. The gun grabbers are free to post their own equally biases statistics if they want to.

That's not what I meant. What I was saying is that statistics are very black and white, and don't factor in everything, and they lack context. To give a very basic example, a voting poll leading up to a election might show one party leading in a certain part of a country, such as the midlands (England for those of you who don't know😉), but what that poll wouldn't tell you is that certain parts of the midlands are bigger than others. And even if they polled people on the streets, not all of those people would vote come election day, and they may ask them something like "If the election was today which party would you vote for?" Well even if they say, I would vote Labour, there's still a chance they would switch parties come the date, or as is so often the case nowadays many people are undecided.
 
That's not what I meant.

I know, and I totally agree. I've seen far too many "studies" that do nothing more than support an opinion, as opposed to actually verifying the facts. The fact remains, the only area in which killings is actually increasing in the U S is the sort of mass killings/terrorist attacks such as Orlando, but the politicians never mention that fact. Almost exclusively, when something like this happens, it is at a location where the shooter knows that the chance that anyone will be able to fight back effectively. Those are facts that are exclusively ignored by politicians, and the largely liberal news media, and those facts absolutely present a vital point that should be addressed and handled instead of wasting all this time on gun control rhetoric that serves no purpose beyond raising blood pressure unnecessarily.
 
I just found this...

'Angels' to block Westboro Baptist Church's protest at Orlando memorial

Just goes to show, even in the darkest of times, there's always a light shining somewhere.

I wonder about the leadership of the Westboro Baptist Church. I am straight but I have no animosity against gays. The only people who seem to have animosity against gays appear to be people like the shooter, who was gay. I suspect that is the case with the leadership of Westboro Baptist - they can't come to grips with being gay, just like the shooter.
 
I wonder about the leadership of the Westboro Baptist Church. I am straight but I have no animosity against gays. The only people who seem to have animosity against gays appear to be people like the shooter, who was gay. I suspect that is the case with the leadership of Westboro Baptist - they can't come to grips with being gay, just like the shooter.

The shooter wasn't gay. The shooter scouted the gay club for the shooting and that's why he was seen there. There's been no confirmation that he was gay. That's just a rumor the media is trying to spread so that straight homophobic people can say "eh look, he was just a closeted gay and that's why he did this". That way they don't have to associate their own homophobia with the homophobia of the shooter. And trust me, even if the shooter was gay and homophobic, it doesn't change the fact that homophobia is a taught behavior, and no, it's not just closeted gays that are homophobic. The majority of homophobic people are straight.
 
brinkster130
brinkster130
I think there is a possibility he was gay, given the people who have come out saying as much...but I totally agree that homophobia is learned and is not only people dealing with self hate. Sadly anyone can be taught to hate.
No one wants to ban guns. The question is whether people on the terror watch list should be allowed to purchase guns, including automatic weapons. That seems a pretty basic way of fighting terrorist attacks.
 
Back
Top Bottom