Knives Vs Guns
-
...if someone had a gun they could have shot this sick guy and ended his run after the first couple stabs. If he really wanted to he could have killed many more. Anything can be used as a weapon, what if he had been weilding a samurai sword, if he had the outcome would have been much worse, limbs amputated and heads severed...
-
...if someone had a gun they could have shot this sick guy and ended his run after the first couple stabs. If he really wanted to he could have killed many more. Anything can be used as a weapon, what if he had been weilding a samurai sword, if he had the outcome would have been much worse, limbs amputated and heads severed...
...if someone had a gun they could have shot this sick guy and ended his run after the first couple stabs. If he really wanted to he could have killed many more. Anything can be used as a weapon, what if he had been weilding a samurai sword, if he had the outcome would have been much worse, limbs amputated and heads severed...
Samurai sword? Yeah maybe a real one. It's a lit easier to get a fake though, and someone is still able to take you down before you get 26 or 35 it whatever. The level of nihilism is strong.
And, legacy or whoever, I didn't claim that this kid couldn't have gotten a gun like Lanza. I'm merely pointing out the different outcomes of a mass attack with a knife vs a mass attack with a gun. You guys are scrambling to defend something I didn't say. Want another example?
22 poor kids wounded, the same day 20 American parents had theirs murdered.
-
Rover on Rover's morning glory, who by the way is a gun rights guy, is having this arguement right now, and his position is the same as what I said about this. Interesting stuff.
Early man walked away as modern man took control. Their minds weren't all the same and to conquer was their goal. So He built his great empires and he slaughtered his own kind, and he died a confused man and killed himself in his own mind... -
But a citizen with ccw license and his weapon could have shot both knife murderers,
and saved all those college students, and young children, and adults from any harm at all.
Meanwhile, we were fishing at a local lake with friends, (a bit too early for bluegill and crappies weren't hitting either),
and an elderly couple drove up and asked if the fish were biting. Ended up with them saying they loved the outdoors,
but in their older age, they were afraid, anymore, of going out when there weren't a lot of people out.
He said in his younger days, he knew he'd just battle anybody who might come after them, but he was much older now,
and knew that he couldn't stop muggers at all.
Well, I ended up mentioning that they could get ccw licenses... and found out they already had them ! But they still
didn't want to go out unless they had several people out at the same place with them.
I shudder to think how many crimes would be committed, if muggers/murderers knew that every victim would
be completely defenseless to their knife or illegally owned gun.
There have been many tens of millions of background checks done, during Obamao's reign of leftist garbage alone.
And lib political wonks like Cysko find a small number of horrors to blame the right for. While refusing to seriously talk about
any solution like Cysko did with my serious questions.
And just like I said before - they claim "gee I'm so tired of talking about this", then they wait a few days whatever, and they start it up again
with the same emotional screaming on the issue on their terms. You can take every single American legal, responsible gun owner,
take all their guns, and put them all in Fema camps under lock and key, and criminals will find guns and continue committing these
murder atrocities.
The left know that. But at least, they figure they will be happy with the false solution.....
-
You guys still don't get it at all. All you want to hear is total victory or total defeat. Think somewhere in the middle. If gun deaths could be lowered in the same way dui deaths have been lowered everyone would call that acceptable
-
But the reality is, even if you could flip a switch in history, and all guns on earth would disappear, and were never invented....
one crazed murdered could still murder a bunch of innocent people - he'd just have to do it without using guns.
Like some horror movie...locked the doors to a church, and set it on fire with gasoline. whatever that movie I turned off was...
Violent murderers will use whatever weapons they can use. To say that harrassing all legal gun owners would at least
"limit" the crimes to a little bit less...what sense does that make?
It's past time to start thinking of why these things are occuring, and what we can do to keep those murderers from being
able to act out in the first place.
Bernadine Dorn and the weather underground got their hands on explosives. That was illegal. But they did it anyways.
Oklahoma City...made their own bomb. Something's wrong, and it has nothing to do with guns. The attack on guns
is solely...? a political attack on a section of our society who enjoy the freedom of our 2nd Amendment. BTW, we are, I believe,
the only country on earth WITH a "2nd Amendment". And we lead the world in freedom and democracy. Go figure, eh?
-
Rover on Rover's morning glory, who by the way is a gun rights guy, is having this arguement right now, and his position is the same as what I said about this. Interesting stuff.
Rover on Rover's morning glory, who by the way is a gun rights guy, is having this arguement right now, and his position is the same as what I said about this. Interesting stuff.
Rover appears to be more intelligent than he actually is because he's typically arguing with the Dieter and Douchey. Those two are the biggest idiots in radio.
-
But the reality is, even if you could flip a switch in history, and all guns on earth would disappear, and were never invented....
one crazed murdered could still murder a bunch of innocent people - he'd just have to do it without using guns.
Like some horror movie...locked the doors to a church, and set it on fire with gasoline. whatever that movie I turned off was...
Violent murderers will use whatever weapons they can use. To say that harrassing all legal gun owners would at least
"limit" the crimes to a little bit less...what sense does that make?
It's past time to start thinking of why these things are occuring, and what we can do to keep those murderers from being
able to act out in the first place.
Bernadine Dorn and the weather underground got their hands on explosives. That was illegal. But they did it anyways.
Oklahoma City...made their own bomb. Something's wrong, and it has nothing to do with guns. The attack on guns
is solely...? a political attack on a section of our society who enjoy the freedom of our 2nd Amendment. BTW, we are, I believe,
the only country on earth WITH a "2nd Amendment". And we lead the world in freedom and democracy. Go figure, eh?
But the reality is, even if you could flip a switch in history, and all guns on earth would disappear, and were never invented....
one crazed murdered could still murder a bunch of innocent people - he'd just have to do it without using guns.
Like some horror movie...locked the doors to a church, and set it on fire with gasoline. whatever that movie I turned off was...
Violent murderers will use whatever weapons they can use. To say that harrassing all legal gun owners would at least
"limit" the crimes to a little bit less...what sense does that make?
It's past time to start thinking of why these things are occuring, and what we can do to keep those murderers from being
able to act out in the first place.
Bernadine Dorn and the weather underground got their hands on explosives. That was illegal. But they did it anyways.
Oklahoma City...made their own bomb. Something's wrong, and it has nothing to do with guns. The attack on guns
is solely...? a political attack on a section of our society who enjoy the freedom of our 2nd Amendment. BTW, we are, I believe,
the only country on earth WITH a "2nd Amendment". And we lead the world in freedom and democracy. Go figure, eh?
See my above post as a response to this one.
-
Rover on Rover's morning glory, who by the way is a gun rights guy, is having this arguement right now, and his position is the same as what I said about this. Interesting stuff.
Rover appears to be more intelligent than he actually is because he's typically arguing with the Dieter and Douchey. Those two are the biggest idiots in radio.
Rover appears to be more intelligent than he actually is because he's typically arguing with the Dieter and Douchey. Those two are the biggest idiots in radio.
I just found it to he interesting, I'm not speaking on what you percieve to be his intelligence.
-
Yeah, Cal's post after you said "not all or nothing" was literally about all or nothing.
Also, Cal, I don't think old people being afraid is the best thing to base policy on
-
Don't worry when the guns are gone you get shit like this.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/4581871.stm
a bunch of maniacs trying to legislate away reality.
-
David Frum, to Cysko's point:
A maniac with violent fantasies attacks a Texas college, but with a knife, not a gun. He stabs 14 people. And … nobody was killed.
Twelve of the injured people were taken to the hospital and two refused treatment. Of the dozen in the hospital, two are in critical condition and four are in fair condition, according to Harris County Sheriff Adrian Garcia.
Happily, the two victims in critical condition have since been upgraded to "good condition."
The gun is the difference between a violent maniac and a homicidal maniac.
-
His intent wasn't to kill, that's all, or he could easily have done it with ease.
And it's a lot different in an attack on innocent, helpless children in grade school,
and an attack on young adults in college. The college attacker was tackled and stopped by another student.
Seems that it shouldn't have to be explained ......
-
David Frum, to Cysko's point:
A maniac with violent fantasies attacks a Texas college, but with a knife, not a gun. He stabs 14 people. And … nobody was killed.
Twelve of the injured people were taken to the hospital and two refused treatment. Of the dozen in the hospital, two are in critical condition and four are in fair condition, according to Harris County Sheriff Adrian Garcia.
Happily, the two victims in critical condition have since been upgraded to "good condition."
The gun is the difference between a violent maniac and a homicidal maniac.
David Frum, to Cysko's point:
A maniac with violent fantasies attacks a Texas college, but with a knife, not a gun. He stabs 14 people. And … nobody was killed.
Twelve of the injured people were taken to the hospital and two refused treatment. Of the dozen in the hospital, two are in critical condition and four are in fair condition, according to Harris County Sheriff Adrian Garcia.
Happily, the two victims in critical condition have since been upgraded to "good condition."
The gun is the difference between a violent maniac and a homicidal maniac.
We're still doing the body count thing?
-
David Frum, to Cysko's point:
A maniac with violent fantasies attacks a Texas college, but with a knife, not a gun. He stabs 14 people. And … nobody was killed.
Twelve of the injured people were taken to the hospital and two refused treatment. Of the dozen in the hospital, two are in critical condition and four are in fair condition, according to Harris County Sheriff Adrian Garcia.
Happily, the two victims in critical condition have since been upgraded to "good condition."
The gun is the difference between a violent maniac and a homicidal maniac.
We're still doing the body count thing?
We're still doing the body count thing?
Leg, I've specified I'm only comparing the results of a mass attack with a knife vs a mass attack with a gun as a way to combat the old "but people will still kill people with a knife/brick/pipe whatever" argument, so in this instance the body count is rather important. Like; the whole point. The point is a mass attack with a knife is considerably more likely to wind up with most or all of the victims surviving
-
Oh come on...
Everybody knows that stabbing people is against the law!
I can't imagine how this could have possibly happened.
WSS
-
You guys still don't get it at all. All you want to hear is total victory or total defeat. Think somewhere in the middle. If gun deaths could be lowered in the same way dui deaths have been lowered everyone would call that acceptable
You guys still don't get it at all. All you want to hear is total victory or total defeat. Think somewhere in the middle. If gun deaths could be lowered in the same way dui deaths have been lowered everyone would call that acceptable
YES, but I am not willing to sacrifice my freedoms for the sake of safety and protection. When you begin doing that it is a slippery slope where the government can ban anything "for safety's sake."
-
You guys still don't get it at all. All you want to hear is total victory or total defeat. Think somewhere in the middle. If gun deaths could be lowered in the same way dui deaths have been lowered everyone would call that acceptable
YES, but I am not willing to sacrifice my freedoms for the sake of safety and protection. When you begin doing that it is a slippery slope where the government can ban anything "for safety's sake."
YES, but I am not willing to sacrifice my freedoms for the sake of safety and protection. When you begin doing that it is a slippery slope where the government can ban anything "for safety's sake."
Well, baby bunker, many people feel the same way as you but ill bet any change in the status quo and you'd immediately be freaking out about "losing your freedoms" common sense gun control isn't Losing your freedom any more than mandating auto insurance was losing a freedom. I understand how you feel, but I don't agree with it.
-
YES, but I am not willing to sacrifice my freedoms for the sake of safety and protection. When you begin doing that it is a slippery slope where the government can ban anything "for safety's sake."
Well, baby bunker, many people feel the same way as you but ill bet any change in the status quo and you'd immediately be freaking out about "losing your freedoms" common sense gun control isn't Losing your freedom any more than mandating auto insurance was losing a freedom. I understand how you feel, but I don't agree with it.
Well, baby bunker, many people feel the same way as you but ill bet any change in the status quo and you'd immediately be freaking out about "losing your freedoms" common sense gun control isn't Losing your freedom any more than mandating auto insurance was losing a freedom. I understand how you feel, but I don't agree with it.
Please define "common sense gun control" because that is a very vague statement. Harsher background checks are fine by me, but limiting which weapons you can buy and banning high capacity magazines is not.
-
Then you aren't listening to the likes of Feinstein, Biden and all. It's been clearly stated, that for
universal background checks to work, there must be a national registry of all guns and gun owners.
And that, is worse than dangerous to our freedoms. See any other country who has ever gone that far.
They only go that far for good reason, and it isn't "to prevent whackos from getting guns"....
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login