(cache) comrh comments on Pro-Gun Control Group Inflates Campus Shooting Stats, Gets Massively Debunked

It is clear what the data comes from on the same page: "Data: Incidents were classified as school shootings when a firearm was discharged inside a school building or on school or campus grounds, as documented in publicly reported news accounts. This includes assaults, homicides, suicides, and accidental shootings. Incidents in which guns were brought into schools but not fired there, or were fired off school grounds after having been possessed in schools, were not included. "

Further more: "That works out to about one shooting every five weeks,” CNN reports." Is that not too fucking many? When will elements of the pro-2nd amendment lobby get there head out of their ass and admit there is a problem like the rest of the country already has realized.

固定リンク

[+]johnnybgoode 6 ポイント7 ポイント8 ポイント 6 時間前 (37 子コメント)

[–]johnnybgoode 6 ポイント7 ポイント8 ポイント 6 時間前

Is that not too fucking many?

It is way too fucking many. There is a serious problem. But if your solution is to infringe upon individuals' right to keep & bear arms, then you are removing many more people's (including elderly/disabled/petite individuals) ability to adequately defend themselves from violent muggings, robberies, rapes, and home invasions. Even if criminals had no access to firearms either, what do you think Granny's chances are in a knife fight?

Firearms are used wayyyy more often in self-defense than they are by mentally unstable domestic terrorists. Check out /r/dgu and you'll see over 50 in the past month just posted to that subreddit. We need to find a solution that doesn't put all of those average, law-abiding people at a disadvantage.

固定リンク
親コメント

[+]man2010 スコアが基準値未満のコメント (36 子コメント)

[–]man2010 -14 ポイント-13 ポイント-12 ポイント 6 時間前

Give granny some pepper spray, a tazer, etc. and she could certainly defend herself in a knife fight.

固定リンク
親コメント

[+]PM_ME_YOUR_GUNS 9 ポイント10 ポイント11 ポイント 6 時間前 (6 子コメント)

[–]PM_ME_YOUR_GUNS 9 ポイント10 ポイント11 ポイント 6 時間前

This is what a knife fight looks like

Now tell me granny's gonna defend herself from that

固定リンク
親コメント

[+]man2010 スコアが基準値未満のコメント (5 子コメント)

[–]man2010 -8 ポイント-7 ポイント-6 ポイント 6 時間前

If the example we're using is when the attacker is already within striking distance of granny then a gun isn't going to help granny much either as she will have already been stabbed multiple times before she could even draw her weapon.

固定リンク
親コメント

[+]PM_ME_YOUR_GUNS 10 ポイント11 ポイント12 ポイント 6 時間前 (4 子コメント)

[–]PM_ME_YOUR_GUNS 10 ポイント11 ポイント12 ポイント 6 時間前

Sorry, I forgot that attackers like to close from great distance, giving plenty of warning for grandma to pull out her one-shot taser

固定リンク
親コメント

[+]man2010 スコアが基準値未満のコメント (3 子コメント)

[–]man2010 -10 ポイント-9 ポイント-8 ポイント 6 時間前

And I forgot that granny would be able to get her gun out and accurately fire it while being stabbed multiple times.

固定リンク
親コメント

[+]PM_ME_YOUR_GUNS 9 ポイント10 ポイント11 ポイント 5 時間前 (2 子コメント)

[–]PM_ME_YOUR_GUNS 9 ポイント10 ポイント11 ポイント 5 時間前

My point is that if he's that close, she's already fucked. Why limit her self-defense options for when she's not fucked?

固定リンク
親コメント

[+]man2010 スコアが基準値未満のコメント (1 子コメント)

[–]man2010 -14 ポイント-13 ポイント-12 ポイント 4 時間前

Why limit her self-defense options for when she's not fucked?

In that case, should nuclear weapons be legal for the public to own? Should the public be free to own explosives with few restrictions? What about drones with warheads on them?

固定リンク
親コメント

[+]flyingwolf 6 ポイント7 ポイント8 ポイント 3 時間前 (0 子コメント)

[–]flyingwolf 6 ポイント7 ポイント8 ポイント 3 時間前

In that case, should nuclear weapons be legal for the public to own?

Are you new at this?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2tLVPVS0Bc

Enjoy.

Should the public be free to own explosives with few restrictions?

We already are.

What about drones with warheads on them?

See item 1.

固定リンク
親コメント

[+]johnnybgoode 6 ポイント7 ポイント8 ポイント 6 時間前 (11 子コメント)

[–]johnnybgoode 6 ポイント7 ポイント8 ポイント 6 時間前

Both of those require you to get quite close to the attacker and even then there are circumstances like thick clothes that tazer barbs won't go through or wind blowing OC away from the target and potentially back at you that can make both of those options unreliable at best and dangerous to the operator at worst. A firearm is the most consistent and reliable weapon. I don't know about you but if someone corners me and pulls a knife in a parking garage at night, I don't want to have to wait till they're within 10' and hope both barbs make good contact on my single-shot tazer. Screw that up and you've booked yourself a ticket to the OR for a perforated abdomen.

固定リンク
親コメント

[+]man2010 スコアが基準値未満のコメント (10 子コメント)

[–]man2010 -9 ポイント-8 ポイント-7 ポイント 6 時間前

A knife requires the attacker to get close to you as well.

固定リンク
親コメント

[+]johnnybgoode 7 ポイント8 ポイント9 ポイント 6 時間前 (9 子コメント)

[–]johnnybgoode 7 ポイント8 ポイント9 ポイント 6 時間前

Right, and why the hell would you ever want that???

固定リンク
親コメント

[+]man2010 スコアが基準値未満のコメント (8 子コメント)

[–]man2010 -7 ポイント-6 ポイント-5 ポイント 6 時間前

Would you rather the attacker have a gun and be able to attack from farther away?

固定リンク
親コメント

[+]johnnybgoode 5 ポイント6 ポイント7 ポイント 5 時間前 (7 子コメント)

[–]johnnybgoode 5 ポイント6 ポイント7 ポイント 5 時間前

That would be possible, but it doesn't happen very often that way because the typical attacker wants something from you, whether it be your money/purse/wallet/car/sex/etc. They have to come within arms reach to get that from you.

As a victim, the larger the buffer you can keep between you and the attacker, the more reaction time you'll have. Having a firearm also means that if possible you can keep moving away from the attacker while using your defensive weapon in order to keep them from coming in physical contact and maintaining that reaction time. Most other forms of defense require you to be so close to the attacker that you end up being physically harmed as well and possibly overpowered.

固定リンク
親コメント

[+]man2010 スコアが基準値未満のコメント (6 子コメント)

[–]man2010 -7 ポイント-6 ポイント-5 ポイント 4 時間前

Then the stabbing that you posted doesn't happen often either according to the way you describe a typical attacker, since once the robber has what they want (money/purse/wallet/car/sex/etc.) the encounter is over.

固定リンク
親コメント

[+]flyingwolf 2 ポイント3 ポイント4 ポイント 3 時間前 (4 子コメント)

[–]flyingwolf 2 ポイント3 ポイント4 ポイント 3 時間前

In many cases they take what they want then kill your ass to avoid you snitching, dead men tell no tales.

固定リンク
親コメント

このスレッドの続きを見る

[+]johnnybgoode 1 ポイント2 ポイント3 ポイント 55 分前 (0 子コメント)

[–]johnnybgoode 1 ポイント2 ポイント3 ポイント 55 分前

So your plan of action is to hope that if you're ever attacked, the attacker is nice enough not to kill you? Great self defense plan.

固定リンク
親コメント

[+]flyingwolf 4 ポイント5 ポイント6 ポイント 6 時間前 (16 子コメント)

[–]flyingwolf 4 ポイント5 ポイント6 ポイント 6 時間前

I put pepper spray on my Ramen noodles, I will laugh at you if you spray me with it. I will also have plenty of time to kill your ass.

You are delusional.

固定リンク
親コメント

[+]man2010 スコアが基準値未満のコメント (15 子コメント)

[–]man2010 -12 ポイント-11 ポイント-10 ポイント 5 時間前

You are delusional if you think that the solution to gun violence is more guns.

固定リンク
親コメント

[+]flyingwolf 6 ポイント7 ポイント8 ポイント 5 時間前 (14 子コメント)

[–]flyingwolf 6 ポイント7 ポイント8 ポイント 5 時間前

Did I say this?

No the solution to gun violence is complex and should probably start somewhere in the mental health arena.

But you too are delusional if you think the solution to gun violence is to ban guns.

If you need a refresher just ask how that war on drugs is going.

固定リンク
親コメント

[+]man2010 スコアが基準値未満のコメント (13 子コメント)

[–]man2010 -10 ポイント-9 ポイント-8 ポイント 5 時間前

But you too are delusional if you think the solution to gun violence is to ban guns.

I never said that either, but stricter federal gun laws are certainly a part of solving gun violence.

固定リンク
親コメント

[+]flyingwolf 5 ポイント6 ポイント7 ポイント 5 時間前 (12 子コメント)

[–]flyingwolf 5 ポイント6 ポイント7 ポイント 5 時間前

How? It is already illegal to use a weapon to commit a violent crime.

It is illegal for felons to own weapons, it is illegal to own an automatic weapon (without a shit ton of money and hoop jumping). It is illegal to modify a semi automatic weapon to be fully automatic.

It is illegal to sell a weapon to a person you suspect might not be legal.

It is illegal to sell a weapon without an NICS check if you are a licensed firearms dealer.

It is illegal to commit murder.

All of these things are done anyway, what makes you think that a criminal is going to care that he is breaking one more law?

What would you suggest as a stricter federal gun law that would help to solve gun violence?

固定リンク
親コメント

[+]man2010 スコアが基準値未満のコメント (11 子コメント)

[–]man2010 -8 ポイント-7 ポイント-6 ポイント 5 時間前

More guns means easier access to them for criminals. If you want to lower the amount of gun-related crime you have to lower the amount of guns that criminals have access to. To do this we need stricter federal gun laws which limit the types and how many guns people can own, as well as ammunition restrictions.

固定リンク
親コメント

[+]flyingwolf 6 ポイント7 ポイント8 ポイント 5 時間前 (10 子コメント)

[–]flyingwolf 6 ポイント7 ポイント8 ポイント 5 時間前

So gun confiscation.

Check out Chicago for how well this worked. No guns allowed, highest incident of gun violence in the country.

How would you suggest we amend the 2nd amendment to the constitution?
For that matter how would American citizens then defend themselves against a tyrannical regime?

固定リンク
親コメント

このスレッドの続きを見る

[+]flyingwolf 6 ポイント7 ポイント8 ポイント 6 時間前 (0 子コメント)

[–]flyingwolf 6 ポイント7 ポイント8 ポイント 6 時間前

And the debunking clearly showed that they counted shooting that happened to be within a mile or so of a school.

If someone is shot on my street, and I live a mile from the school I would not consider it a school shooting, no one in their right mind would.

But Everytown and MDA did.

固定リンク
親コメント

π Rendered by PID 22594 on app-20 at 2014-06-13 03:57:39.323773+00:00 running e247af8 country code: JP.

progun

Announcement: Get Yourself Flair!

調停者

progun

Announcement: Get Yourself Flair!

調停者

この操作にはログインまたは登録が必要です

新しいアカウントを作る

privacy philosophy

ログイン