Gun Control

MutantScalper said:
What does that have to do with the price of cheese?



What does that have to do with the price of cheese?

The subject of this thread is gun control. Try to stay on topic, please.
Click to expand...
It directly applies to the conversation at hand. If you don't like my argument, rebutt it. But don't tell me how to make my own points.

lolpop109 said:
'It's a reasonable conclusion that people who are fighting in a war would die more, so why should we be worried?'

Is that a contradiction ? Because I agree it is a reasonable conclusion that people in a war are fighting more, so why are the more death is US by shooting than in these war zones ? This is my point
Click to expand...
Because if you look at it in context, it's completely different. If we take your argument, just base deaths against base deaths, Canada, The UK and Australia all have the same problem: more people dying domestically than in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. And yet they have much stricter gun laws. Should we be worried about them?

If you take deaths PER CAPITA, however, it's a completely different story, as I presented in my previous post.

Dr Fallout said:
While I get what you're saying you're ENTIRELY ignoring the fact that their opponents have better weaponry and arms. While yes, it's true that the US military have protective gear, squadmates and hospital evacs, we also need to take into account enemy numbers, arms, tanks and military aircraft that kill more people.
Click to expand...
Which makes the Army vs. Civilian death comparison even more ridiculous. Especially concerning base v. base analysis.

Crni Vuk said:
Point is, you can not even get to try to fix a problem if you don't realize that there IS a problem. It feels like talking to an alcoholic. - I am not refering to you, I am saying in general, when it comes to the issue of mass shootings.
Click to expand...
We already have recognized a problem with mass shootings, though. Many states changed their laws after the Columbine High School shooting to make sure at-risk groups (like people under 18) would not be able to own guns or purchase them legally, and restricted gifting and selling locally much harder. Some tightened their background checks to make it harder for mentally ill people to own guns (which is toeing the line of what I would consider acceptable).

lolpop109 said:
I could't agree with this more !
Click to expand...
Is this really needed? This is "le +1 upboat for you sir" territory.
 
Operation Wignut said:
Which makes the Army vs. Civilian death comparison even more ridiculous. Especially concerning base v. base analysis.
Click to expand...
Except it doesn't... it shows that while the US have much harder opposition, armed with tanks, aircraft, numbers and heavy weaponry, random crazy guys with guns kill much more per year.
 
Dr Fallout said:
Except it doesn't... it shows that while the US have much harder opposition, armed with tanks, aircraft, numbers and heavy weaponry, random crazy guys with guns kill much more per year.
Click to expand...
Well, no. Actually that's completely wrong. Mass shooting deaths totalled 879 from 1966 to 2016. So the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, which lasted less than 20 years, killed almost 8 times more people than random crazy guys with guns in a 50 year timespan. Then there's the fact that there's 316 million people in the US. So comparing 2.7 million people to 316 million is utterly ridiculous and bordering on ignorant behavior. There are more people to kill in the US than deployed overseas, and yet the per capita death is 50 times greater overseas than here. Base v. base is a demonstrably false comparison and worthy of being called utterly ridiculous.

MutantScalper said:
No it doesn't.
Click to expand...
Yes it does.

Let's have a volley of these.
 
Operation Wignut said:
Well, no. Actually that's completely wrong. Mass shooting deaths totalled 879 from 1966 to 2016. So the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, which lasted less than 20 years, killed almost 8 times more people than random crazy guys with guns in a 50 year timespan. Then there's the fact that there's 316 million people in the US. So comparing 2.7 million people to 316 million is utterly ridiculous and bordering on ignorant behavior. There are more people to kill in the US than deployed overseas, and yet the per capita death is 50 times greater overseas than here. Base v. base is a demonstrably false comparison and worthy of being called utterly ridiculous.
Click to expand...
I agree, I narrowed the amount of gun deaths in the US too far.
 
Guns are expensive. Ammo is expensive. Unless you live so far out in the country that you can build your own shooting range, range time is expensive. So owning guns and ammo and having the means to practice marksmanship is a luxury. That's gun control.

I own several guns and a bit of ammo despite the fact I'm poor, but because I'm poor I rarely get a chance to practice. I enjoy target shooting (used to take potshots at squirrels on my birdfeeder with a pellet pistol but other than that have never shot a living thing) and cowboy action stuff with my muzzleloaders. I listen to friends who were raised to guns (I was raised by hippies) about the glory days when you could get an old bolt-action rifle and a 440-round can of ammo for $75. *sigh*

Anybody who says they don't enjoy a good explosion is lying through their teeth.
 
Operation Wignut said:
Yes it does.

Let's have a volley of these.
Click to expand...

Ok so you don't want to talk about gun control, you prefer to talk about, say, the price of cheese. Hey how about I make a thread about the price of cheese and you can go over there to talk about cheese, cars, diseases, ice cream, swimming pools, knives, etc. This thread is for discussing gun control.
 
Operation Wignut said:
Mass shooting deaths totalled 879 from 1966 to 2016. So the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, which lasted less than 20 years, killed almost 8 times more people than random crazy guys with guns in a 50 year timespan.
Click to expand...

In the US crazy guys with cars killed nearly the equivalent of that in 2014 alone. The simple nonsense of running red-lights.

Supposedly it is 'Stop on Red [light]' week here in the US; and they are stressing the following suggestions:
  • Yellow lights are an indicator to slow down and prepare to stop.
  • Come to a complete stop before turning right on red.
  • Scan intersections and approach with caution, even if the light is green.
  • Yield to pedestrians. The right of way is theirs.
It's about as nuts as printing instructions on a box of toothpicks.
toothpicks2.png


.
 
Operation Wignut said:
It directly applies to the conversation at hand. If you don't like my argument, rebutt it. But don't tell me how to make my own points.
Click to expand...
Apply your argument to any other subject:
Operation Wignut said:
We've been trying to end the Plague for decades and yet it has killed 100,000,000 people. We have thousands of witch doctors, better medical knowledge, and yet the Plague has been responsible for countless deaths. What do you propose we do to resolve THAT situation?

Meanwhile the Hundred Years' War is literally a deadly war, hundreds of thousands have fought in it, and yet Plague kills more people. Coupled with the fact that treatises are already ineffective (the Lancastrian War's already a real problem) and yet no one is avoiding the Plague. Every single case of Plague that has ended a life in this country is legal.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top