Walmart shooting

[Bread.]

an argument based around the fact that something is lawful (IE: your constitution argument) is a logical fallacy..

Australia is a good example.

Apples to Oranges comparison..

Australia is not America

Australian’s have no constitutional right to bear arms.
The British granted Australia nationhood peacefully where as the United States had to fight for it and ratify its own constitution with amendments to protect democracy and prevent tyranny and oppression. Precisely why the 2nd ammendment is written in the constitution.

The rate of firearm ownership in the United States is significantly higher than Australia (101.5 compared to 12.1
per 100 population)

Mass shootings continued to increase in the US during the 10 year-period that the US Federal Assault Weapons Ban(1994-2004)
was effective compared to the decline with Australias 1996 ban.

Gun laws, especially those that aim to resolve less than 0.5% of the nations GUN VIOLENCE isnt going to solve anything;

 

[Frombo]

its not an Apples to Oranges comparison. excluding statistics because they are from countries that aren't the USA is taking out all of the possible opposing arguments. Of course you'd like that.

theres no better analogy so I'll just say whats happening here.

"Any statistics that prove me wrong can't be included because *USA chants*"

thats terrible debate form Bread. Let me Jeff Foxworthy this:

"If you have to throw out any statistics that prove you wrong in a debate, you might be losing the debate"

 

[Bread.]

"If you have to throw out any statistics that prove you wrong in a debate, you might be losing the debate"

which is why you failed to address any of my statistics

 

[Frombo]

Nah. its because that really is an Apple to Oranges comparison. The 1996 ban Australia implemented was much more strict compared to the US's 1994-2004 assault rifles ban. the reduced number of deaths in Australia and continued downward trend that continues even today is a result of much stricter limitations. I didn't fail to address them, its just that what you said wasn't a valid response. bad debate form.

 

[Frombo]

the fact is, you can look at any country with strict gun laws and notice a drastic difference of gun related deaths when compared to the USA. thats just a fact. thats not a coincidence.

Major Gun Reform Laws= fewer gun related deaths.

it really is that easy.

 

[Bread.]

0.5%

 

[Frombo]

0.5% only applies if you think I'm talking about only applying heavy gun reform laws to weapons other than handguns. My logic is following what would happen if all guns underwent a reform of laws applying to them. I never said that I was on everyone else's side here. Everyone else typically agrees that they aren't saying this should effect all guns, just the heavy hitters. But I'm not saying that, I'm saying that it is a fact that if all guns had a heavy handed crackdown that gun related deaths would drop in the USA by at least 30% in five years. I'm not saying ban all guns, just heavily reform the laws regarding them. You can't argue these facts lol, countries with heavy sets of laws regarding guns have a drastically reduced amount of deaths related to guns. And if the USA adopted these types of laws they wouldn't be the exception, it can be said with 99% certainty that gun related deaths would drop at least 30% over five years. And 30% is a conservative figure.

 

[little cindy lou who]

the fact is, you can look at any country with strict gun laws and notice a drastic difference of gun related deaths when compared to the USA. thats just a fact. thats not a coincidence.

Major Gun Reform Laws= fewer gun related deaths.

it really is that easy.

What you are saying is correct .. you can easily say that and it's true .. but aside from the weapons used .. it's the proliferation of these

shootings .. so many, one follows another .. the news media is the stage the shooters want to be up on .. the news media

reporting these shootings as horrific as they are .. are giving the shooters what they want ..massive attention and notoriety

worst off all it's creating the copy cat effect ..

laws regulating firearms .. ok ...not giving the mass shooters a public platform .. ok .... but the mental health issue is numero uno

the Internet and social media factors into all of this .. it's where the mentally ill shooters marinade thier violent hateful views

most of all they want attention ... for example ... the parkland shooter in 2018 killed 17 people .. his reason ? " it was valentines day

and i wanted to ruin that for them cause i was lonely and nobody loved me " he even posted online " I'm going to be the next school

shooter " which was seen and reported to the FBI .. which ignored it ... so firearms regulation yeah ... but the big problem to solve is the

mental illness issue in all of this .. it's huge .. how will that be solved .. i don't know .. any ideas ?

 

[Frombo]

@little cindy lou who , you can't solve the problem of mental illness. but in your example, the parkland shooter would have killed a much smaller amount of people if he was only armed with a knife. I've said this previously, and maybe you didn't see it- I'd rather have 1000 maniacs armed with knives on the loose than 100 maniacs with guns.

 

[Bread.]

Still comparing apples to oranges.
Ive responded to every single one of your "statistics" and you jump over mine.

Nobody has yet to argue all the facts on page 6 cuz they cant

How do you propose you disarm an entire nation that has some 300+million firearms since its inception?
By removing the ones from all registered law abiding citizens first?
Or by trying to track down the unknown amount of firearms that criminals use plus the ones that are adding up day by day.

 

[little cindy lou who]

@little cindy lou who , you can't solve the problem of mental illness. but in your example, the parkland shooter would have killed a much smaller amount of people if he was only armed with a knife. I've said this previously, and maybe you didn't see it- I'd rather have 1000 maniacs armed with knives on the loose than 100 maniacs with guns.

agreed .. but " can't solve the problem of mental illness " ? ... some of these mass killings do not even involve guns they use vehicles running over a mass amount of people . ....

if the # 1 issue is mental illness and " it can't be solved " ... well .... now im depressed ... what's the answer then ?

 

[Bread.]

agreed .. but " can't solve the problem of mental illness " ? ... some of these mass killings do not even involve guns they use vehicles running over a mass amount of people . ....

if the # 1 issue is mental illness and " it can't be solved " ... well .... now im depressed ... what's the answer then ?

but but but, no guns means we wont have mass killings! or stabbings or explosions! make everything illegal and the deaths will stop!

 

[Frombo]

Bread so we've agreed that major gun reform laws would reduce the number of gun related deaths, and we're moving on to how that would be done? okay. well to answer your question about how exactly the US would have to take these guns, thats not my problem lol. All I'm claiming is that based on the statistics of every single country with majorly strict gun laws, it can be said with 99% certainty that deaths in the US related to guns would go down. And it can be said with 99% certainty, according to the statistics of again, every single country with strict gun laws, that the number would go down by at least 30% over 5 years.

TLDR: I never claimed to have the magic solution as to how the government would get these guns back. I only ever claimed (with evidence) that strict guns laws have always equaled fewer gun related deaths.

But one example for the solution could be something like what Australia did, they offered a buyback for all guns and would literally give you cash if you brought back your guns. But again, this is only a suggestion, it in no way takes away from the fact that the original debate has been settled.

 

[little cindy lou who]

but but but, no guns means we wont have mass killings! or stabbings or explosions! make everything illegal and the deaths will stop!

sarcasm noted and i can feel your frustration and pain .... exactly ... an awful problem with many factors involved in need of a workable viable solution

but the next one .. and i wish it wasn't true but there will be one ... the same conversations will take place ... ya tend to wanna throw up your hands and say WTF !!!!

 

[Bread.]

Bread so we've agreed that major gun reform laws would reduce the number of gun related deaths, and we're moving on to how that would be done? okay. well to answer your question about how exactly the US would have to take these guns, thats not my problem lol. All I'm claiming is that based on the statistics of every single country with majorly strict gun laws, it can be said with 99% certainty that deaths in the US related to guns would go down. And it can be said with 99% certainty, according to the statistics of again, every single country with strict gun laws, that the number would go down by at least 30% over 5 years.

TLDR: I never claimed to have the magic solution as to how the government would get these guns back. I only ever claimed (with evidence) that strict guns laws have always equaled fewer gun related deaths.

But one example for the solution could be something like what Australia did, they offered a buyback for all guns and would literally give you cash if you brought back your guns. But again, this is only a suggestion, it in no way takes away from the fact that the original debate has been settled.

I dont agree with any of that as it means giving up your constitutional rights and freedom, the very freedom many people have died for.

So you live in some fantasy dystopian future where guns dont exist. Kind of like planet of the apes(1968-good movie)
"All im claiming is... if guns didnt exist then wed have 0 people killing each other! 0 gun deaths" - frombo logic

But addressing your so called idea and the hundreds of millions of guns in existence and "its not your problem" but youre here to debate.

Hey guess what i have a solution to curb gun violence too! Lets just nuke the whole planet! 0 gun deaths after!

Yes the original debate was settled on page 6 of this thread, that we can agree on. Keep shitposting and dont forget to pm boba fett to smash that like button

 

[little cindy lou who]

police officers used to confiscate marijuana from anyone having that on them or in thier car and maybe even arrest them or just tell em go on ..
seems somewhat ironic .... that ganja was a problem for society that laws were made to arrest people for using ganja

i have no problem with law enforcement confiscating illegal weapons from anyone carrying them ...ILLEGAL weapons as in military assault weapons MADE ILLEGAL by a law being passed

what if you set up a program where people could turn in thier firearms for free ganja ?

I'd rather have a buncha stoners sitting around dazed and glazed than a buncha pissed off crazies with AR 15's that wanna shoot up

the mall cause they are having a bad hair day . and there is that twisted shiit in america about 2nd amendment rights

this country was built on the principles of individual freedom ... free to live as you please AS LONG AS YOU OBEY THE LAW

why do we need laws making it legal for insane whackatoids to purchase military grade weapons and then go out and destroy innocent
lives ?

there are solutions to any problem .... the problem of mass shootings is ENORMOUS and complicated ..... no easy answers

i still say it's 75 % a mental illness problem

 

[Bread.]

Criminals owning illegal weapons with 20 bodies that could land them in federal prison for 20+ years arent going to willingly give them up for some gift cards to Outbacks.

You are misinformed go read my page 6 posts. ARs are not "military grade weapons" in fact i think no military in the world uses ARs. While they do use guns that appear similar to an AR15 they are vastly different weapons.

The supposed gun law trying to be passed is trying to ban AR15s not "military weapons". Only a very small percentage of the USA has legally owned "military grade weapons"(class 3 firearms). About 630,000 compared to the 423,000,000 million-legally owned- firearms circulating the USA.

 

[little cindy lou who]

You are misinformed ARs are not "military grade weapons"

AR15 requires only one simple upgrade and it's as powerful as an M16 of which it is an actual variant of

in 1959 Armalite sold the rights to colt which then created a military grade fully automatic weapon variant the M16 used in Vietnam

which had a problem of jamming because it required tedious cleaning, soldiers negligent of that lost thier lives . i know the Armalite history

apples n oranges ..... you can talk firearms tech stuff all you want


the issue is mentally ill people committing mass killings with weapons .. high powered weapons military or otherwise

even a vehicle used to run over a mass amount of people or even bombs being planted ... limiting the use of the most powerful tools to kill can drop the numbers of these incidents

it's still .....A HUGE HORRIFIC MENTAL ILLNESS PROBLEM .... i guess that's the elephant in the room ... huh

 

[Bread.]

Those simple upgrades means years in prison. They will work to lay down suppressive fire, likely. No where near as accurate as an actual assault rifle means reduced lethality though.

I mean yes we can agree mental illness is the elephant in the room.

However i disagree that limiting the use of ARs is going to drop the numbers of these incidents. The data on page 6 shows this..

 

[Frombo]

but thank you for providing the classic example of someone starting to lose a debate and resorting to personal attacks that have nothing to do with the debate. I never said get rid of all guns, you're putting words in my mouth.

its almost like you're purposely ignoring the bulk of my points because they completely shatter your argument. all your points you made on page 6 became moot after my input.

you can't argue with facts. "wahh frombo's statistics all prove me wrong so I'm going to try and insult him personally instead"

I'm here to debate whether or not major gun reform would reduce the number of gun related deaths in the USA. and the statistics prove that they would. I know most Americans have this exceptionalism where yall think you're special but surely you'd think that logic wouldn't apply to something negative like gun related deaths.

"nah we're special the US would be the exception, even though every other country that has ever implemented strict gun reform laws has had drastically reduced gun related deaths, the US is so trash that it wouldn't effect us"

surely patriotism doesn't sink that deep, that you have to win a contest of who can kill the most people with guns?

again, the fact is, every single country that has strict gun laws has 1/100th of the gun related deaths that the US has. and no amount of personal insults can change that.