Mega-Thread: Gun Control Thread

[Edge-]

You were never mourning. Your first post was ad hom, before the bodies hit room temperature. Stop pretending you care about children, or anyone.

Tone policing is really boring, FYI.

Maybe if kids being murdered in school wasn't a think that a disturbing number of Americans think is an acceptable price to pay for the Second Amendment after decades of this, we wouldn't be so snarky. This is a reaction to the continued lack of reaction from the pro-gun crowd on this topic.

[Linkedblade]

"gun laws don't work"
"good luck trying to change the constitution (implied neerer neerer neeeeeeener here)"

wow. it's almost like the same bad faith posting that plagued the school shooting thread has found it's way here!

I said come up with a solution that isn't a new law.

[Endus]

You were never mourning. Your first post was ad hom, before the bodies hit room temperature. Stop pretending you care about children, or anyone.

That's not an ad hominem. That's anger. Because children were murdered. And people like yourself aren't only okay with that, you spend your time actively resisting any effort to prevent future such attacks. You've spent the whole thread doing exactly that.

- - - Updated - - -

I said come up with a solution that isn't a new law.

Why?

Gun control laws are effective. See "literally everywhere else in the developed world".

You keep deflecting from that fact.

[Linkedblade]

Tone policing is really boring, FYI.

Maybe if kids being murdered in school wasn't a think that a disturbing number of Americans think is an acceptable price to pay for the Second Amendment after decades of this, we wouldn't be so snarky. This is a reaction to the continued lack of reaction from the pro-gun crowd on this topic.

Because acts of terror cause no deaths anywhere else in the world. Which is also the problem. You say the problems is guns, when the problem is bad actors. Gun control doesn't work, but you insist it's the guns.

[uuuhname]

I said come up with a solution that isn't a new law.

why don't you? like why the fuck should I go through the motions of making an argument when I'm more than certain it'll just be brushed aside by you. why the fuck should I waste my time on you?

why don't you address the comment on dead school kids first.

[Linkedblade]

That's not an ad hominem. That's anger. Because children were murdered. And people like yourself aren't only okay with that, you spend your time actively resisting any effort to prevent future such attacks. You've spent the whole thread doing exactly that.

- - - Updated - - -



Why?

Gun control laws are effective. See "literally everywhere else in the developed world".

You keep deflecting from that fact.

You've yet to supply any meaningful evidence except a subjective scoring system with moderate correlation.

[Edge-]

I'll reply to you because it looks Ike the other guy is banned. But it's ridiculous to think you can't go on an effective killing spree with a bolt action rifle.

Now we're moving goalposts to "bolt-action" which, fine, let's entertain this.

How many rounds can someone reasonably pump out per minute with a bolt-action - https://www.wideopenspaces.com/shoot...ast-semi-auto/

Damn, 10 in 6.5s is fast! However he's completely uninterrupted while chambering rounds and this doesn't really include the additional time for reloading and whatnot, even the act of chambering a round interrupts the shooter vs. a semi-automatic where the only time you stop shooting is if your magazine is dry.

But the world record? 35 shots in 1 minute which...seems extremely low compared to most semi-automatic rifles? - https://www.cleveland.com/nation/201...tomatic_1.html

Accounting for magazine changes and not "world record" level speeds put it at around 138 rounds per minute.

I sure think that one choice of weapon - semi-automatic - is gonna be the obvious one if your goal is maximum damage in the shortest period of time.

[Endus]

Because acts of terror cause no deaths anywhere else in the world.

Not to anywhere close to the rate that they do in the USA, not in the developed world. It isn't even close.

And when issues do come up, if we identify a weakness in our laws that contributed to that attack occurring, we amend the laws. Even if they weren't successful.

Which is also the problem. You say the problems is guns, when the problem is bad actors. Gun control doesn't work, but you insist it's the guns.

This tired old horseshit, again?

Unless you've got mind-reading tech or prophetic visions, you can't identify the "bad actors". What you can do is keep guns out of their hands.

[Linkedblade]

why don't you? like why the fuck should I go through the motions of making an argument when I'm more than certain it'll just be brushed aside by you. why the fuck should I waste my time on you?

why don't you address the comment on dead school kids first.

I did. They got brushed away by "you like dying kids" ad nauseum.

[Edge-]

Because acts of terror cause no deaths anywhere else in the world.

When did we transition to talking about terror attacks? Are we just talking about terror attacks with guns, or other attacks?

Which is also the problem.

Terror attacks are always a risk. But they're a risk for the government, military, intelligence community, and law enforcement to handle with their training and resources. Not randos.

You say the problems is guns, when the problem is bad actors. Gun control doesn't work, but you insist it's the guns.

Again, literally the rest of the developed world proves this to be a blatant lie and just bogus misinformation.

[Linkedblade]

Not to anywhere close to the rate that they do in the USA, not in the developed world. It isn't even close.

And when issues do come up, if we identify a weakness in our laws that contributed to that attack occurring, we amend the laws. Even if they weren't successful.



This tired old horseshit, again?

Unless you've got mind-reading tech or prophetic visions, you can't identify the "bad actors". What you can do is keep guns out of their hands.

Or let people be able to defend themselves.

[Edge-]

Or let people be able to defend themselves.

Except it's not needed in any other developed nation.

Curious that America is the only developed nation where people need a personal firearm for protection, innit? Sounds a lot more like a developing nation that's not quite sovereign yet because it does not have a monopoly on the use of force.

[Linkedblade]

When did we transition to talking about terror attacks? Are we just talking about terror attacks with guns, or other attacks?



Terror attacks are always a risk. But they're a risk for the government, military, intelligence community, and law enforcement to handle with their training and resources. Not randos.



Again, literally the rest of the developed world proves this to be a blatant lie and just bogus misinformation.

Mass killing or terror attack, usually imply the same thing.

[uuuhname]

I did. They got brushed away by "you like dying kids" ad nauseum.

I don't see how or why that's justification to not make your own argument.

[Endus]

You've yet to supply any meaningful evidence except a subjective scoring system with moderate correlation.

That's a lie. Asked and answered.

Plus, I don't have to convince you. Folks like yourself always act like that's the goal, that we have to strive to convince you to stop lying.

We don't.

We've got an audience.

We're speaking to them. So they can see that you are lying, and that we have nothing to hide. So long as we make that case, it really doesn't matter one whit how you feel about any of it.

We're not talking to you. We're responding to you, and talking to the audience we share. If you prefer to keep lying, that's fine. Makes our jobs so much easier the more you expose the dishonesty in your position, frankly.

[Linkedblade]

Except it's not needed in any other developed nation.

Curious that America is the only developed nation where people need a personal firearm for protection, innit? Sounds a lot more like a developing nation that's not quite sovereign yet because it does not have a monopoly on the use of force.

Yeah, of course. No developed nation is currently going through any kind of mass shootings on a daily basis.

[Edge-]

Yeah, of course. No developed nation is currently going through any kind of mass shootings on a daily basis.

I mean...outside of the US, which developed nation features regular mass shootings and school shootings?

[Linkedblade]

That's a lie. Asked and answered.

Plus, I don't have to convince you. Folks like yourself always act like that's the goal, that we have to strive to convince you to stop lying.

We don't.

We've got an audience.

We're speaking to them. So they can see that you are lying, and that we have nothing to hide. So long as we make that case, it really doesn't matter one whit how you feel about any of it.

We're not talking to you. We're responding to you, and talking to the audience we share. If you prefer to keep lying, that's fine. Makes our jobs so much easier the more you expose the dishonesty in your position, frankly.

All you've done in sprinkle an entire forum with nation bashing sentiments. How you are still an active user on this beyond reason.

- - - Updated - - -

I mean...outside of the US, which developed nation features regular mass shootings and school shootings?

Maybe Ukraine.

[Edge-]

All you've done in sprinkle an entire forum with nation bashing sentiments. How you are still an active user on this beyond reason.

American here, he is in no way, shape, or form "bashing" America.

If your feelings are being hurt that's a "you" problem, but he's not bashing the nation I live in. He's highlighting a problem in the country, which is not nation bashing unless your position is that any criticism of a nation is inherently "bashing".

- - - Updated - - -

Maybe Ukraine.

...I honestly can't tell if your serious or this is just you continuing to try to be cute.

Because if you're serious here, like, holy fucking shit dude. I guess America is in a perpetual state of civil war?

[Linkedblade]

American here, he is in no way, shape, or form "bashing" America.

If your feelings are being hurt that's a "you" problem, but he's not bashing the nation I live in. He's highlighting a problem in the country, which is not nation bashing unless your position is that any criticism of a nation is inherently "bashing".

Saying people enjoy seeing children get hurt, is clearly ad hominem. Saying the country does the same thing, is nation bashing.