Minneapolis school shooting - Dems call for gun control

you-keep-using-that-word.gif

"Infringement?" What infringement?
Give the man a dictionary.
 
So he gets a car and runs them over. Guns dont kill deranged people kill and we need to control them. They die because the democrats wont allow long term mandated treatment of the mentally ill. This killer was a trans Jew hating progressive who was part of the progressive ideology that pushed him over the top.

Guns are the weapon of choice for killing in the US. Why? Because they're the easiest. Very few people go into schools and stab people. Very few people try and drive cars through schools to kill kids.

Minnesota is 13th for mental healthcare spending in the US.


People get angry in life, people get violent. Give them guns and they can act on this. Don't give them guns and they are less likely to act on this.

That crazy views are prevalent in the US is hardly just the Democrats' fault. Having only two political parties who spend loads of money trying to force everyone to accept one or the other is a problem, and it's both sides that are enforcing the two party system.

But I guess it's easy to just blame the Democrats for everything, then you don't need to think.
 
15th post

UK free speech crackdown sees up to 30 people a day arrested …

Aug 19, 2025 · UK data suggests over 30 people a day are arrested for speech crimes, about 12,000 a year, under laws written well before the age of social media that make crimes of sending “grossly offensive

So, you're trying to connect the UK having limited free speech (I mean, who doesn't? The US also has limited free speech) with the lack of school shootings?

Are you suggesting kids in the UK cannot access reports of shootings in the US? Can't get violent rap music etc?

There's a problem right now with how the internet is being used. The article you posted has a women who posted a message on twitter about the Southport murderer. The article is very vague about it all. The woman in question was arrested and released.

Your article says "Instead, horrified, and in the fog of a developing tragedy, she’d reposted on X another user’s content blaming newly arrived migrants for the ghastly crime — clarifying in her retweet, “If this is true.”"


Other articles say something different.

"Bernadette Spofforth, 55, says she copied "a name and a sentence" from another post without checking the source, and claims there has been a "concerted effort" to get her jailed."

"Bernadette Spofforth was arrested at her Chester home in August on suspicion of publishing written material to stir up racial hatred and false communications."

So, the Southport killer was Axel Muganwa Rudakubana who was born in the UK to parents from Rwanda who had been in the country for 4 years before he was born.

People posted a name on social media that was not this man's name. How dangerous is that? You could be going about your business and then get lynched by a mob because some asshole posted YOUR NAME on social media in connection with killing children.

The claims on social media were that it was a Muslim or an asylum seeker, or both.

This woman reposted the name, which your article just happens to ignore. So she was arrested for it. Really she should have gone to prison, she put other people's lives at risk.

However all that has nothing to do with what we're talking about.
 
So, you're trying to connect the UK having limited free speech (I mean, who doesn't? The US also has limited free speech) with the lack of school shootings?

Are you suggesting kids in the UK cannot access reports of shootings in the US? Can't get violent rap music etc?

There's a problem right now with how the internet is being used. The article you posted has a women who posted a message on twitter about the Southport murderer. The article is very vague about it all. The woman in question was arrested and released.

Your article says "Instead, horrified, and in the fog of a developing tragedy, she’d reposted on X another user’s content blaming newly arrived migrants for the ghastly crime — clarifying in her retweet, “If this is true.”"


Other articles say something different.

"Bernadette Spofforth, 55, says she copied "a name and a sentence" from another post without checking the source, and claims there has been a "concerted effort" to get her jailed."

"Bernadette Spofforth was arrested at her Chester home in August on suspicion of publishing written material to stir up racial hatred and false communications."

So, the Southport killer was Axel Muganwa Rudakubana who was born in the UK to parents from Rwanda who had been in the country for 4 years before he was born.

People posted a name on social media that was not this man's name. How dangerous is that? You could be going about your business and then get lynched by a mob because some asshole posted YOUR NAME on social media in connection with killing children.

The claims on social media were that it was a Muslim or an asylum seeker, or both.

This woman reposted the name, which your article just happens to ignore. So she was arrested for it. Really she should have gone to prison, she put other people's lives at risk.

However all that has nothing to do with what we're talking about.
I am saying that gun bans and censorship are totalitarianism.
 

New Topics

Back
Top Bottom