|
Madkal posted:It's been pointed out before but Australia, a country with strict gun laws, doesn't have mas shootings, though America, which has loose gun laws does. But hey, American land of the free. Australia had extremely few mass shootings BEFORE their strict gun laws and the number of mass murders caused by other means (melee weapons, arson, etc.) is only slightly lower than the total before the gun law change. The changes also came into effect after an unusual spike in gun violence that was statistically an outlier from the past history that could have just as easily dropped on its own.
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 18:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 14:05 |
|
|
Ularg posted:A handy guide for him if you ever decide to touch the poop: I touched the poop with a bad joke. quote:Yes. There are now more terrorist groups that need American arms and financial aid. Think of the terrorist's children! I feel ashamed. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 18:26
|
|
|
chitoryu12 posted:Australia had extremely few mass shootings BEFORE their strict gun laws and the number of mass murders caused by other means (melee weapons, arson, etc.) is only slightly lower than the total before the gun law change. The changes also came into effect after an unusual spike in gun violence that was statistically an outlier from the past history that could have just as easily dropped on its own. Americans in general are the real problem.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 18:27
|
|
|
chitoryu12 posted:Australia had extremely few mass shootings BEFORE their strict gun laws and the number of mass murders caused by other means (melee weapons, arson, etc.) is only slightly lower than the total before the gun law change. The changes also came into effect after an unusual spike in gun violence that was statistically an outlier from the past history that could have just as easily dropped on its own. Well you could say it only took one mass shooting for them to change their law, instead of waiting to see if mass shootings would ever become the norm in the future.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 18:36
|
|
|
Which countries with strict gun laws see mass shootings? Particularly compared to a certain nation in which gun regulation is rather lax?
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 18:48
|
|
|
Kajeesus posted:Which countries with strict gun laws see mass shootings? Particularly compared to a certain nation in which gun regulation is rather lax? Mexico has strict gun laws and lots of gun violence. So we help them by sending guns to their gun clubs. The Spanish word for gun club is "el cartel."
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 18:57
|
|
|
Maker Of Shoes posted:Americans in general are the real problem. Guns don't kill people, Americans do... with guns.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 19:07
|
|
|
oldpainless posted:The point that thing is trying to make is that all those places on that list would assumedly be full of people carrying a weapon. Despite being in the military and on a military base, most people aren't armed and don't have a firearm within a few seconds reach. The Government specifically tries to limit the number of people carrying a weapon on base. I've heard more than a few military guys point out that its stupid to trust a base full of 18-22 year olds who have been trained to kill at the drop of a hat. They have constant brawls on bases, and having those guys armed is not a good idea. Most weapons, down to and including fixed blade knives, are typically banned on bases unless you are on duty at the moment.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 19:12
|
|
|
Madkal posted:Well you could say it only took one mass shooting for them to change their law, instead of waiting to see if mass shootings would ever become the norm in the future. Actually there were at least 15 mass shootings in Australia from the 1971 up through Port Arthur in 1996, plus 1 incident of arson at a nightclub. Afterward there were 4 mass shootings, 3 arson attacks, 1 blunt instrument attack, and 1 mass stabbing of children. The actual number of casualties from mass murder has only slightly decreased. So a better explanation is "Australia took like 15 mass shootings to change the law, then still had a pretty similar number of mass murders with different methods instead."
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 19:36
|
|
|
My sister  
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 19:50
|
|
|
chitoryu12 posted:Actually there were at least 15 mass shootings in Australia from the 1971 up through Port Arthur in 1996, plus 1 incident of arson at a nightclub. Afterward there were 4 mass shootings, 3 arson attacks, 1 blunt instrument attack, and 1 mass stabbing of children. The actual number of casualties from mass murder has only slightly decreased. Well unfortunately you can't control people buying a box of matches, but gun violence is down still. But then again I hear the argument about why doing any gun control when people will just kill each other using other methods quite often. Thanks for the eye opener on mass shooting though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 20:02
|
|
|
Ularg posted:We just need more "Good Guys" with guns. As long as those "Good Guys" are God-fearing, Gay and Muslim hating Americans, women need not reply. The last good guy with a gun story I heard ended with the good guy shooting the victim by mistake and fleeing the scene. I wonder what the good guy with a gun people had to say about that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 20:06
|
|
|
Busket Posket posted:My sister Your sister might be differently abled in the head.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 20:11
|
|
|
Murphys Law posted:The last good guy with a gun story I heard ended with the good guy shooting the victim by mistake and fleeing the scene. I wonder what the good guy with a gun people had to say about that. Wasn't good, guy or gun enough, obviously.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 20:15
|
|
|
Ularg posted:You-Know-Who on my friends list has been working non-stop to fill my feed with garbage. And yet the same people insist that we need laws to keep pervs out of ladies' bathrooms. Ok guy. Murphys Law posted:The last good guy with a gun story I heard ended with the good guy shooting the victim by mistake and fleeing the scene. I wonder what the good guy with a gun people had to say about that. The answer is "No true Scotsman". Obviously that fella wasn't a True Responsible Gun Owner (TM).
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 20:28
|
|
(I wish I had a list of how many "good guys with guns" were at each shooting, but I really don't need to get any more depressed today)
|
Madkal posted:Well unfortunately you can't control people buying a box of matches, but gun violence is down still. But then again I hear the argument about why doing any gun control when people will just kill each other using other methods quite often. Well, gun violence is down in the sense that the new gun laws didn't really do a whole lot that wouldn't have happened naturally. The new gun laws after Port Arthur were enacted in 1996, and you actually see that gun violence in Australia was on a downward trend in general since the 1970s. The Port Arthur massacre was a random statistical spike, the likes of which happened repeatedly in previous decades and were often followed by declines just as sharp or sharper than after the enactment of the 1996 gun laws. In general, murder actually saw a spike after the 1996 gun laws while manslaughter has remained almost exactly the same for decades. Statistically, the laws have done nothing that random chance hasn't. It's more likely that gun violence changes are due to changes in economic conditions and culture, the usual things that affect crime rate. Regardless of your opinion on whether new gun laws would be a benefit in the United States, Australia is actually a really lovely example to use. I've seen a ton of Australians bring out the "After Port Arthur we enacted a bunch of new gun laws and haven't had a mass shooting since and our gun violence dropped" argument, but it's just not true at all. So this: Maker Of Shoes posted:Americans in general are the real problem. is actually the more likely answer.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 20:39
|
|
|
Are We A Nation Of Gun Nuts...Or Are We Just NUTS???
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 20:49
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/fredwimpy/status/742333426703945733
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 21:02
|
|
|
Last I checked, porcupine needles were not designed for the explicit purpose of taking lives.
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 21:03
|
|
|
Electric Lady posted:Last I checked, porcupine needles were not designed for the explicit purpose of taking lives. Look man, a gun was designed to fire bullets. It's not the bullet's fault it was fired into something.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 21:15
|
|
|
Saw this today ...just saying...something doesn't add up...
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 21:30
|
|
|
Does he think liberals should have guns for hands?
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 21:53
|
|
|
I can't find it anymore, but a friend posted this thing saying "If I can't go to a Muslim country and drink beer and wear shorts,why should we cater to them?" I responded that when I visited two Muslim countries where I drank beer everyday and wore bikinis and no one gave a flying gently caress. She 'liked' my comment. So hopefully that means I educated her? Maybe she deleted it? One can only hope.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 22:16
|
|
|
Picnic Princess posted:I can't find it anymore, but a friend posted this thing saying "If I can't go to a Muslim country and drink beer and wear shorts,why should we cater to them?" I responded that when I visited two Muslim countries where I drank beer everyday and wore bikinis and no one gave a flying gently caress. She 'liked' my comment. So hopefully that means I educated her? Maybe she deleted it? One can only hope. Bit of both probably? I dunno, some people who make or share statuses like that, tend to back down once they get a contrasting response. It's better than them doubling down and argue with you, at least.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 22:20
|
|
|
chitoryu12 posted:Actually there were at least 15 mass shootings in Australia from the 1971 up through Port Arthur in 1996, plus 1 incident of arson at a nightclub. Afterward there were 4 mass shootings, 3 arson attacks, 1 blunt instrument attack, and 1 mass stabbing of children. The actual number of casualties from mass murder has only slightly decreased. But, that said, of the four mass shootings between 1996 and 2014, only one is really comparable to Port Arthur, and I think it's not out of the realm of possibility that it could have been much, much worse if the perpetrator had access to the same sort of gear as used in Port Arthur.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 22:24
|
|
|
Guns don't kill people. Gun Owners kill people. Let's just ban Gun Owners.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 22:26
|
|
|
RFC2324 posted:Wasn't Osama trained by the Reagan Administration? He wasn't. While it's true that the Reagan Administration was dumping tons of money and arms into Afghanistan, most of it was funneled through the ISI (Pakistan's intelligence service), and none of it was sent to Bin Laden or his group, at least directly or willfully on the CIA/Reagan's part. Bin Laden was for the most part, self-funded from his own family's wealth as well as having other Saudi financiers back his jihad in Afghanistan. I recommend reading Ghost Wars if you want to know more about it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 22:27
|
|
|
IamnotJoe posted:Guns don't kill people. Gun Owners kill people. Let's just ban Gun Owners. kill whitey
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 22:28
|
|
|
mng posted:kill whitey Muslim spotted
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 22:44
|
|
|
 C'mon man, you're not even god-king yet.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 23:56
|
|
|
mng posted:kill whitey You posted from the wrong account, FAROOQ.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 23:58
|
|
|
Ularg posted:You posted from the wrong account, FAROOQ. that's very insulting :/
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 23:59
|
|
|
John Big Booty posted:I wouldn't rest my argument on that list. I'd suggest comparing total casualties rather than the destruction of a single event. All of the mass murders from 1971 until 1996 (I'm discounting the biker gang shootout) counted for a total of 127 deaths and 35+ injured (the Whiskey Au Go Go fire had an untold number of injured). All of the mass murders after Port Arthur (discounting serial killings from 1992 to 1999 by a group) count for 62 deaths and at least 8 injured (several of the massacres were arson, so it's unknown how many were injured). You're going from an average of 5 deaths per year to 3.4 deaths per year from mass murder. Not a gigantic improvement.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 00:29
|
|
|
If America were to get a 32% reduction in the last 4 years, that's more than 300 people alive. 32% is a huge statistical change
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 01:10
|
|
|
Arctic Baldwin posted:If America were to get a 32% reduction in the last 4 years, that's more than 300 people alive. 32% is a huge statistical change Edit: Okay, I think we should probably stop and do this elsewhere since we've gotten way the gently caress off topic. chitoryu12 has a new favorite as of 01:25 on Jun 16, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 01:23
|
|
|
Lizard Wizard posted:
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 01:37
|
|
|
The most infuriating thing about this post is the complete lack of rhythm.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 01:44
|
|
|
I really want to imagine that even after he loses, Trump is just going to try and find a way to wage a private war against ISIS using his rabid (some might say "radical Christian") followers as
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 01:46
|
|
|
Lizard Wizard posted:
Just a reminder that Woodward and Bernstein worked for the Post and at the height of their investigation Nixon didn't even do this.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 01:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 14:05 |
|
|
BROCK LESBIAN posted:Just a reminder that Woodward and Bernstein worked for the Post and at the height of their investigation Nixon didn't even do this. "Woodward and Bernstein, began a series of stories that linked a burglary at Democratic Party headquarters to the campaign to re-elect Nixon. The Watergate stories, named for the office complex where the break-in took place, led to Nixon's resignation in 1974 and a Pulitzer Prize for the Post. Along the way the Post and its leader faced intense pressure, both from the Nixon administration and from other media that ignored the story for months. Attorney General John Mitchell, responding to a story linking him with the scandal, exploded at Bernstein: "Katie Graham's [owner of the Washington Post] gonna get her tit caught in a big fat wringer if that's published." Graham professed shock, less at Mitchell's metaphor than at the nickname "Katie," which she never used. She briefly wore a small gold laundry wringer and a tiny gold breast on a chain around her neck."
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 02:02
|
|
