Liberals demand more gun control after shootings

How about some accountability for the systemic failure of law enforcement and welfare administration that completely allowed this kid to slip through the cracks. Anyone going to lose their job at child welfare services? Nope. Anyone going to lose their job at the fbi? Nope. Anyone going to lose their job at local law enforcement? Nope.

How about a section of physical education that teaches self defense?

How about teachers that are better trained in threat mitigation?

How about requiring more than a single medical opinion before releasing a child remitted for psych eval?

 

Sure do all that and gun control. Because the rest of the developed world did not get low gun deaths from your plan. So let’s do what is proven to work as well

 

97% of the country now supports a universal background check.

So those who don't are now completely in the fringe.

 

Which post hoc fallacy did I float?? It seems a reasonable statistical argument to me.

 

You want to argue that the number of guns in the US is responsible for the greater number of gun-related murder in the US.
That is, you argue correlation = causation. Post hoc.

Three questions to address your point:
What % of the guns in the US are used to commit murder?
What % of the guns in the UK are used to commit murder?
What % of the gun in Germany are used to commit murder?

 

and of course your wrong on all three. The us average age is 37, Germany and France early forties. Germany is 90% German, France is 90%French.

 

America has 60 times more blacks and Mexicans.

Take black Americans and Latinos out of the equation, America's murder rate is comparable to Europe.



2018 Race of Victim/Assailant
Race Victim Assailant
Black 37 7
Hispanic 12 -
White/Other 2 1
Police 1 -
Self Defense - 1
Unknown 7 50
As of 2/13/18

https://heyjackass.com/

 

Nonsense

 

A law from 1872 prohibits the French Republic from conducting census by making any distinction between its citizens in terms of race or religious beliefs, so French demographics can be a bit hard to determine. In 2004, it was estimated that 85% of the population of Metropolitan France was white or of European origin, with 10% from North Africa, 3.5% Black and 1.5% Asian.

http://worldpopulationreview.com/countries/france-population/

 

Nation master and the CIA fact book disagree.

 

Nonsense

 

So you you don't. trust nationmaster or fact book?

 

Dude do you know you can be black, asian, hispanic or arab and be a german? You are hilarious. That just means you were born there

 

Wikipedia put US at 38.1 France 41.4 and Germany at over 47.

 

Dude ther census still divides by race and ethnicity.

 

So they have few gun crimes due to ethnicity? Is that it? LOL

 

I care far more about people not dying than I care about the second amendment. It was enshrined at a time when the best weapons technology had guns firing once every thirty to forty five seconds. The founding fathers never envisioned a weapon technically capable of killing 300 or more people per minute and capable of being operated by one person with ease. In other words the second amendment is horribly dated.

Also, what kind of ridiculous self defense scenarios are you daydreaming about where the ability to kill one person per second is not enough?

 

I see. The Constitution only matters to you when you agree with it.

Fact is, the Constitution protects the right to not go to church, the right to kneel during the anthem, the right to an abortion, the right to vote, the right to marry whoever will agree to it, and the right to keep and bear arms with equal veracity.

And so, while you don't like the 2nd, you don't get to ignore it.

 

You done acting like you have the moral high ground? The right to vote doesn’t have a body count associated with it. Nor does the right to kneel during the national anthem or the right to get an abortion or any of that other stuff you mentioned. The weapons that the second amendment allows us to own are for the sole purpose of killing humans as fast as possible. Trying to pretend gun ownership is just like any other right is pathetic head in the sand mentality.

The constitution is not infallible. That’s why amendments exist. If one of the amendments is responsible for putting countless innocent Americans in the ground you’re damn ****ing right I don’t support it. Are you completely nuts?

 

If you cared about people not dying you would not champion ludicrous nonsense like gun control. Your ignorance is clear. "300 people a minute"?? Spare me. Repeating arms existed at the time of the ratification of the Constitution as well. Ever hear of a Puckle gun? How about the Girandoni rifle? To claim the Founders "never envisioned" more advanced weapons is ignorance at its finest.

Oh, and you can't ignore the Constitution just because you find it inconvenient. If the Second Amendment is as dated as you claim, then you shouldn't have any problem enacting a Constitutional amendment to repeal it, now should you?

I hate to pop your bubble, but you clearly know NOTHING about what you're spouting about. I spent a great deal of time in the security and law enforcement fields, and have taken some of the most advanced training available today. I have been part of post-shooting investigations and watched dash cam videos of gun battles between violent criminals and police, as well as security camera footage of fights between criminals and private citizens.

One round a second? One round fired pretty much NEVER means a bad guy goes down or stops trying to kill you, unless the spine or the brain is hit; sometimes not even then, especially if drugs are involved. Law enforcement is trained to fire and continue firing until the threat is visibly neutralized. For decades they were taught to fire two rapid shots at center mass and then to fire a shot to the head or pelvis if the bad guy was not neutralized by those two hits (called a "double tap" or "hammer"). Faced with multiple assailants, as we see more and more with gang crime, one round a second means you shoot one bad guy and then even if you neutralize him his buddy's gonna shoot you dead before you can fire again.

SO, that's not "ridiculous" or "daydreams"; it is the harsh reality of real world violent confrontations. Now go do some research and get some education before you embarrass yourself again.

 

Then pursue a Constitutional amendment to repeal it. Otherwise, shut up. You can't ignore the Constitution just because you find it inconvenient.

 

Stop pretending that I’m ignoring the constitution. It makes you look like a complete fool.

 

Oh my god are you also a special forces navy seal with over 300 confirmed kills??? Spare me your claims of expertise and the “fruits” of them.

Yes you’re living a fantasy, talking about his buddy getting you after you get him. Just how many people are trying to kill you all at once?? They’re just coming out of the woodwork I guess.

The puckle gun was crew operated and the girandoninri rifle had other limitations that made it far less dangerous and even an off the shelf AR 15 and you know it. Not to mention those weapons weren’t littering the countryside in the millions like vastly more dangerous modern weapons do today.

 

Never said I was a SEAL, or even in the military. I said I was a law enforcement officer, which is the truth, and even a rudimentary amount of research on the subject of modern law enforcement defensive tactics demonstrates how utterly lacking in knowledge you are regarding the subject.

Once again, your lack of knowledge is profound. You're the one in a fantasy world, and I'm the one who understands harsh reality. You don't know what you're talking about, we both know it, and your shrieking and histrionics trying to hide it only make you look pathetic.

Yeah, you REALLY don't know what you're talking about; to say nothing of how you clearly failed to do your research. The point was the Founders were well aware of the advancements of technology and were well aware of what was possible. Your sad attempts at rationalization are not my problem.

No, the one who has exposed themselves as a fool is you. You want to ban guns. The Constitution precludes that. You claim the Constitution is out of date, which is irrelevant because the Constitution needs to be Amended before you can ignore a clearly stated provision of it.

Checkmate.

Have a nice day.

 

If by Liberals" you mean "Americans", you are correct.

Those hellbent on permissiveness and maintaining the status quo in regard to the obscene frequency of firearm massacres in the US are confronting a popular movement that no longer panders to special interests, extremists, paranoids, and fetishists. The lives of our children are far too precious.