lets show same respect to brave men that died saving children at Florida High School

looloo2134

Those brave gentlemen died saving the life of school children.

Scott Beigel

Aaron Feis

Scroll to see replies

🙏👏🙏

Thank goodness evil isn't the norm.
For every evil man there are a hundred good thank God.
RIP.

Reply 3

Death and Taxes

If they’d had been carrying firearms they would still be alive.

Those who want to limit gun ownership have blood on their hands.

Reply 4

The PoliticalGuy

Original post by Death and Taxes

If they’d had been carrying firearms they would still be alive.

Those who want to limit gun ownership have blood on their hands.

If guns had been banned then they would still be alive.
Those who want gun ownership's to become more widespread have blood on their hands.

Reply 5

PlayWithMarkers

Original post by Death and Taxes

If they’d had been carrying firearms they would still be alive.

Those who want to limit gun ownership have blood on their hands.

How people can still believe this rubbish despite evidence CONSISTENTLY proving that it's more dangerous to own a firearm is beyond me. But muh rights! Muh freedums!

Reply 6

Death and Taxes

Original post by PlayWithMarkers

How people can still believe this rubbish despite evidence CONSISTENTLY proving that it's more dangerous to own a firearm is beyond me. But muh rights! Muh freedums!

I see you are opposed to personal freedom. You’d rather cower under a desk and wait for the state to come save you.

The state was too lay to save these children in Floridia though.

Reply 7

PlayWithMarkers

Original post by Death and Taxes

I see you are opposed to personal freedom. You’d rather cower under a desk and wait for the state to come save you.

The state was too lay to save these children in Floridia though.

I am all for personal freedom. I like having the freedom to not worry about being shot whilst at work, or school, or the cinema, or a concert. Americans don't have the same freedom.

Reply 8

HighOnGoofballs

Original post by PlayWithMarkers

I am all for personal freedom. I like having the freedom to not worry about being shot whilst at work, or school, or the cinema, or a concert. Americans don't have the same freedom.

Who brings a gun to cinemas, concert, schools? Criminals.

What's to stop criminals from acquiring guns in the UK? Very little. IF they want guns, they can get guns.

What's going to happen when, in the UK, a criminal comes into a school, cinema, concert, and you have nothing to defend yourself with?

Personally, I'm opposed to guns being reintroduced into the UK, but your argument isn't a good one.

Americans don't have the same freedom not because of guns, but because of their lousy gun laws.

(edited 6 years ago)

Reply 9

Doones

Original post by Death and Taxes

If they’d had been carrying firearms they would still be alive.

Those who want to limit gun ownership have blood on their hands.

Why stop there? Why not let the public have automatic weapons.

Why is the gun lobby's answer to have more rather than fewer weapons?

And why did the Donald repeal Obama's regulation that made it easier to carry out mental health checks when selling guns?

Hmmm....

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 10

Doones

Original post by HighOnGoofballs

In many states you will find people at the cinema carrying a legally held firearm.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 11

HighOnGoofballs

Original post by Doonesbury

In many states you will find people at the cinema carrying a legally held firearm.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Sure you will.

But that still doesn't address why some people get angsty over regular, innocent law abiding citizens carrying guns (in America).

Reply 12

PlayWithMarkers

Original post by HighOnGoofballs

People always say this, but it doesn't happen in the UK, we so rarely have mass shootings (even accounting for per citizen etc.). The US has a massively disproportionate number of shootings to its population compared to most first world countries because of their backwards attitude towards firearms. We don't fetishize them or think they're part of our freedoms, and we have relatively low gun crime as a result. It's just not embedded into our culture in the same way.

As for the rest of your point, it is proven TIME AND TIME AGAIN that having a gun in your home is MORE dangerous than not having one, but people always trot out some rubbish about protecting yourself and your family, despite the fact you're more likely to kill one of them than you are an intruder. I don't think guns should necessarily be entirely illegal, but I have no interest in owning one myself, and the law needs to be much, much stricter.

Reply 13

euphrosyne

Original post by Death and Taxes

If they’d had been carrying firearms they would still be alive.

Those who want to limit gun ownership have blood on their hands.

You must be joking, right?

The last thing we need is a shoot out between civilians.

Reply 14

HighOnGoofballs

Original post by PlayWithMarkers

People always say this, but it doesn't happen in the UK, we so rarely have mass shootings

Violent crime rates actually went up in the Uk after guns were banned. Not saying correlation equals causation, but just some food for though. Also there have been hundreds of studies on gun crime, and there is no evidence whatsoever that introducing guns with effective regulation has any impact on the crime rate.

Original post by PlayWithMarkers

(even accounting for per citizen etc.). The US has a massively disproportionate number of shootings to its population compared to most first world countries because of their backwards attitude towards firearms. We don't fetishize them or think they're part of our freedoms, and we have relatively low gun crime as a result. It's just not embedded into our culture in the same way.

I agree. I think their attitude towards guns should be more responsible, and that they need to have stricter regulation.

Original post by PlayWithMarkers

As for the rest of your point, it is proven TIME AND TIME AGAIN that having a gun in your home is MORE dangerous than not having one, but people always trot out some rubbish about protecting yourself and your family, despite the fact you're more likely to kill one of them than you are an intruder. I don't think guns should necessarily be entirely illegal, but I have no interest in owning one myself, and the law needs to be much, much stricter.

Well that I think comes down to irresponsible ownership, and again, lack of strict gun laws.

I'm glad you don't think they should be illegal, though. We pretty much agree on almost everything...almost :smile:

Reply 15

Doones

Original post by HighOnGoofballs

Sure you will.

But that still doesn't address why some people get angsty over regular, innocent law abiding citizens carrying guns (in America).

Why not carry automatic weapons into the cinema then? Or grenades?

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 16

J_2theamie

Original post by Death and Taxes

If they’d had been carrying firearms they would still be alive.

Those who want to limit gun ownership have blood on their hands.

There's a reason why there are so few shootings in the UK. And that reason is that we do have tighter gun controls.

Reply 17

Medrat

Other countries have just as much personal freedom but don't have widespread gun ownership. The same argument can be made for restricting government tyranny, which is the reason for gun ownership in the US. Other countries can limit govermental tyrrany in other ways.

Reply 18

limetang

Original post by The PoliticalGuy

If guns had been banned then they would still be alive.
Those who want gun ownership's to become more widespread have blood on their hands.

I’m sorry no, those who use guns to kill people have blood on their hands, nobody else does.

Reply 19

HighOnGoofballs

Original post by Doonesbury

Why not carry automatic weapons into the cinema then? Or grenades?

Posted from TSR Mobile

Because we should responsibility draw a line somewhere.

Obviously I'm not condoning everyone carrying their own nuclear bombs around. You know I'm not so why even go into those regions.