Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: America has the highest rate of mass shootings in the world because of ...

  1. #1
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,272

    America has the highest rate of mass shootings in the world because of ...

    'They accurately recognize that the only way they can guarantee that their names and faces adorn magazines, newspapers, and television is by slaughtering unarmed men, women, or children.'

    Lankford concludes: 'Unfortunately, the most obvious step the United States could take to reduce mass shootings may also be the most politically challenging. Reduce firearms availability.'

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...tionalism.html
    Hmmm. The good doctor had one of two choices and he picked the liberal choice. I wonder if the evidence that increased gun ownership and the potential that a armed LAC does deter crime. I wonder if the good doctor knows that unarmed is the key term and singular cause.
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,151
    Where is the highest rate of mass murders in the world and, separately, history (that is rate in space and time)?

    "Shooting" is framing murder, genocide, ethnic cleansing, ad nauseam to gun-grabbers advantage.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  3. #3
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,792
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    Where is the highest rate of mass murders in the world and, separately, history (that is rate in space and time)?

    "Shooting" is framing murder, genocide, ethnic cleansing, ad nauseam to gun-grabbers advantage.
    +1
    All experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. Thank heaven we do not permit a few to impose anarchy.

    "With Anarchy as an aim and as a means, Communism becomes possible."
    --Marxist.org

    "Communism and Anarchy [are], a necessary complement to one another. "
    --PETER KROPOTKIN, "Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal." 1898.

  4. #4
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,792
    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    Hmmm. The good doctor had one of two choices and he picked the liberal choice. I wonder if the evidence that increased gun ownership and the potential that a armed LAC does deter crime. I wonder if the good doctor knows that unarmed is the key term and singular cause.
    The media already KNOW how to reduce these events.

    They've been doing it for 3 decades on sports broadcasts. When someone runs onto the field (often naked) they cut away; no images of the idiot, no mention of his name. In fact the talking heads make a point to say they have cut away specifically to deny any TV time.

    The streaker gets his citation for public indecency, trespassing, disturbing the peace, or whatnot, but gets zero media time. Blackout. It works well. Streaking across pro-football fields seems to be way down since the 70s when the media instituted the cut-away policy.

    Now, the 1st Amd won't permit legal mandates (though the FCC might impose some limits on what constitutes proper use of the public airwaves used by TV news). But the media could voluntarily limit coverage to discourage nut cases using mass shootings as their avenue to fame. The media cares more about ratings and attacking RKBA then they do about innocent lives.

    Charles
    All experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. Thank heaven we do not permit a few to impose anarchy.

    "With Anarchy as an aim and as a means, Communism becomes possible."
    --Marxist.org

    "Communism and Anarchy [are], a necessary complement to one another. "
    --PETER KROPOTKIN, "Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal." 1898.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    missouri
    Posts
    497
    I find it hilarious he is suppose to be an expert, and all highly intelligent.. yet he contradicts himself with his conclusion.

    they target UNARMED citizens, so having MORE unarmed citizens would reduce the potential.. say what?
    Last edited by Ezek; 09-02-2015 at 12:20 PM. Reason: did not mean to qoute

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,011
    If more guns=safer citizens, the US should be the safest country in the world.

  7. #7
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,792
    Quote Originally Posted by beebobby View Post
    If more guns=safer citizens, the US should be the safest country in the world.
    In many respects the US is the safest country in the world.

    It has been over 120 years (1890) since the last major Indian slaughter in this nation. Since then, the largest government slaughter of civilians which I can recall off the top of my head would be the Waco slaughter of the Branch Davidians in the 1990s. (The internment of Japanese-Americans during WWII was relatively peaceful with overt attempts to slaughter anyone.) Compare this to the Nazi, Soviet, Chinese, Japanese, and Rwanda (1994, 800,000 victims) genocides and slaughters of the 20th century.

    I think we go back to the war of 1812 since we were last successfully invaded by an organized military force. (We'll ignore the invited mass invasion of illegal aliens.)

    The US has a lower total violent crime rate than many other first world nations including England; though apples-to-apples comparisons are hard to come by. And if you look outside our major urban areas (almost always controlled by liberals with lots of gun laws), our violent crime rates are even lower. The violent crime rate in Utah is about 220 per 100,000 (and that is driven by a couple of urban cities), while our stereotypically polite and law abiding Canadian neighbors have a violent crime rate of almost 2,000 per 100,000. To compare apples-to-apples, Utah's murder rate is 2.3 per 100,000 while Canada's is 1.56. Canada has about 80% of its population living in urban areas, Utah has 90% of our population in urban areas.

    Strong State Preemption means that our rare, liberal-controlled cities can't enforce gun control.

    As reported on the US Census site, Maryland has a violent crime rate of 679 per 100,000 residents, while Virginia's rate is only 282.

    Are you suggesting that privately owned firearms do not increase personal nor social safety?

    Charles
    Last edited by utbagpiper; 09-02-2015 at 07:49 PM.
    All experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. Thank heaven we do not permit a few to impose anarchy.

    "With Anarchy as an aim and as a means, Communism becomes possible."
    --Marxist.org

    "Communism and Anarchy [are], a necessary complement to one another. "
    --PETER KROPOTKIN, "Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal." 1898.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    missouri
    Posts
    497
    Quote Originally Posted by beebobby View Post
    If more guns=safer citizens, the US should be the safest country in the world.
    the problem mr beebobby, is the lack of concentration of armed citizens, too many sheeples, not enough .. well I wouldn't say sheepdogs so I guess the best term would be feral's in the sense they are out for themselves, their families, and their self defense, and outside of that, they do not feel responsibility to protect. but there is also a lack of concentration of "sheepdog's" as well.

    the other problem is GFZ's, it's like painting a target on everyone present in a GFZ saying "VICTIM ZONE, SHOOT ALL YOU WANT, NO ONE CAN RETALIATE EFFECTIVELY"
    Last edited by Ezek; 09-02-2015 at 04:20 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •