CreateDebate


Debate Info

11
12
YES, b4 they kill the children NO, shit happens regardless
Debate Score:23
Arguments:24
Total Votes:24
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 YES, b4 they kill the children (9)
 
 NO, shit happens regardless (7)

Debate Creator

westernslave(695) pic



should we ban knives now? thanks to the mass killing in china....

or start making sure nobody that has any "mental illnesses" get their hands on one? (lmao @ you idiots...yes you 4real)

33 dead and 160 injured before police/GUNS could put a stop to it.

im actually pretty pleased to see this happened. (too bad it was in china and not the usa) its time you fuckheaded antigun nuts see what people can do without a gun if motivated.

i bet this story wont be drilled into us americans by the MSM...like they do with gun violence/crimes/false flags....if they do, it will be for the "terrorists are still out there and want to kill you" agenda

 

YES, b4 they kill the children

Side Score: 11
VS.

NO, shit happens regardless

Side Score: 12
1 point

Knives that are specifically designed for combat, yes. Knives that have other uses, no.

Side: YES, b4 they kill the children
5 points

There were ten attackers you dumb fuck... that's only three victims per attacker! If they had guns there would have been way more victims you fucking idiot!

(I'm not for banning guns at all... I just wanted to act like an angry, arrogant, fucking over the top asshole like you!)

Side: NO, shit happens regardless
2 points

the 160 injured werent victims?

1, 5 or 10 attackers...it makes no difference...if people want to fuck some shit up...they will.

of course they could have killed more with guns...and guess what smartass...if they had used dynamite, they would have done even more damage than with guns.

i will give your comment a point upwards so you feel special pointing out there were 10 attackers...im actually surprised you didnt refer to them as terrorists

Side: YES, b4 they kill the children
Hellno(17756) Disputed
2 points

the 160 injured werent victims?

I'd rather be injured than DEAD!

1, 5 or 10 attackers...it makes no difference

Actually it does... if there was only 1 attacker then there would have only been 3 killed, not 33... Duh. Not to mention that you wouldn't have even heard about it so there would be a difference.

of course they could have killed more with guns...and guess what smartass...if they had used dynamite, they would have done even more damage than with guns.

Of course they could have killed more with dynamite... and guess what smart ass... if they had used nukes, they would have done even more damage than with dynamite.

i will give your comment a point upwards so you feel special

Don't bother... nothing you could do would make me feel special.

im actually surprised you didnt refer to them as terrorists

What fucking difference does that make? If the victims were terrorized then they were terrorists to them. To the separatists they were heros. To the Chinese government they're Dead Men Walking.... who gives a shit what they're called?

Side: NO, shit happens regardless
lupusFati(790) Disputed
1 point

Ummm... Am I really the only one to realize that you're wrong when you say 'three victims per attacker'?

33 Victims, 10 Attackers...

3 times 10 = 30.

So yeah.

Side: YES, b4 they kill the children
Hellno(17756) Disputed
1 point

I don't know what you're talking about unless your dispute is over .30 (which would be completely ridiculous)

33 victims divided by 10 attackers = 3.30

So yeah.

Side: NO, shit happens regardless

if hitler & the germans were really trying to kill all the jews...they would have used a knife...and you bet your ass that 6 million figure would have been true....probably a hell of a lot more.

Side: NO, shit happens regardless
Atrag(5556) Disputed
1 point

if hitler & the germans were really trying to kill all the jews...they would have used a knife...

Is that a joke? Gas is a lot more time effective that sawing at peoples necks one by one.

Side: YES, b4 they kill the children
1 point

youre a joke

the jews were very easy to control...you think it wouldnt have been hard for the nazi's to take them one by one into a bathroom, slice their throats, drain the blood in the tubs, put them in a wheel barrel and then dump them in a huge fucking grave? using that method how many jews do you think could have been disposed of per day by a small number of nazi's?

...in the time it would take to get 50 jews to strip naked for their "showers"...the nazi's could have slit 25 throats and tossed 25 bodies into a hole.

if the goal was to exterminate the jews...i think the highly intelligent germans would have been more efficient at it.

how to kill 6 million jews
Side: NO, shit happens regardless
1 point

If you ban knives, then it will be quite easy enough for a lawbreaker to make one of his own, and then attack helpless citizens who do not have knives because they are law-obeying people. Plus, really? Who would attack with a knife? That's a little stupid...

Side: NO, shit happens regardless