This is what Gun Confiscation looks like...

[satrebil]

I can commit a "mass killing" with my fucking Chevy. Try again, moron.

I’m on the third floor right now, come and get me.

Let's ask the occupants of the Murrah building about that. Or the WTC.

You're 0/2, moron.

That has what to do with your Chevy?

It was an inference that if I wanted to commit mass murder, I don't need a gun to do it. Deductive logic isn't really your strong point, is it....

And I showed you how limited your Chevy is in that. And then you did what?

Are you actually this stupid? Do you not know what the Murrah building is (was) ?

 

[satrebil]

We already have that. Law abiding citizens are allowed to own guns. People convicted of felonies and DV are not. What more do you want?

Laws that work. Because clearly we don't have those.

News flash: It's against the law to murder people. Has been since... forever.

What fucking magic law do you have hidden up your sleeve that stops lunatics? Please share with the class.

So you're telling me that Germany, Japan, New Zealand and pretty much every other 1st world country somehow managed to rid themselves of lunatics? How did you think they managed to do that?

Are you insinuating that murders don't happen in those countries? Really?

Would you like to compare mass murder rates? How do you feel about data?

That wasn't the question now was it, numbnuts. I asked you what magic law you have that stops lunatics. You went on a tangent about other countries. You dare speak of moving goal posts? Answer the question: WHAT LAW DO YOU HAVE THAT STOPS LUNATICS?

 

[Hale]

It's a bigger shame that you condone over 36,000 people killed each year by guns in order to protect your right to a "well regulated militia", which doesn't mean any goon with some bucks and a bad attitude towards kids, Muslims or Jews.

And it's a huge shame that you equate number of guns to number of murders, a well established fallacy. Why can't you be honest?

 

[Brain357]

I’m on the third floor right now, come and get me.

Let's ask the occupants of the Murrah building about that. Or the WTC.

You're 0/2, moron.

That has what to do with your Chevy?

It was an inference that if I wanted to commit mass murder, I don't need a gun to do it. Deductive logic isn't really your strong point, is it....

And I showed you how limited your Chevy is in that. And then you did what?

Are you actually this stupid? Do you not know what the Murrah building is (was) ?

Ah you moved to bombing now. Ever notice bombers are often caught trying to make a bomb? Sometimes they blow themselves up. Sometimes the bomb just doesn’t work. Rifle is legal and always seems to work.

 

[RDD_1210]

Laws that work. Because clearly we don't have those.

News flash: It's against the law to murder people. Has been since... forever.

What fucking magic law do you have hidden up your sleeve that stops lunatics? Please share with the class.

So you're telling me that Germany, Japan, New Zealand and pretty much every other 1st world country somehow managed to rid themselves of lunatics? How did you think they managed to do that?

Are you insinuating that murders don't happen in those countries? Really?

Would you like to compare mass murder rates? How do you feel about data?

That wasn't the question now was it, numbnuts. I asked you what magic law you have that stops lunatics. You went on a tangent about other countries. You dare speak of moving goal posts? Answer the question: WHAT LAW DO YOU HAVE THAT STOPS LUNATICS?

Holy shit you're slow. There are lunatics in every country yet every other country doesn't have the gun violence problem that we have. Why is that? This is where you insert your next excuse.

 

[satrebil]

News flash: It's against the law to murder people. Has been since... forever.

What fucking magic law do you have hidden up your sleeve that stops lunatics? Please share with the class.

So you're telling me that Germany, Japan, New Zealand and pretty much every other 1st world country somehow managed to rid themselves of lunatics? How did you think they managed to do that?

Are you insinuating that murders don't happen in those countries? Really?

Would you like to compare mass murder rates? How do you feel about data?

That wasn't the question now was it, numbnuts. I asked you what magic law you have that stops lunatics. You went on a tangent about other countries. You dare speak of moving goal posts? Answer the question: WHAT LAW DO YOU HAVE THAT STOPS LUNATICS?

Holy shit you're slow. There are lunatics in every country yet every other country doesn't have the gun violence problem that we have. Why is that? This is where you insert your next excuse.

The point you're not getting, dumb shit, is that the method of violence is irrelevant. The violence still exists. Eliminate one means of producing violence, people will find another - hence mass stabbing attacks, sarin gas on subways, suicide bombers at kid's pop music concerts and trucks mowing down crowds of people.

Do you get it yet, or do you need this in crayon?

 

[Brain357]

So you're telling me that Germany, Japan, New Zealand and pretty much every other 1st world country somehow managed to rid themselves of lunatics? How did you think they managed to do that?

Are you insinuating that murders don't happen in those countries? Really?

Would you like to compare mass murder rates? How do you feel about data?

That wasn't the question now was it, numbnuts. I asked you what magic law you have that stops lunatics. You went on a tangent about other countries. You dare speak of moving goal posts? Answer the question: WHAT LAW DO YOU HAVE THAT STOPS LUNATICS?

Holy shit you're slow. There are lunatics in every country yet every other country doesn't have the gun violence problem that we have. Why is that? This is where you insert your next excuse.

The point you're not getting, dumb shit, is that the method of violence is irrelevant. The violence still exists. Eliminate one means of producing violence, people will find another - hence mass stabbing attacks, sarin gas on subways, suicide bombers at kid's pop music concerts and trucks mowing down crowds of people.

Do you get it yet, or do you need this in crayon?

Based on homicide rates those other means must be much less effective? Cause the U.K. doesn’t have a mass killing problem like us. Neither does Japan, or Germany....

 

[satrebil]

Let's ask the occupants of the Murrah building about that. Or the WTC.

You're 0/2, moron.

That has what to do with your Chevy?

It was an inference that if I wanted to commit mass murder, I don't need a gun to do it. Deductive logic isn't really your strong point, is it....

And I showed you how limited your Chevy is in that. And then you did what?

Are you actually this stupid? Do you not know what the Murrah building is (was) ?

Ah you moved to bombing now. Ever notice bombers are often caught trying to make a bomb? Sometimes they blow themselves up. Sometimes the bomb just doesn’t work. Rifle is legal and always seems to work.

I didn't move on to anything. I explicitly stated several posts ago: "It was an inference that if I wanted to commit mass murder, I don't need a gun to do it."

I can think of dozens of ways to commit mass murder with readily available products. Your problem is you're too stupid to realize just how easy it is, and you think banning the "big scary guns" will stop mass murder.

Protip: It won't.

 

[RDD_1210]

So you're telling me that Germany, Japan, New Zealand and pretty much every other 1st world country somehow managed to rid themselves of lunatics? How did you think they managed to do that?

Are you insinuating that murders don't happen in those countries? Really?

Would you like to compare mass murder rates? How do you feel about data?

That wasn't the question now was it, numbnuts. I asked you what magic law you have that stops lunatics. You went on a tangent about other countries. You dare speak of moving goal posts? Answer the question: WHAT LAW DO YOU HAVE THAT STOPS LUNATICS?

Holy shit you're slow. There are lunatics in every country yet every other country doesn't have the gun violence problem that we have. Why is that? This is where you insert your next excuse.

The point you're not getting, dumb shit, is that the method of violence is irrelevant. The violence still exists. Eliminate one means of producing violence, people will find another - hence mass stabbing attacks, sarin gas on subways, suicide bombers at kid's pop music concerts and trucks mowing down crowds of people.

Do you get it yet, or do you need this in crayon?

Ok, so following your train of logic....in all of these other countries that have much stricter access to guns, we should see people killing each other with other methods, like you say, "stabbings, gas attacks, bombings" at a similar rate. But it's not.

Why is that not happening at the same rate as our gun violence is occurring in this country?

 

[Brain357]

That has what to do with your Chevy?

It was an inference that if I wanted to commit mass murder, I don't need a gun to do it. Deductive logic isn't really your strong point, is it....

And I showed you how limited your Chevy is in that. And then you did what?

Are you actually this stupid? Do you not know what the Murrah building is (was) ?

Ah you moved to bombing now. Ever notice bombers are often caught trying to make a bomb? Sometimes they blow themselves up. Sometimes the bomb just doesn’t work. Rifle is legal and always seems to work.

I didn't move on to anything. I explicitly stated several posts ago: "It was an inference that if I wanted to commit mass murder, I don't need a gun to do it."

I can think of dozens of ways to commit mass murder with readily available products. Your problem is you're too stupid to realize just how easy it is, and you think banning the "big scary guns" will stop mass murder.

Protip: It won't.

Yes and making a bomb is illegal. Seems when the mass killing weapon is legal you get a lot more killing.

 

[satrebil]

Are you insinuating that murders don't happen in those countries? Really?

Would you like to compare mass murder rates? How do you feel about data?

That wasn't the question now was it, numbnuts. I asked you what magic law you have that stops lunatics. You went on a tangent about other countries. You dare speak of moving goal posts? Answer the question: WHAT LAW DO YOU HAVE THAT STOPS LUNATICS?

Holy shit you're slow. There are lunatics in every country yet every other country doesn't have the gun violence problem that we have. Why is that? This is where you insert your next excuse.

The point you're not getting, dumb shit, is that the method of violence is irrelevant. The violence still exists. Eliminate one means of producing violence, people will find another - hence mass stabbing attacks, sarin gas on subways, suicide bombers at kid's pop music concerts and trucks mowing down crowds of people.

Do you get it yet, or do you need this in crayon?

Ok, so following your train of logic....in all of these other countries that have much stricter access to guns, we should see people killing each other with other methods, like you say, "stabbings, gas attacks, bombings" at a similar rate. But it's not.

Why is that not happening at the same rate as our gun violence is occurring in this country?

As has already been stated, the countries you listed are not plagued by inner city gang violence. If you remove those deaths from your statistics, you would find our rates to be fantastically low.

 

[satrebil]

Yes and making a bomb is illegal. Seems when the mass killing weapon is legal you get a lot more killing.

So what if it's illegal? If the perpetrator cared about legality he wouldn't be doing it in the first place. Jesus Christ...

 

[RDD_1210]

Would you like to compare mass murder rates? How do you feel about data?

That wasn't the question now was it, numbnuts. I asked you what magic law you have that stops lunatics. You went on a tangent about other countries. You dare speak of moving goal posts? Answer the question: WHAT LAW DO YOU HAVE THAT STOPS LUNATICS?

Holy shit you're slow. There are lunatics in every country yet every other country doesn't have the gun violence problem that we have. Why is that? This is where you insert your next excuse.

The point you're not getting, dumb shit, is that the method of violence is irrelevant. The violence still exists. Eliminate one means of producing violence, people will find another - hence mass stabbing attacks, sarin gas on subways, suicide bombers at kid's pop music concerts and trucks mowing down crowds of people.

Do you get it yet, or do you need this in crayon?

Ok, so following your train of logic....in all of these other countries that have much stricter access to guns, we should see people killing each other with other methods, like you say, "stabbings, gas attacks, bombings" at a similar rate. But it's not.

Why is that not happening at the same rate as our gun violence is occurring in this country?

As has already been stated, the countries you listed are not plagued by inner city gang violence. If you remove those deaths from your statistics, you would find our rates to be fantastically low.

Source? What data are you looking at that removes inner city gang violence?

 

[Hale]

Ok, so following your train of logic....in all of these other countries that have much stricter access to guns, we should see people killing each other with other methods, like you say, "stabbings, gas attacks, bombings" at a similar rate. But it's not.

Why is that not happening at the same rate as our gun violence is occurring in this country?

That whole "correlation/causation" thing is giving you a LOT of trouble, isn't it? That's because you must first remove the fallacy that more guns = more murders.

Try thinking about it this way: Number of knives ≠ number of people stabbed. Get it?

 

[RDD_1210]

Ok, so following your train of logic....in all of these other countries that have much stricter access to guns, we should see people killing each other with other methods, like you say, "stabbings, gas attacks, bombings" at a similar rate. But it's not.

Why is that not happening at the same rate as our gun violence is occurring in this country?

That whole "correlation/causation" thing is giving you a LOT of trouble, isn't it? That's because you must first remove the fallacy that more guns = more murders.

Try thinking about it this way: Number of knives ≠ number of people stabbed. Get it?

More guns absolutely equals more gun murders. Guns don't make people safer when you look at the statistics. The data is clear.

 

[RDD_1210]

If having guns is needed to keep us safe.

And the U.S. has more guns than any other nation.

Why are we not the safest country?

 

[Brain357]

Yes and making a bomb is illegal. Seems when the mass killing weapon is legal you get a lot more killing.

So what if it's illegal? If the perpetrator cared about legality he wouldn't be doing it in the first place. Jesus Christ...

They are often caught trying to make the bomb. No such luck when the weapon is legal.

 

[Brain357]

Yes and making a bomb is illegal. Seems when the mass killing weapon is legal you get a lot more killing.

So what if it's illegal? If the perpetrator cared about legality he wouldn't be doing it in the first place. Jesus Christ...

Man Convicted In Attempted Bombing Case At Downtown OKC Bank

 

[Edgetho]

A country that cares about public safety. Strange.

A Country that has never been free is not now free.

Let them eat cake

 

[Brain357]

Yes and making a bomb is illegal. Seems when the mass killing weapon is legal you get a lot more killing.

So what if it's illegal? If the perpetrator cared about legality he wouldn't be doing it in the first place. Jesus Christ...

And when trying to get an illegal gun:

Milwaukee man accused of plotting machine gun attack at Masonic center still in jail