Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
OwlFancier
Aug 22, 2013

Like if you take the view that opportunity is not a component in mass killings then you should be entirely comfortable just leaving loaded shotguns around the place because obviously nobody would ever misuse them in the spur of the moment.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Gripweed
Nov 8, 2018

VitalSigns posted:

Yeah this is another really good point, clearly "can't get guns" is not the reason people do truck attacks in the USA now. Obviously they do truck attacks when they have a target that's good for truck attacks (like crowded sidewalks) and they do gun attacks when they have a target that's good for gun attacks but poor for truck attacks like a school or a movie theater.

So if they can't get guns then a whole bunch of potential targets are eliminated and they can't all be replaced with a conveniently timed crowd on a downtown street.

Yeah but the only way to stop truck attacks is to install bollards. If you think the NRA is bad, you don't want to see what happens when we start giving more money to Big Bollard and the Bollard Lobby.

Jaxyon
Mar 7, 2016
I’m just saying I would like to see a man beat a woman in a cage. Just to be sure.

patonthebach posted:

Do you think the type of people who want to be mass shooters / terrorists in england go "oh poo poo, we cant get a gun, better not commit this atrocity" or do they rent a uhaul and get some kitchen knives and do it anyways?

All available data says the former is what happens. Thanks for asking!

Just for reference, the US has about 1 mass shooter a day. How many mass truckings or knifings are happening. Is it one a day?

No.

vvv It's either realize you're wrong and you have hosed up views on guns, or just power through with cognitive dissonance.

Jaxyon fucked around with this message at 19:04 on Nov 16, 2018

Groovelord Neato
Dec 6, 2014


it's absolutely bizarre seeing people who got serial dunked on in the gbs version of this thread come back here for more punishment. vehicles are very rarely used as weapons, that link doesn't disprove it. plus it ignores that the primary use of a vehicle isn't to maim or kill which is a gun's sole reason for being.

Alhazred
Feb 16, 2011




patonthebach posted:



So long term, if one of the goals is to stop terrorists / mass shooters, after we ban guns and they switch to trucks, what do we ban next? Or only then do we have to fix the social problems that are leading to people wanting to commit those acts?


Stopping people from driving into crowds is almost laughable easy:

Gucci Loafers
May 20, 2006

Ask yourself, do you really want to talk to pair of really nice gaudy shoes?


Groovelord Neato posted:

it's absolutely bizarre seeing people who got serial dunked on in the gbs version of this thread come back here for more punishment. vehicles are very rarely used as weapons, that link doesn't disprove it. plus it ignores that the primary use of a vehicle isn't to maim or kill which is a gun's sole reason for being.

Does anyone have a link?

Curious, what the general outcome of most Gunchat threads? It always seemed as if they exploded into millions of pieces.

OwlFancier
Aug 22, 2013

Alhazred posted:

Stopping people from driving into crowds is almost laughable easy:


Quite notably in fact someone tried doing this outside parliament recently and very rapidly found out that you can't, because it's all hardened against vehicles and also there are shitloads of coppers with machineguns loitering about the place.

Groovelord Neato
Dec 6, 2014


Tab8715 posted:

Does anyone have a link?

Curious, what the general outcome of most Gunchat threads? It always seemed as if they exploded into millions of pieces.

you'd have someone like neseus iv who was wrong about everything but so sure of himself come in and poo poo it up for 20 pages and get nowhere.

VitalSigns
Sep 3, 2011

Alhazred posted:

Stopping people from driving into crowds is almost laughable easy:


But pointless because they will just karate chop people to death anyway.


patonthebach posted:

Agreed. USA needs comprehensive gun control asap.

Oh yeah

Alhazred
Feb 16, 2011




VitalSigns posted:

But pointless because they will just karate chop people to death anyway.


Footage captured from the latest ISIS training video:

khwarezm
Oct 26, 2010

Deal with it.
The truck mass killing or the pool control arguments are so baffling to me since if you look into those specific examples just a little you'd see there are actual policies that can be implemented and often have been implemented to *control* both issues when people realize their lethal potential. It's why you have things like Pool fencing laws, when I lived in Queensland that poo poo was dead serious. Likewise the rash of mass killings with vehicles recently prompted greater scrutiny of things like bollards in areas known to be public and crowded, which severely limits their potential, in addition to tighter controls on renting out a large vehicle to just anyone.

This sort of preventative stuff has been happening for decades, it's why regulations exist on fertilizers to stop some fuckface from pulling another Oklahoma city. Yes other methods can be used to kill lots of people, but like guns those other methods can be given similar restriction and control laws to kneecap their lethality, it's a dead end argument.

Elizabethan Error
May 18, 2006

khwarezm posted:

The truck mass killing or the pool control arguments are so baffling to me since if you look into those specific examples just a little you'd see there are actual policies that can be implemented and often have been implemented to *control* both issues when people realize their lethal potential. It's why you have things like Pool fencing laws, when I lived in Queensland that poo poo was dead serious. Likewise the rash of mass killings with vehicles recently prompted greater scrutiny of things like bollards in areas known to be public and crowded, which severely limits their potential, in addition to tighter controls on renting out a large vehicle to just anyone.

This sort of preventative stuff has been happening for decades, it's why regulations exist on fertilizers to stop some fuckface from pulling another Oklahoma city. Yes other methods can be used to kill lots of people, but like guns those other methods can be given similar restriction and control laws to kneecap their lethality, it's a dead end argument.
they're just shallow examples of things that *also* kill people, presented without critical examination because it fits their worldview and is therefore cool and good already

3D Megadoodoo
Nov 25, 2010

zapplez posted:

The whole "its too hard to stop people from using X so we can't ban it" is a really bad argument to make when you want to ban guns. Hell, its a dumb argument because on the same token that means we shouldn't ban meth or heroin because we know people will obtain it regardless.

Alcohol is much easier to manufacture than meth or heroin, too, so get hosed.

e: You literally need some orange juice and a bucket to make alcohol.

3D Megadoodoo fucked around with this message at 21:40 on Nov 17, 2018

Farking Bastage
Sep 22, 2007

Who dey think gonna beat dem Bengos!
There's a lot of chuds against the Red Flag laws, but it hits a little too close to home for me. Over the last few years, I KNEW my father was in a very bad mental state. He hadn't been right since his construction business went tits up in 2008. Increasingly paranoid, with a drug and an alcohol problem. He would get on a rip and indiscriminately fire his .44 magnum for no reason... IN TOWN. He ran off to colorado for about a year living out of his truck basically and came home 10-20-17 when my maternal grandmother died to attend the funeral. The morning of 10-23-17 he lost his poo poo again and shot my mother in the face with that .44 magnum, altered the crime scene, and tried to play it off as a suicide.

If Red flag was a thing then, I would have TOTALLY called him in. Flame away if you want, but I think that is a good thing to do at least until LEO starts abusing it to squash dissent.

Martin Random
Jul 18, 2003

by FactsAreUseless
I need a functional handgun with a slide and an insertable magazine. What's the hotness?

vincentpricesboner
Sep 3, 2006

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN
https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/19/us/mercy-hospital-chicago-shooting/index.html

Another shooting. How many hours until we can confirm the shooter was a mentally ill incel ?

stone cold
Feb 15, 2014

zapplez posted:

mentally ill

:fuckoff:

OwlFancier
Aug 22, 2013

Perhaps the pertinent point is that they shot people.

stone cold
Feb 15, 2014

I’ll tell you what we can immediately confirm, right now:

the shooter definitely owned guns

but let’s obfuscate the issue with fake concern about mental health

VitalSigns
Sep 3, 2011

OwlFancier posted:

Perhaps the pertinent point is that they shot people.

I've just been informed that the pertinent point as that they could have run over people

Panzeh
Nov 27, 2006

"..The high ground"
I think sub machine guns should be legal because they are proletarian weapons of choice.

vincentpricesboner
Sep 3, 2006

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

Yes, they are a persecuted, discriminated minority. On the other hand, they commit a fuckton of mass shootings. They need help. They need better funding so they can get the meds they need and the therapy they need. They need better laws to protect themselves from getting access to firearms.

OwlFancier
Aug 22, 2013

Every country has people with mental illness, only America has such a problem with mass shootings. Pretty sure that the problem isn't mentally ill people, gunfucker.

friendbot2000
May 1, 2011

Groovelord Neato posted:

it's absolutely bizarre seeing people who got serial dunked on in the gbs version of this thread come back here for more punishment. vehicles are very rarely used as weapons, that link doesn't disprove it. plus it ignores that the primary use of a vehicle isn't to maim or kill which is a gun's sole reason for being.

This is what gets me every goddamn time when someone counters with "well knives kill people." Knives are actual legitimate tools that have other uses than killing. I carry a pocket knife with me wherever I go because it is a legitimately useful multi-tool. Guns have only one use and one function and that is to kill.

Gripweed
Nov 8, 2018

zapplez posted:

Yes, they are a persecuted, discriminated minority. On the other hand, they commit a fuckton of mass shootings. They need help. They need better funding so they can get the meds they need and the therapy they need. They need better laws to protect themselves from getting access to firearms.

this is the one obfuscating chaff argument gun people do that annoys me. Gun people claim to think gun ownership is a genuine human right, on par with real human rights like freedom of speech or freedom of religion. Unless you have mental illness. "Banning guns is the first, last, and only step on the road to tyranny! I will fight to the last breath for the right to own guns! Unless you're bi-polar or have depression or something!"

It exposes the lie of the whole argument that gun ownership is a right.

mfcrocker
Jan 31, 2004



Hot Rope Guy

OwlFancier posted:

Every country has people with mental illness, only America has such a problem with mass shootings. Pretty sure that the problem isn't mentally ill people, gunfucker.

Hell, we're doing a really piss-poor job funding mental health services in the UK and oh wow big surprise no mass shootings

vincentpricesboner
Sep 3, 2006

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

OwlFancier posted:

Every country has people with mental illness, only America has such a problem with mass shootings. Pretty sure that the problem isn't mentally ill people, gunfucker.

Theres like a dozen other countries that have a problem with mass shootings. Not to mention the amount of other countries that have a problem with similiar mass causality incidents involving trucks or bombs.

OwlFancier
Aug 22, 2013

Gonna take a big wild guess and say that there is no country on the face of the earth that has a similar mass vehicular murder problem as the US does with mass shootings.

Or bombings for that matter unless you count ones dropped from aircraft.

Yeowch!!! My Balls!!!
May 31, 2006
while it's a typo, it is loving hilarious to see a gunfucker refer to the inevitable consequences of making tools exclusively for killing as freely available as possible as Mass Causality Events

VitalSigns
Sep 3, 2011

We already established on a previous page that this is the case but why not go back to the ol' shibboleths

Gripweed
Nov 8, 2018

zapplez posted:

Theres like a dozen other countries that have a problem with mass shootings. Not to mention the amount of other countries that have a problem with similiar mass causality incidents involving trucks or bombs.

Hey if you could name a single country that isn't an active warzone that has had as many truck attacks or bombing as the US has had mass shootings this year, that would be fantastic

vincentpricesboner
Sep 3, 2006

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

Gripweed posted:

Hey if you could name a single country that isn't an active warzone that has had as many truck attacks or bombing as the US has had mass shootings this year, that would be fantastic

My point wasnt "there are countries with the exact same amount of mass shootings as the USA " it was "other countries have a problem with mass shootings"

Does Norway not have a problem with mass shootings? How about Mexico? France ? Brazil? Philippines? Canada?

friendbot2000
May 1, 2011

zapplez posted:

Theres like a dozen other countries that have a problem with mass shootings. Not to mention the amount of other countries that have a problem with similiar mass causality incidents involving trucks or bombs.

You realize you are dehumanizing the victims of these atrocities by calling them "mass casualty incidents"? That is like the military using the phrase "collateral damage". You seriously need to re-evaluate your ethics and morality if you are even tempted call it anything other than mass murder.

zapplez posted:

My point wasnt "there are countries with the exact same amount of mass shootings as the USA " it was "other countries have a problem with mass shootings"

Does Norway not have a problem with mass shootings? How about Mexico? France ? Brazil? Philippines? Canada?

This is a false equivalency. All these countries have not had a mass murderer in loving years(some in decades) and we have one every goddamn month.

Example: In Iceland, they had a goddamn day of mourning after a police officer had to shoot his weapon at a man, killing him. That is how rare this kind of violence is in Scandinavian Countries. Here, it is just another loving Tuesday.

friendbot2000 fucked around with this message at 16:34 on Nov 20, 2018

OwlFancier
Aug 22, 2013

zapplez posted:

My point wasnt "there are countries with the exact same amount of mass shootings as the USA " it was "other countries have a problem with mass shootings"

Does Norway not have a problem with mass shootings? How about Mexico? France ? Brazil? Philippines? Canada?

Like if you're going to say the US has "a problem" with mass shooting then Norway definitely doesn't have "a problem" with mass shooting in the sense that in no way are the two remotely commensurable.

I assume of course that you would argue that universal healthcare is not a desirable thing because people still die in places that have it.

vincentpricesboner
Sep 3, 2006

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

OwlFancier posted:

Like if you're going to say the US has "a problem" with mass shooting then Norway definitely doesn't have "a problem" with mass shooting in the sense that in no way are the two remotely commensurable.

I assume of course that you would argue that universal healthcare is not a desirable thing because people still die in places that have it.

No I wouldnt argue that at all. Universal healthcare is a good thing everywhere. Don't just put words in my mouth.

Its disingenuous to say only the USA has a problem with mass murderers. Its not like only 1 or 3 every few years is an OK amount either. Im sure if you asked a frenchman if he thinks mass murder is his country is a serious problem or not he would have a strong answer.

vincentpricesboner fucked around with this message at 16:46 on Nov 20, 2018

vincentpricesboner
Sep 3, 2006

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

friendbot2000 posted:

You realize you are dehumanizing the victims of these atrocities by calling them "mass casualty incidents"? That is like the military using the phrase "collateral damage". You seriously need to re-evaluate your ethics and morality if you are even tempted call it anything other than mass murder.


This is a false equivalency. All these countries have not had a mass murderer in loving years(some in decades) and we have one every goddamn month.

Example: In Iceland, they had a goddamn day of mourning after a police officer had to shoot his weapon at a man, killing him. That is how rare this kind of violence is in Scandinavian Countries. Here, it is just another loving Tuesday.

I'm sorry if I offended you with the phrase. Wasn't my intention. Just trying to convey similar incidents that are done for the same purpose and with the same goals of trying to hurt a ton of people all at once and to scare others. The incel who drove a truck through a crowd in Toronto last year can be seen as having parallels between the mass shooter in the california bar the other week. Its the same end result and the same sick goal. Mass murder is a better term though.

mfcrocker
Jan 31, 2004



Hot Rope Guy

zapplez posted:

No I wouldnt argue that at all. Universal healthcare is a good thing everywhere. Don't just put words in my mouth.

Its disingenuous to say only the USA has a problem with mass murderers. Its not like only 1 or 3 every few years is an OK amount either. Im sure if you asked a frenchman if he thinks mass murder is his country is a serious problem or not he would have a strong answer.

How do you not get that there's a huge, huge difference between <1 a year and multiple a month?

OwlFancier
Aug 22, 2013

zapplez posted:

No I wouldnt argue that at all. Universal healthcare is a good thing everywhere. Don't just put words in my mouth.

Its disingenuous to say only the USA has a problem with mass murderers. Its not like only 1 or 3 every few years is an OK amount either. Im sure if you asked a frenchman if he thinks mass murder is his country is a serious problem or not he would have a strong answer.

Yes it is me, the person who suggests that a clear difference both in the order of magnitude and the methodology constitutes a unique problem, who is being disingenuous. Not the person saying "well everywhere has had at least one mass murder so our constantly having them is perfectly normal"

Unoriginal Name
Aug 1, 2006

by sebmojo

zapplez posted:

No I wouldnt argue that at all. Universal healthcare is a good thing everywhere. Don't just put words in my mouth.

Its disingenuous to say only the USA has a problem with mass murderers. Its not like only 1 or 3 every few years is an OK amount either. Im sure if you asked a frenchman if he thinks mass murder is his country is a serious problem or not he would have a strong answer.

Indeed there is no difference between 1 and 50

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

3D Megadoodoo
Nov 25, 2010

zapplez posted:

Im sure if you asked a frenchman if he thinks mass murder is his country is a serious problem or not he would have a strong answer.

Probably "not really" or something to that effect (I can't write French).

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply