Multiple shot dead by Florida gunman
Scroll to see replies
Original post by Bornblue
You keep arguing on irrelevant points.
Let's say you are correct and it was a gun-free zone. What is your point? That it shouldn't be a gun-free zone? That everyone in the airport should carry a gun? WHAT IS YOUR POINT?
I can tell for absolute certain that one less gun in that airport would have meant five less deaths.
The idea that the way to tackle gun crime is more guns, as you propose, is frankly ludicrous.
By the way, comparing the USA to a country with far weaker law enforcement and far less powerful law enforcement agencies such as Jamaica is a void comparison. But I can tell you that if there were no guns in Jamaica, that there would be no gun crime too.
Let's say you are correct and it was a gun-free zone. What is your point? That it shouldn't be a gun-free zone? That everyone in the airport should carry a gun? WHAT IS YOUR POINT?
I can tell for absolute certain that one less gun in that airport would have meant five less deaths.
The idea that the way to tackle gun crime is more guns, as you propose, is frankly ludicrous.
By the way, comparing the USA to a country with far weaker law enforcement and far less powerful law enforcement agencies such as Jamaica is a void comparison. But I can tell you that if there were no guns in Jamaica, that there would be no gun crime too.
That gun free zones are basically saying shoot here.
That doesn't mean that the the murder rate would fall in America in countries that have banned guns the level stayed the same or increased.
The idea that the best way to protect people is to leave them defenceless while criminals use it to their advantage is ludicrous, as has been pointed out somewhere between 89 and 97% of gun crime is committed with illegal guns so crack down on that but the politicians don't want to because "it disproportionately effects minority's"
I like how you just use Jamaica when Ireland, the uk and Australia were also mentioned by jammy in his post which I talked about
Original post by Bornblue
FFS. I beg of you. Just once answer a question someone asks you. Please. You are so incredibly frustrating because you never read what anyone else writes.
If you don't support giving everyone a gun at an airport then why make a point of it being a gun-free zone? Unless you think everyone there should have a gun?
If everyone in an airport carried a gun, it would be a lot less, not more safe. Imagine how many innocent people would be killed if 100 citizens thought someone was a bad man with a gun and shot him at the same time.
You know what would make more sense than giving everyone a gun in an airport? Making sure than no one had a gun at the airport so that such tragedies wouldn't happen in the first place.
If you don't support giving everyone a gun at an airport then why make a point of it being a gun-free zone? Unless you think everyone there should have a gun?
If everyone in an airport carried a gun, it would be a lot less, not more safe. Imagine how many innocent people would be killed if 100 citizens thought someone was a bad man with a gun and shot him at the same time.
You know what would make more sense than giving everyone a gun in an airport? Making sure than no one had a gun at the airport so that such tragedies wouldn't happen in the first place.
I'm against law abiding citizens no being able to have a gun which is what you support and these gun free zone shootings shows what would happen with your policy.
You mean making it illegal to carry the gun in a terminal that was tried and 5 people died here
Original post by joecphillips
I'm against law abiding citizens no being able to have a gun which is what you support and these gun free zone shootings shows what would happen with your policy.
You mean making it illegal to carry the gun in a terminal that was tried and 5 people died here
You mean making it illegal to carry the gun in a terminal that was tried and 5 people died here
Yet again you have not answered the question.
You are utterly pathetic.
Original post by Bornblue
Yet again you have not answered the question.
You are utterly pathetic.
You are utterly pathetic.
I answered the question just not how you want me to you are pathetic you go on about gun enthusiasts being against this and that when replying to me despite me already saying some changes that could and should have been made
Answer this question: if gun free zones are so good why do so many mass shootings happen within them?
Original post by pikachū
The Goyim know
Original post by joecphillips
That gun free zones are basically saying shoot here.
So in other words, you are saying that the answer to gun crime is more guns. You've changed your position on this twice now.
It's an idiotic position at best. You know how you stop people shooting others? You make sure that there are no guns in society rather than giving everyone a gun.
But let's accept your ludicrous suggestion that airports would be safer if eveyone had a gun and play a little thought experiment:
If everyone is allowed to carry a gun in an airport, how would anyone know whether someone carrying a gun was a good person or bad person? They wouldn't know that someone carrying a gun was a bad person until the time that he had shot and killed at least one person. By that time, it is already too late.
Then what happens? Rather than fleeing a gunman, hundreds of people with guns suddenly start firing at this bad gunman, which is almost guaranteed to kill people in the crossfire.
Yeah, great idea.
That doesn't mean that the the murder rate would fall in America in countries that have banned guns the level stayed the same or increased.
The idea that the best way to protect people is to leave them defenceless while criminals use it to their advantage is ludicrous, as has been pointed out somewhere between 89 and 97% of gun crime is committed with illegal guns so crack down on that but the politicians don't want to because "it disproportionately effects minority's"
I like how you just use Jamaica when Ireland, the uk and Australia were also mentioned by jammy in his post which I talked about
You brought up Jamaica, not me.
As for the UK, we have far, far less gun deaths than the USA and we have no guns. Must be a wild coincidence eh? There can't possibly be any connection between people not having guns and people not killing other people with guns...
America needs to take a leaf out of Japan's book when making its gun laws.
Original post by joecphillips
I answered the question just not how you want me to you are pathetic you go on about gun enthusiasts being against this and that when replying to me despite me already saying some changes that could and should have been made
Answer this question: if gun free zones are so good why do so many mass shootings happen within them?
Answer this question: if gun free zones are so good why do so many mass shootings happen within them?
You haven't answered the question. You gave an answer to a different question that you wanted me to ask.
Answer YES or NO to this question:
Would airports and nightclubs be safer if everyone was allowed to carry guns in them?
Yes or no please. I don't need an explanation, just a simple one word answer.
Original post by Bornblue
So in other words, you are saying that the answer to gun crime is more guns. You've changed your position on this twice now.
It's an idiotic position at best. You know how you stop people shooting others? You make sure that there are no guns in society rather than giving everyone a gun.
But let's accept your ludicrous suggestion that airports would be safer if eveyone had a gun and play a little thought experiment:
If everyone is allowed to carry a gun in an airport, how would anyone know whether someone carrying a gun was a good person or bad person? They wouldn't know that someone carrying a gun was a bad person until the time that he had shot and killed at least one person. By that time, it is already too late.
Then what happens? Rather than fleeing a gunman, hundreds of people with guns suddenly start firing at this bad gunman, which is almost guaranteed to kill people in the crossfire.
Yeah, great idea.
You brought up Jamaica, not me.
As for the UK, we have far, far less gun deaths than the USA and we have no guns. Must be a wild coincidence eh? There can't possibly be any connection between people not having guns and people not killing other people with guns...
It's an idiotic position at best. You know how you stop people shooting others? You make sure that there are no guns in society rather than giving everyone a gun.
But let's accept your ludicrous suggestion that airports would be safer if eveyone had a gun and play a little thought experiment:
If everyone is allowed to carry a gun in an airport, how would anyone know whether someone carrying a gun was a good person or bad person? They wouldn't know that someone carrying a gun was a bad person until the time that he had shot and killed at least one person. By that time, it is already too late.
Then what happens? Rather than fleeing a gunman, hundreds of people with guns suddenly start firing at this bad gunman, which is almost guaranteed to kill people in the crossfire.
Yeah, great idea.
You brought up Jamaica, not me.
As for the UK, we have far, far less gun deaths than the USA and we have no guns. Must be a wild coincidence eh? There can't possibly be any connection between people not having guns and people not killing other people with guns...
I also said how jammy brought up the murder rate and mentioned the uk, Ireland and Australia in a earlier comment in the discussion or can we only use the uk when it suits your argument?
Which is why I said murder rate, what good is it stopping 5 murders with guns if it creates at least 5 murders with knives?
With the curre Gun laws not everyone is allowed a gun if you start asking questions that reflect the situation as it is know instead of loaded questions to push your beliefs I will answer them clearly but until then I will answer the question without responding to your beliefs.
Original post by Bornblue
You haven't answered the question. You gave an answer to a different question that you wanted me to ask.
Answer YES or NO to this question:
Would airports and nightclubs be safer if everyone was allowed to carry guns in them?
Yes or no please. I don't need an explanation, just a simple one word answer.
Answer YES or NO to this question:
Would airports and nightclubs be safer if everyone was allowed to carry guns in them?
Yes or no please. I don't need an explanation, just a simple one word answer.
You are not asking the right question you are already ignoring the laws about purchasing a gun that are already in place when you start to take into account gun purchasing laws then you will get the answer but until then I will answer the question taking into account the current laws on purchasing guns.
I have already talked about people who shouldn't own guns so maybe ask a decent question next time
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by Bornblue
You haven't answered the question. You gave an answer to a different question that you wanted me to ask.
Answer YES or NO to this question:
Would airports and nightclubs be safer if everyone was allowed to carry guns in them?
Yes or no please. I don't need an explanation, just a simple one word answer.
Answer YES or NO to this question:
Would airports and nightclubs be safer if everyone was allowed to carry guns in them?
Yes or no please. I don't need an explanation, just a simple one word answer.
Yep.
Original post by Little Toy Gun
The second amendment states that it's for "a well regulated Militia" but let's just assume it meant every private citizen including mentally ill people and babies.
To the first, that's a debate that's been extensively explored by the US Supreme Court. To the second, one could argue that's pretty spurious. Many laws in many countries are not extended to cover those in alieni juris.
Original post by joecphillips
I also said how jammy brought up the murder rate and mentioned the uk, Ireland and Australia in a earlier comment in the discussion or can we only use the uk when it suits your argument?
Which is why I said murder rate, what good is it stopping 5 murders with guns if it creates at least 5 murders with knives?
Which is why I said murder rate, what good is it stopping 5 murders with guns if it creates at least 5 murders with knives?
Are you really this stupid or are you putting it on?
It's far, far more difficult to kill five people with a knife in quick succession, than it is with a gun. It's far easier to run from someone with a knife than someone with a gun.
There is no question that it is easier to kill someone with a gun, than with a knife...
How do you know if a gunman is good or bad until he starts to shoot people? What about the inevitability of people being caught up in the cross fire?
With the curre Gun laws not everyone is allowed a gun if you start asking questions that reflect the situation as it is know instead of loaded questions to push your beliefs I will answer them clearly but until then I will answer the question without responding to your beliefs.
You still haven't answered my question.
Would airports be safer if everyone had a gun?
Original post by joecphillips
You are not asking the right question you are already ignoring the laws about purchasing a gun that are already in place when you start to take into account gun purchasing laws then you will get the answer but until then I will answer the question taking into account the current laws on purchasing guns.
I have already talked about people who shouldn't own guns so maybe ask a decent question next time
I have already talked about people who shouldn't own guns so maybe ask a decent question next time
HAHHAHAHHA. Yet again you pathetically avoid the question.
I am asking you a fairly simple question because I want to know your opinion on the matter.
Would airports be safer if everyone had a gun? Yes or no. It's a one word answer.
Original post by joecphillips
You say less guns=less murder when in many countries banning guns has not reduced the murder rate, Jamaica is one example of where your failed logic has been enacted.
You say less guns=less murder when in many countries banning guns has not reduced the murder rate, Jamaica is one example of where your failed logic has been enacted.
I thought a lot of the problems in Jamaica were down to gang issues. It isn't as if gun controls were brought in and a small number of criminals suddenly developed a taste for shooting now defenceless people.
Original post by joecphillips
That gun free zones are basically saying shoot here.
So why isn't Heathrow seeing mass shootings? Why hasn't the UK had a school massacre since 1996?
And are you seriously suggesting that there should be no gun free zones?
Original post by jape
Yep.
Finally! Someone who actually answers a question that you ask them.
Take a bow.
Original post by Bornblue
Are you really this stupid or are you putting it on?
It's far, far more difficult to kill five people with a knife in quick succession, than it is with a gun. It's far easier to run from someone with a knife than someone with a gun.
There is no question that it is easier to kill someone with a gun, than with a knife...
How do you know if a gunman is good or bad until he starts to shoot people? What about the inevitability of people being caught up in the cross fire?
You still haven't answered my question.
Would airports be safer if everyone had a gun?
It's far, far more difficult to kill five people with a knife in quick succession, than it is with a gun. It's far easier to run from someone with a knife than someone with a gun.
There is no question that it is easier to kill someone with a gun, than with a knife...
How do you know if a gunman is good or bad until he starts to shoot people? What about the inevitability of people being caught up in the cross fire?
You still haven't answered my question.
Would airports be safer if everyone had a gun?
It's been shown that banning guns does not lower the murder rate yet you ignore this, you would happily exchange 5 gun murders for 5 knife murders it doesn't matter how easy something is it matters that banning guns has been proven not to lower the murder rate in the uk and Australia and have the opposite effect and raise it in the Ireland and Jamaica but you ignore that.
Is a murder involving a gun somehow worse than any other murder?
You still ignore the fact not everyone can get a gun in America and I have talked about people who shouldn't be allowed to have a gun
Original post by joecphillips
It's been shown that banning guns does not lower the murder rate yet you ignore this, you would happily exchange 5 gun murders for 5 knife murders it doesn't matter how easy something is it matters that banning guns has been proven not to lower the murder rate in the uk and Australia and have the opposite effect and raise it in the Ireland and Jamaica but you ignore that.
Is a murder involving a gun somehow worse than any other murder?
Is a murder involving a gun somehow worse than any other murder?
It is far easier to kill someone with a gun than a knife. Try killing 50 people in a matter of minutes with a knife... Try killing five people as quickly as the guy did the other day with a knife...
I want to make it harder for people to kill others, so far as possible, not easier. And you comparing the USA to Jamaica adds nothing to your laughably bad 'argument'. (hesitate to actually call it an 'argument' - more like a serious of jumbled, contradictory positions)
You still ignore the fact not everyone can get a gun in America and I have talked about people who shouldn't be allowed to have a gun
Having guns sold legally makes it far easier to get hold of them illegally.
Now answer my question:
Would airports be safer if everyone had a gun?
Original post by Bornblue
It is far easier to kill someone with a gun than a knife. Try killing 50 people in a matter of minutes with a knife... Try killing five people as quickly as the guy did the other day with a knife...
I want to make it harder for people to kill others, so far as possible, not easier. And you comparing the USA to Jamaica adds nothing to your laughably bad 'argument'. (hesitate to actually call it an 'argument' - more like a serious of jumbled, contradictory positions)
Having guns sold legally makes it far easier to get hold of them illegally.
Now answer my question:
Would airports be safer if everyone had a gun?
I want to make it harder for people to kill others, so far as possible, not easier. And you comparing the USA to Jamaica adds nothing to your laughably bad 'argument'. (hesitate to actually call it an 'argument' - more like a serious of jumbled, contradictory positions)
Having guns sold legally makes it far easier to get hold of them illegally.
Now answer my question:
Would airports be safer if everyone had a gun?
I have used the uk, Ireland and Australia which you repeatedly have ignored why is that?
Show me evidence that banning guns reduces the murder rate
Show me where I have said everyone should be able to have a gun, I'm 100% certain I have talked about people who shouldn't be able to and also show me where in the us law everyone is allowed guns, it would be like me asking you whether everyone should be allowed to drive? You haven't said that just like I haven't said what you are trying to say I have said
Original post by joecphillips
I have used the uk, Ireland and Australia which you repeatedly have ignored why is that?
Show me evidence that banning guns reduces the murder rate
Show me where I have said everyone should be able to have a gun, I'm 100% certain I have talked about people who shouldn't be able to and also show me where in the us law everyone is allowed guns, it would be like me asking you whether everyone should be allowed to drive? You haven't said that just like I haven't said what you are trying to say I have said
Show me evidence that banning guns reduces the murder rate
Show me where I have said everyone should be able to have a gun, I'm 100% certain I have talked about people who shouldn't be able to and also show me where in the us law everyone is allowed guns, it would be like me asking you whether everyone should be allowed to drive? You haven't said that just like I haven't said what you are trying to say I have said
Okay let's deal with the UK and Australia.
The UK has very strict gun laws and barely any gun crime.
Australia has gun laws probably half way in between the USA and UK and has more gun crime.
I don't need evidence to prove to you that someone not having a gun means that they can't shoot people dead. That's basic logic. I know you'll go 'ah but they'd get a knife' - Well as discussed, it is far, far more difficult to kill people, especially groups of people in a public place with a knife.
I'm getting bored of you not answering the question.
I'm not trying to trip you up. I want to know your opinion.
Would airports be safer if everyone there (except people who cannot legally buy a gun) was allowed to carry a gun yes or no?
Would night clubs be safer if there were more guns in them? Yes or no?
Just answer with a yes or no. They are not trick questions.
(edited 7 years ago)
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Prague in state of shock following mass shooting at Charles University.
- How do I deal with my on and off step dad?
- Shooting in Brussels. Shooter still at large.
- Should I apply to UEA,Sunderland or Cardiff for a lows ucat score of 2430 band sjt2
- Family annoyed I am not going on holiday with them
- AQA A-Level Maths 2021 Paper 1 Question (13c)
- Psych counselling essay - uni
- any americans?
- Durham Law LLB 2024 chances of receiving an offer
- Workaway Florida
- How you look
- Oxford biomedical application
- Dropping out of sixth form/college to do an apprenticeship?
- When would you perceive someone as "ugly"
- Predicted grades A*AA
- Woman attacked by her own dog, an xl bully
- Can I still apply for extenuating circumstances?
- How many countries have you been to?
- long questions maths mat advice
- Wasp infestation in my accom from hell
Latest
Posted 2 minutes ago
Unit 3 Health and Social Care retake OCRLast reply 7 minutes ago
Government Social Research - Research Officer Scheme 2024Last reply 12 minutes ago
ATAS (Academic, Technology, Approval Scheme) Certificate 2023/2024Last reply 16 minutes ago
Official London School of Economics and Political Science 2024 Applicant ThreadPosted 27 minutes ago
Failed 2 out of 3 exams semester 1 and scared about the 3 I have left in semester 2.Last reply 31 minutes ago
Official Dental Hygiene and Therapy (Oral Health Science) 2024 Entry ThreadDentistry
2927
Last reply 46 minutes ago
University of Oxford 2025 Undergraduate Applicants Official ThreadLast reply 2 hours ago
Official University of Edinburgh Applicant Thread for 2024Trending
Last reply 14 hours ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 17 hours ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 20 hours ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 1 week ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 14 hours ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 17 hours ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 20 hours ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 1 week ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
