17 dead children, what is appopriate?
Less guns.
Side Score: 28
|
 |
More guns.
Side Score: 23
|
|
|
|
|
One thing that is appropriate in America is to continue to protect the rights of those dead children ... agreed? They have the right to remain silent! They have the right to rest in peace! They have the right to be missed! They have the right to wonder ... if they COULD, just whose "rights" are more important, the ones they USED to have, or the rights they have NOW! The rights given by the Second Amendment in (not sure, around 1793), when maybe ONE child could have been killed before all the rest could clear the building, or the rights (claimed by the arrogant), that allow the slaughter of dozens before some can even realize what is happening! Had this idiot, and the several before him, had a handgun with a few rounds before he had to reload, how many more would be around to enjoy many more than the limited "rights" available to those dead children today. Whose rights are more important than theirs?? NRA members?, Posse members? "Militia" members? The RIGHT to life and the pursuit of happiness is not measured by ownership of the biggest, baddest GUN! I have always owned guns, love to shoot. I don't NEED an assault weapon, those who do are "mentally ill" and shouldn't HAVE ANY gun! Side: Less guns.
What you don't get Crazy Al is the politicians you Progressives want to fix everything including guns are protected by a security force of armed people in Washington,DC and every state capital in all 50 States ! Now Al are we to believe you Progressives are more interested in protecting your Precious Politicians than the precious children in public schools? Side: More guns.
2
points
Dispense ballistic shields and helmets immediately the assault weapons falls under the First Amendment by being incapable of holding any self-value. By using regulation in this way it enrages the use of humans sacrifice to reach a goal that is every bit as illegal as the crime of murder that took place. Side: More guns.
1
point
|
1
point
Banning guns and adding more laws won’t do anything. Thorough backround checks, banning bump stocks, and raising the legal age however will help. Teachers should also be allowed to carry firearms. If more people at the school posses firearms, it would probably deter most trigger happy, mentally ill school shooters. Side: More guns.
2
points
Mentally ill people DON'T conform to the norms of society.. That's what makes them mentally ill. SOME social norms should be conformed too, but in a lot of ways it's SOCIETY that's mentally ill. Conformity to social norms is not the standard by which you should judge someones mental stability. For example, if you grow up as an ashkenazi jew and the social norm is to chop foreskins off and suck the blood out of a baby's dick then you are mentally ill if you DO follow social norms. Side: More guns.
Mentally ill people DON'T conform to the norms of society.. That's what makes them mentally ill. FactMachine nailed it when he pointed out that it is the society itself which is mentally ill. Gun culture is celebrated and worshipped in the United States, so is it any wonder that people are using guns for what they are actually designed for? Whether the people committing mass shootings are neurotic or not is not the point and neither is whether they are conforming to the norm. The point is that there is, on average, more than one mass shooting per day in the United States. That is one crazy person killing innocent people every single day of the year. The entire point in banning dangerous weapons in the first place is so crazy people can't get their hands on them. Nine out of every ten people might be able to own a rocket launcher without using it to blow up the neighbourhood, but it isn't the nine sane people who matter. It's the one maniac who kills thirty people and then commits suicide by jumping off a building. Side: More guns.
1
point
1
point
In 2015, 10,265 people died in alcohol-impaired driving crashes, accounting for nearly one-third (29%) of all traffic-related deaths in the United States. So you tell me with each child dying from a drunk driver, why the Left is not all over the media pretending to be outraged over these innocent children's deaths? Do you have any idea how many more children are killed by drunk drivers than by guns in schools? Where is the outrage and demand for alcohol regulations and back ground checks in public bars, nightclubs, etc. If the real reasons for more gun control legislation is to save lives, why won't the Left propose laws mandating back ground checks in public places that sell alcohol to possible repeat DWI offenders? I don't want this, but if your goal is to save lives with all your anti Gun rhetoric, you should be over joyed to save many thousands more lives by having background checks on people before buying alcohol in public places. Do you have any idea how many times repeat DWI drivers continue to drink and drive? Approximately 40% of drunk drivers are repeat offenders! They drive even when their licenses are revoked! The only way to prevent this is to do a background check before they buy that weapon of death.....ALCOHOL! Wait, what you say? You say you don't want to be inconvenienced by background checks when buying alcohol? You say you are a law abiding citizen who would never drink and drive? You say you don't want to pay more for alcohol to pay for those background checks for past DWI drivers? I THOUGHT YOUR GOAL WAS TO SAVE LIVES? You expect law abiding citizens to pay more and put up with all the inconvenience from your anti gun legislation, but when it comes to your alcohol...... HANDS OFF? A drunk driver behind the wheels of a car happens millions of times more often than some lunatic with a gun! The odds of you or your loved one being killed by a drunk driver is far higher than the odds of being shot at a concert or Church. You are hypocrites and total jokes. You prove you could not care less about saving lives. You final goal is to take our guns. You always spew your ludicrous reasoning why only guns should be singled out to save lives. A police state is just fine as long as it only controls one particular weapon of death..... the gun. You say we already have alcohol restrictions? Yes, and we already have gun restrictions. You can't buy a gun under age, the same as alcohol. We can't shoot people, you can't hunt near public places and you can not drink and drive. BUT PEOPLE STILL DO IT! IT'S NOT THE WEAPON OF CHOICE, BUT THE PERSON BEHIND THAT WEAPON. Use the brain God gave you and start addressing why people grow up to be criminals, or become irresponsible drinkers who have no problem drinking and driving. Start addressing the core problem instead of their weapon of choice. Side: More guns.
0
points
I'd like to see a single statistic that shows any decrease in violent crime after a single piece of gun control legislation. It hasn't happened yet, and even if it had according to federal statistics at https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/ascii/ Side: More guns.
I'd like to see a single statistic that shows any decrease in violent crime after a single piece of gun control legislation. The very fact that you purport to require "statistics" to illustrate the most basic piece of common sense fathomable only proves that you are irreversibly biased and cannot be reasoned with. Guns are designed specifically to make violence easier, quicker and more deadly than would ordinarily be possible. That is their entire purpose you idiotic, brainwashed retard. In the United States 30,000 people lose their lives every year to guns. In Great Britain, where most guns are outright banned, that number is around 50 every year. You're a moron. And that sir, is factually accurate. Side: Less guns.
|
