Terrorists strike yet again

public

Volvomies, volvomies
Joined
Nov 26, 2007
Messages
11,853
Location
Causticity
Car(s)
P26L XC70 D5 and a ton of crap
The Oklahoma bombing in 1995 was done with a rental truck.
 

MacGuffin

Forum Addict
DONOR
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
8,293
Location
Wilhelmshaven, Germany
Car(s)
'17 Ford Mustang GT Fastback
Yeah, par the course for lefties to not realize that PEOPLE kill people, not objects. Hence why no one is calling for a ban on trucks (just like there shouldn't be a ban on guns).
Yes, people kill people. You're absolutely right about that. And more people kill more people. Right?

More people with knives kill more people without knifes. And more people with guns kill people with knives.

If you take your hands off your ears for a moment and stop shouting LALALALALALALALALALALA whenever I say something, think about the following:

A free running tiger in a city kills a few people - can't be avoided. A hundred free running tigers in a city kill many more people - can't be avoided as well.

A hundred cars cause some accidents in which people are killed - cannot be avoided. A million cars on the road will cause many, many more accidents and kill many, many more people - also no way to avoid that.

10,000 guns in the hands of humans will kill some people - can't be avoided. We have that here in Europe as well.

300,000,000 guns in the hands of people will kill 30,000 people each year.

Since 1968 more people in America died from gunshots than all fatalaties in all wars the USA took part in since the 19th century - including the Cilvil War!

It's not even worth a discussion, it's a mathematical certainty that when you have more guns, there will be more people getting shot. Period.

64 % of all murders in America are being committed with a gun. In Canada it's 30,5 %, in Germany 9%.

But nah, that has nothing to do with the number of guns, right? Must be because the Americans are simply much more trigger-happy than the rest of humanity, right?

If you demand a source now, look for someone who speaks German and read here: http://www.spiegel.de/panorama/gese...-kultur-in-den-usa-in-grafiken-a-1171186.html

P.S.: If you're gonna say now that guns can be used to kill the tigers, I'll shoot you :p
 
Last edited:

prizrak

Forum Addict
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
21,601
Location
No, sleep, till, BROOKLYN
Car(s)
11 Xterra Pro-4x, 12 'stang GT
300,000,000 guns in the hands of people will kill 30,000 people each year.
Wrong right off the bat, around 60% of those are suicides.

That's true for poisonings, car accidents, heart disease, etc... the longer the timeline and the larger the population the more people will die from various things.

There is fully a third more people in the US now than there were in 1968, so despite crime rates being in decline since late 80s/early 90s absolute values will be larger.

64 % of all murders in America are being committed with a gun. In Canada it's 30,5 %, in Germany 9%.
So 91% of people murdered in Germany and 69.5% of people murdered in Canada are murdered without any guns whatsoever. You are literally proving the point that guns don't kill people....
 
Last edited:

LeVeL

Forum Addict
Joined
Jun 16, 2007
Messages
13,265
Religions don't kill people either.
A gun has never taught people to go kill. Islam has and continues to do so.


It's not even worth a discussion, it's a mathematical certainty that when you have more guns, there will be more people getting shot. Period.
Except that you're factually wrong. It's estimated that more than half of WY residents own guns, yet the murder rate is one of the lowest in the country; in NY only about 10% own gun and it's in the top ten for murder. For an example closer to home, look at Switzerland.

And before you start backpedaling and talking about rural vs urban states, cultures, training, etc: it is demonstrably FALSE that "when you have more guns, there will be more people getting shot" as you claim.
 

D-Fence

Mrs. IceBone
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
9,669
Location
Minga oida!
Car(s)
John Pooper Works
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a truck is a good guy with a bigger truck! This would happen regardless, things will continue happening no matter what. There will be situations where being armed will give you a better chance, there will be situations where it wouldn't matter. But of course if he used guns there would be a ton of screaming about gun control, I don't see much about UBC for truck rentals though....
Or a bollard!


Imagine if that had guns on it!
 

prizrak

Forum Addict
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
21,601
Location
No, sleep, till, BROOKLYN
Car(s)
11 Xterra Pro-4x, 12 'stang GT
Or a bollard!


Imagine if that had guns on it!
Automated sentry turrets on top of towers in my yard is the ultimate dream I have for a house

P.S. further down the street they actually do have steel bollards that would stop it but they don't run that far north.
 
Last edited:

_HighVoltage_

Captain Volvo
Joined
Aug 5, 2006
Messages
9,964
Car(s)
1998 Volvo S70 T5M




Par for the course.
Yeah, par the course for lefties to not realize that PEOPLE kill people, not objects. Hence why no one is calling for a ban on trucks (just like there shouldn't be a ban on guns).
I don't think that was public's point. The way I see it:
- mass shooting happens - response is that we don't know all the details yet, we shouldn't call for any policy changes because emotions are high and we need to cool off a little bit.
- foreigner kills people with a truck - we need to act now! As seen in the President's recent tweets about ramping up extreme vetting.

It's a double standard.
 

MacGuffin

Forum Addict
DONOR
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
8,293
Location
Wilhelmshaven, Germany
Car(s)
'17 Ford Mustang GT Fastback
Wrong right off the bat, around 60% of those are suicides.
And suicides don't count because...?

That's true for poisonings, car accidents, heart disease, etc... the longer the timeline and the larger the population the more people will die from various things.
So what you're saying is that the 1,500,000 victims of gun shots would also have died from other causes if there hadn't been so many guns? That's an extremely bold theory. Care to elaborate?

For an example closer to home, look at Switzerland.
It's interesting that you ignore the simplest of logic but bring up Switzerland. Good example. Let me elaborate.

A) Guns per 100 inhabitants:

- USA: 89
- Switzerland: 46 (hightest rate in Europe)

B) Deaths by guns per 1 million inhabitans:

- USA: 29.7
- Switzerland: 7.7

So despite the fact that the Swiss have roughly 50 % the guns per capita as the Americans, the Americans somehow manage to kill 3.86 times as many people with them.

So, it seems like the Swiss can handle their guns much more responsibly than the Americans can. You're right. It's not the guns, it's just trigger-happy Americans.

One more reason to pull their toys away from thm.
 

LeVeL

Forum Addict
Joined
Jun 16, 2007
Messages
13,265
And suicides don't count because...?



So what you're saying is that the 1,500,000 victims of gun shots would also have died from other causes if there hadn't been so many guns? That's an extremely bold theory. Care to elaborate?



It's interesting that you ignore the simplest of logic but bring up Switzerland. Good example. Let me elaborate.

A) Guns per 100 inhabitants:

- USA: 89
- Switzerland: 46 (hightest rate in Europe)

B) Deaths by guns per 1 million inhabitans:

- USA: 29.7
- Switzerland: 7.7

So despite the fact that the Swiss have roughly 50 % the guns per capita as the Americans, the Americans somehow manage to kill 3.86 times as many people with them.

So, it seems like the Swiss can handle their guns much more responsibly than the Americans can. You're right. It's not the guns, it's just trigger-happy Americans.

One more reason to pull their toys away from thm.
Well you completely ignored my example within the actual US but anyways:


A) Guns per 100 inhabitants:

- Denmark: 12
- Switzerland: 24

B) Deaths by guns per 100k inhabitans:

- Denmark: 0.99
- Switzerland: 0.69


Damn trigger-happy Danes! :shakefist: Somebody take the guns away from them!
 

prizrak

Forum Addict
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
21,601
Location
No, sleep, till, BROOKLYN
Car(s)
11 Xterra Pro-4x, 12 'stang GT
And suicides don't count because...?
Because they are self harming, I don't care about people harming themselves.

So what you're saying is that the 1,500,000 victims of gun shots would also have died from other causes if there hadn't been so many guns? That's an extremely bold theory. Care to elaborate?
What I'm saying is that you have no point, so more people died from *something* than in all wars since *some time*. That tells you literally nothing, maybe involvement in those wars was very limited, maybe extremely high population growth skewed the absolutes. You have 0 proof that those people would not have died if it weren't for guns, just as I have 0 proof they would have died from something else*

*Well I'm sure plenty would have died of natural causes but we are talking homicides I'm guessing.

It's interesting that you ignore the simplest of logic but bring up Switzerland. Good example. Let me elaborate.

A) Guns per 100 inhabitants:

- USA: 89
- Switzerland: 46 (hightest rate in Europe)

B) Deaths by guns per 1 million inhabitans:

- USA: 29.7
- Switzerland: 7.7

So despite the fact that the Swiss have roughly 50 % the guns per capita as the Americans, the Americans somehow manage to kill 3.86 times as many people with them.
If that includes suicides you can half that stat right there.

So, it seems like the Swiss can handle their guns much more responsibly than the Americans can. You're right. It's not the guns, it's just trigger-happy Americans.

One more reason to pull their toys away from thm.
Thank you for making our point for us, it has little to do with availability of guns and a lot to do with culture and socieconomic conditions. This is further evidenced by the fact that if you actually drill down into these statistics instead of taking the aerial view of it you'd see that something like 90% of this violence happens in a very small number of inner city neighborhoods. Incidentally they tend to be what we refer to as projects/ghetto, aka low income housing.
 
Last edited:

GRtak

Forum Addict
Joined
Sep 6, 2008
Messages
20,292
Location
Michigan USA
Where would they ever get that kind of... oh, wait.

[video=youtube;v-Plzx73K68]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v-Plzx73K68[/video]


They got the kids wrong.
 

kunedog

Active Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Messages
310
They got the kids wrong.
And the vehicle, and the driver. Dammit, they had one job (and good video of the attack to work with).

EDIT: I like how they took off the Ford logos but left the F-250 ones.
 
Last edited:

LeVeL

Forum Addict
Joined
Jun 16, 2007
Messages
13,265
Where would they ever get that kind of... oh, wait.
I don't see the connection between a racist POS murderer and a gubernatorial candidate. That is the most tasteless ad I've ever seen.
 

MacGuffin

Forum Addict
DONOR
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
8,293
Location
Wilhelmshaven, Germany
Car(s)
'17 Ford Mustang GT Fastback
Oh man, I hope you really didn't mean it how it sounds.

*Well I'm sure plenty would have died of natural causes but we are talking homicides I'm guessing.
It sounds like you're saying: "They died of gunshots? So what? They would have died anyway."

As I wrote above: I really hope you didn't mean it as cynical as it reads.

This is further evidenced by the fact that if you actually drill down into these statistics instead of taking the aerial view of it you'd see that something like 90% of this violence happens in a very small number of inner city neighborhoods. Incidentally they tend to be what we refer to as projects/ghetto, aka low income housing.
So... you're saying that the fact they lived in slums makes their deaths less significant, and that all is well as long as the more wealthy people remain save in their neighborhoods or what?

Again, I really hope you didn't mean it as it reads.
 

prizrak

Forum Addict
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
21,601
Location
No, sleep, till, BROOKLYN
Car(s)
11 Xterra Pro-4x, 12 'stang GT
Oh man, I hope you really didn't mean it how it sounds.



It sounds like you're saying: "They died of gunshots? So what? They would have died anyway."

As I wrote above: I really hope you didn't mean it as cynical as it reads.
That's completely not what I was saying. I'll try to break it down a little better.

The argument is that "X has killed more people since Y than have died in Z". That tells us absolutely nothing about the problem for the following reasons:
Y is picked completely arbitrarily to make the numbers work, you can pick an earlier date and inflate the numbers or you can pick a later date and the numbers will drop.
Z is meaningless by itself as it is an absolute number with no relation to the total population. Z could be 50% of the population at the time it was measured but only 1% today.
This statistic is completely meaningless and does nothing more than attempt to push a specific narrative without taking any other variables into account. It can also be applied to just about any other sufficiently large cause of death, like "more people died from getting stabbed since 1879 than in all wars combined"

So... you're saying that the fact they lived in slums makes their deaths less significant, and that all is well as long as the more wealthy people remain save in their neighborhoods or what?

Again, I really hope you didn't mean it as it reads.
You have an interesting way of reading things sometimes. What I was attempting to illustrate is that, despite what media would have you believe, gun violence in the US is a very local problem that is mainly confined to areas where all crime is high. It's not the guns, it's the people and their socieconomic and cultural realities that cause crime.
 
Top