Stop looking at mass killers as unique murderers... How to really stop this..

[Greoric]

On your first point: People are corrupt potentially. Yet, we trust people when an institution that they represent has oversight and checks that prevent or mitigate abuse.

So, you'd posit the checks and balances we have in place are perfect? Otherwise, you're still advocating putting all the weapons in the hands of people that are potentially corrupt.... with respect, that's a very stupid position to try to defend.

On the second point: Nutbags with delusions of grandeur don't usually lace themselves up with guns and start stabbing their classmates at some community college. Guns provide an easy way to kill people while exerting little to none of their energy in doing so. The Vegas killer could not throw knives from his balcony. The guns he had gave him the ability to kill without recourse of A. Likely fire coming back, and B. The victims inability to find him quickly.

I don't see this distinction as a mere detail.

So now it reads like you only care about sensationalized violence. I asked you if you can demonstrate your argument with showing firearms increase the total murder in society.... Or do you only care about anecdotes?

 

[lilelvis]

So, you think America is close to Germany in 1938? Are you high?

Where is the rampant Jewish hysteria?

Where is the fascist dictator?

Where is the murdering of all political opposition?

Where is the bloodlust and yearning to take over Europe?

Is America facing similar hardship like the conditions of The Treaty of Versailles?

Our American leaders obsessed with racial superiority and Nordic blood myths?

What a stupid fucking thing for you to even contemplate, much less ooze out of your mouth.

I explained what I thought was similar in the post.
Keep arguing for the sake of it. It’s ok i guess

 

[hillelslovak87]

I explained what I thought was similar in the post.
Keep arguing for the sake of it. It’s ok i guess

I just want to know why you would think it is pertinent to bring up the Nazis disarming their populace in relation to regulations in 21st century America. I find it odd, considering the example does not even work. The German Republic had strict gun control. When the Nazis came into power they loosened regulations on ownership of guns for German citizens and Nazi party members. They confiscated and restricted guns for Jews and other undesirable groups.

The example falls flat on it's face when used in relation to America's regulation of firearms in the 21st century.

 

[Rational Poster]

So, you'd posit the checks and balances we have in place are perfect? Otherwise, you're still advocating putting all the weapons in the hands of people that are potentially corrupt.... with respect, that's a very stupid position to try to defend.


So now it reads like you only care about sensationalized violence. I asked you if you can demonstrate your argument with showing firearms increase the total murder in society.... Or do you only care about anecdotes?

Quantity of firearms doesn't tell us anything.

It's ease of access that's the issue.

 

[Rational Poster]

I just want to know why you would think it is pertinent to bring up the Nazis disarming their populace in relation to regulations in 21st century America. I find it odd, considering the example does not even work. The German Republic had strict gun control. When the Nazis came into power they loosened regulations on ownership of guns for German citizens and Nazi party members. They confiscated and restricted guns for Jews and other undesirable groups.

The example falls flat on it's face when used in relation to America's regulation of firearms in the 21st century.

But if the Jews had guns they could have not only prevented the holocaust, but used their bolt action rifles to hijack tiger tanks and the Luftwaffe and defeated Hitler themselves like I would have done if I was a Jew and had a gun under Hitler times.

Trust me because I was an E-7 railing painter, 23rd battalion escort brigade. I know how to detect weaknesses.

 

[spamking]

Quantity of firearms doesn't tell us anything.

It's ease of access that's the issue.

I keep hearing about this ease of access . . . so your main concern is about private sales? Or improper storage?

 

[AGGAMEMNON66]

america has great similarities with Australia, Canada and European nations. To simply discard this is facile.

And to ignore the enourmous differences is intellectually dishonest, or flat out ignorance.


And I left out the shoe horned false equivalency you attempted to hide behind in an obvious desperate attempt to get something to mean what it doesn't.


You're going to need a bigger boat for that.

 

[lilelvis]

I just want to know why you would think it is pertinent to bring up the Nazis disarming their populace in relation to regulations in 21st century America. I find it odd, considering the example does not even work. The German Republic had strict gun control. When the Nazis came into power they loosened regulations on ownership of guns for German citizens and Nazi party members. They confiscated and restricted guns for Jews and other undesirable groups.

The example falls flat on it's face when used in relation to America's regulation of firearms in the 21st century.

See post #302, then the original. Then read the hitler quote.

Before you do that, take some alpha brain or something.

The propaganda is similar. This isn't that hard.

 

[Rational Poster]

I keep hearing about this ease of access . . . so your main concern is about private sales? Or improper storage?

It seems obvious the system that we've developed to keep psychos from purchasing or accessing firearms legally has developed a bit of a chasm and is proving again and again to be a complete failure.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

So if you have a tool that makes it exceptionally easy to mow people down, and that is it's purpose, maybe you limit this weapon to military and police swat teams.

Sure, two bodies that behave with relative impunity compared to their "bosses", We The People.

Police and military, at least in principle, have oversight that prevents them from holding the average citizen's life in their hands for no reason, or under no established protocol set legally.

Sounds like you've missed a lot of threads around here.

You sound informed. Why do the military and police need full-auto (i.e. increased rates of fire over whatever the correct rate of semi-auto fire is)? Is it only for mowing down crowds?

 

[hillelslovak87]

Sure, two bodies that behave with relative impunity compared to their "bosses", We The People.





Sounds like you've missed a lot of threads around here.

You sound informed. Why do the military and police need full-auto (i.e. increased rates of fire over whatever the correct rate of semi-auto fire is)? Is it only for mowing down crowds?

Come on, homes. You need me to explain to you as to why the military might need full auto firing weapons? As for police, I don't think they need fully auto, or even burst fire weapons, unless the public still does. If civilians had acquiesced to some sort of restriction on who can own what gun, I would expect to see police armaments getting less and less insanely high powered.

 

[hillelslovak87]

See post #302, then the original. Then read the hitler quote.

Before you do that, take some alpha brain or something.

The propaganda is similar. This isn't that hard.

The propaganda is similar? Are you not aware that Hitler lessened restrictions of weapons for German citizens and Nazi supporters and members, and only restricted gun ownership for Jews and other minority groups? Your comparison fails upon even a cursory glance of the history.

 

[hillelslovak87]

And to ignore the enourmous differences is intellectually dishonest, or flat out ignorance.


And I left out the shoe horned false equivalency you attempted to hide behind in an obvious desperate attempt to get something to mean what it doesn't.


You're going to need a bigger boat for that.

All three nations are multicultural first world nations founded upon the English framework initially.

That single similarity does an incredible amount of work, because it happens to be the overarching framework of all three societies.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

Come on, homes. You need me to explain to you as to why the military might need full auto firing weapons? As for police, I don't think they need fully auto, or even burst fire weapons, unless the public still does. If civilians had acquiesced to some sort of restriction on who can own what gun, I would expect to see police armaments getting less and less insanely high powered.

You need mollycoddled into answering direct questions instead of being condescending? Hard to tell which one of us is really dumber with an answer like yours.

I agree that what's good for the police is good for the public. After all, it's mainly threats against civilians that the police are there for. Other than of course storming houses like the military to apprehend drug dealers.

"If civilians had acquiesced to some sort of restriction on who can own what gun,..."? I must be reading that wrong.

 

[lilelvis]

The propaganda is similar? Are you not aware that Hitler lessened restrictions of weapons for German citizens and Nazi supporters and members, and only restricted gun ownership for Jews and other minority groups? Your comparison fails upon even a cursory glance of the history.

Ok man you got me. Just as I stated, the U.S and Nazi Germany are exactly the same in every way.

What does propaganda have to do with actually happened?

 

[spamking]

It seems obvious the system that we've developed to keep psychos from purchasing or accessing firearms legally has developed a bit of a chasm and is proving again and again to be a complete failure.

HIPAA protections have their place . . . but I agree, if we're going to improve the background check process there needs to be better data sharing.

 

[EZShrimpn]

But if the Jews had guns they could have not only prevented the holocaust, but used their bolt action rifles to hijack tiger tanks and the Luftwaffe and defeated Hitler themselves like I would have done if I was a Jew and had a gun under Hitler times.

So what you're saying is that we should give up our guns and resign ourselves to be starved to death in camps?

 

[hillelslovak87]

Ok man you got me. Just as I stated, the U.S and Nazi Germany are exactly the same in every way.

What does propaganda have to do with actually happened?

You are stating facts that are wrong. You're using the Nazis as the example in which you set your argument upon. You say if we have strict gun control, we will, unlike Australia, England and other developed nations, slide into fascism and tyranny. You use Germany as an example in seeming ignorance of the actual facts. Hitler disarmed Jews and other undesirables, while broadening gun rights and dissolving many German Republic restrictions for German citizens and Nazi supporters and party members.

 

[lilelvis]

You are stating facts that are wrong. You're using the Nazis as the example in which you set your argument upon. You say if we have strict gun control, we will, unlike Australia, England and other developed nations, slide into fascism and tyranny. You use Germany as an example in seeming ignorance of the actual facts. Hitler disarmed Jews and other undesirables, while broadening gun rights and dissolving many German Republic restrictions for German citizens and Nazi supporters and party members.

Wow. Just wow..

 

[Alphafail]

These poor suicidal boys are actually the victims and just need a hug.