- All Debates
- Popular Debates
- Active Debates
- New Debates
- Open Challenge Debates
- My Challenge Debates
- Accepted Challenges
- Debate Communities
- Argument Waterfall
- New People
- People by Points
That's brilliant! I wonder if that would work with drugs too!
I wonder if drugs and guns are the same thing? Are drugs and guns the same thing Amarel? I mean, they are certainly pretty similar aren't they? One gets you high while the other shoots holes in people.
You are just literally a fucking idiot. Comparing drug bans to gun bans instead of actual gun bans (like the highly successful ones in the UK and Australia)!!! 😂👌 That's exactly the toxic level of stupidity we have all come to expect from you mate.
You probably don't mean period. I'm sure you're for "trained units which are licensed to carry guns" keeping them.
I mean period. I don't advocate anybody having a gun outside of designated warzones. Armed police units are simply a countermeasure against a small hardcore criminal element who can and do still obtain them in spite of the law. A criminal element who would be running the country without the existence of armed police.
Shut your face please. I can sense the slime running down your chin.
Yeah? Your police go unarmed to arrest suspects with guns?
Are you literally retarded? Our suspects don't carry guns because we haven't legalised and flooded the country with them. On the rare occasions firearms are involved the police employ specialised, trained units which are licensed to carry guns.
You're just SUCH an idiot. 😂🤦♂️
most police forces throughout the world either arm all their front line officers
No they don't you fucking idiot. You have more chance of being struck by lightning than witness a terrorist attack, you paranoid, scared little coward. I live in the UK and our front line officers don't need guns to attend domestic disturbances and traffic violations because they aren't likely to be shot in the face while making an arrest.
You can't take guns away from people who want them without the help of people who have them.
Oh God, you're just SO RIDICULOUS. Every other civilised country has managed to do exactly that, you deeply insane, blathering halfwit. You don't need to take guns away from people once you pass a law banning them. It then becomes AGAINST THE LAW to possess a gun, so anybody who retains a gun risks being sent to jail.
They’re brainwashed sheeple and the statements regards guns in society get more and more outrageous every day it’s actually hard to top Amarels one last week as in “ we are a nation of gun safety fanatics “ ...... how can one country produce so many idiots?
Religion and hardcore far right politics, over a period of many decades. They actually teach these people that any form of criticism is born of jealousy. That's literally what your mum tells you as a kid!!! In many ways Americans have the same level of naivety as children.
The keyword is "control". Some of those people with "shaped minds" have trouble with word recognition, they see the word "confiscation".
You are not unaffected by it yourself, my friend. I know you think you are, but you aren't.
I don't advocate "control". I advocate taking guns away, period. I'd take them away from the civilians and from the police. If you want to live in a violent society then indoctrinate the population into religion and give them all guns. If you don't then do something else.
It’s weird how some people actually think guns are bad for society when it’s so obvious only a fool would dispute the fact the more guns in society the less crime in that society and the more peaceful it is
It's truly disconcerting that anybody could believe this stuff mate. It really demonstrates how people's minds can be shaped to believe pretty much anything.
What’s truly tragic about this imbecile is that every statement he makes about the law or economics in the US is always wrong and when you correct him he invents a new narrative to fit with his updated reinterpretation
Lol. That's a precise analysis of what any conversation with him is like. Everything he ever says is absurd, and when you object to its absurdity he distorts language and reason in any way possible as an alternative to taking your point. Often he will include provocation and insults to try to elicit an emotional response from you.
I've found this to be an increasingly common pattern of behaviour on the American right, as the tethers attaching them to factual reality continue to disintegrate in the post-truth era of politics. Much of the academic reasoning behind right wing American ideology -- things like rational market theory etc... -- which supported it for so many years has collapsed under further scrutiny, and these people now have nowhere else to turn except conspiracy theories and delusion.
Once again, BurritoLunch is revealing just how evident their lack of character is in this regard. Always calling someone a racist when you find that they have a differing opinion.
Differing opinion? 😂🤦♂️
A police officer is currently on trial for killing a black man. The autopsy reports and expert testimony all confirm the officer's actions resulted in the man's death.
On the basis of literally nothing, Amarel is rejecting the autopsy reports and the expert testimony, and arbitrarily declaring the man died from a Fentanyl overdose.
That isn't "differing opinion". That's wilful rejection of the facts of this case.
If he had died alone in his apartment of fentanyl, it would be a homicide you ignorant fuck.
Homicide: the killing of one person by another.
Make note to self. Must learn difference between homicide and drug overdose.
The official autopsy was the first one done by the states medical examiner.
Who also ruled it a homicide, not a Fentanyl overdose.
Why are you so wilfully dishonest, Amarel?
That's the original source we have access to. That's the one you're ignoring.
Ignoring it? It fucking well agrees with me!!! It rules the death a homicide, not a drug overdose. You are:-
A) Ignoring that it disagrees with you.
B) Ignoring that the State Medical Examiner might not be the most reliable source in an investigation into state culpability for a civilian death.
I'll give it to you plain and simple Amarel. You are an obnoxiously dishonest, thoroughly offensive, spineless little racist halfwit.
Really? You're now going to claim that the cause of death is neck compression? Uh huh
They aren't my claims you delusional halfwit. They are what the autopsy report says:-
A new, independent autopsy ordered by George Floyd's family has determined he was killed by "asphyxiation from sustained pressure”.
On 1st Monday June, the family released the findings, which noted Floyd’s killing was "caused by asphyxia due to neck and back compression that led to a lack of blood flow to the brain.”
You literally live on a different planet you stupid racist fuck. 😂👌
A number of medical experts have weighed in.
Oh, OK. So the experts who performed the autopsy didn't give you the answer you were looking for, therefore you need to find others who will?
You have consistently accepted some medical experts and rejected those with contradicting opinions.
Both autopsies ruled the cause of death as homicide and a separate lung expert has just thrown out your narrative that it was a Fentanyl overdose.
And what do you have in refutation to those experts?
Oh, that's right. Absolutely nothing. More of the exact same bog standard Amarel bullshit.
On cross examination Chauvin's attorney asked if fentanyl can cause hypoxia/asphyxia and Doc said yes. When asked if meth can cause hypoxia, Doc said it can.
Here's what he actually said, as per the headlines:-
Contradicting the defence, Dr Martin Tobin said fentanyl did not cause Mr Floyd's death. He said even a "healthy person...would have died".
Fentanyl wasn’t what slowed George Floyd’s breathing, lung expert testifies in Derek Chauvin trial