Apparently it's because America is "special" in a short bus sort of way and is incapable of learning or changing which is the basic crux of the argument that nothing done elsewhere can work here.
gun laws, health care, drug reform etc....
When did we establish this? I must have missed the memo.
Yet when I bring up tobacco and how it kills well over a magnitude more than guns that is somehow less tragic to the anti-gun side. I don't get it.
You broadly missed the point I was making in an overzealous effort to demonize guns. The point was that people that want to commit these types of acts have the element of surprise on their side and can use any number of things to inflict huge numbers of causalities. Whether a gun or something else doesn't matter for these kinds of attacks.
Yet when I bring up tobacco and how it kills well over a magnitude more than guns that is somehow less tragic to the anti-gun side. I don't get it.
By "we" you just mean the fucking willfully psychotically ignorant people that there are far too many of in the US. More and more they are choosing to fall under the term "Republican". Even when they hate the Republicans they still choose to claim them as their own because they can find an abundant source of similar minded people in that party.
Its not a coincidence that the people who constantly claim we can't do universal healthcare (ah yes, the good old "corrupt government contracts" bullshit that happen because of the same pieces of shit, meaning if you stop voting those people in, you'll make massive inroads towards fixing both issues) are the ones most adamant about not doing anything but enabling more gun sales. There's a direct correlation. Its obvious to literally every person who has even rudimentary logic capabilities and knowledge of the situation that aren't going in completely adamant that we do nothing to impede chickenshit gun nuts from arming themselves to the teeth (which enables an entire industry that allows guns to be incredibly pervasive in our society, and thus easily obtainable and usable by people having mental episodes where they want to harm, either themselves or others).
Access/ease/potential is worse for many alternatives. It's also inane to think that something shouldn't be regulated/banned because someone might use something else. Then you regulate/ban that "something else" too depending on what it is.
I'd rather have a semi-auto 12 gauge shotgun for home defense any day yet I reserve the right to buy whatever firearm I wish.It's pretty hard to stab 500 people as a long wolf and I don't think high powered assault rifles have any place in home defense.
Sounds like she would fit in well with some of the posters around here: http://www.foxnews.com/entertainmen...athy-for-vegas-vics-probably-republicans.html
Just imagine if he had a suppressor.
Well, the fact that people who die from tobacco have a choice in the matter might have something to do with it. If you don't understand the difference between slow suicide and mass murder there are a lot of things that you don't get.
Access/ease/potential is worse for many alternatives. It's also inane to think that something shouldn't be regulated/banned because someone might use something else. Then you regulate/ban that "something else" too depending on what it is.
She has a point that certainly there will be a lot of people with conflicted feelings after this due to being personally affected by a mass shooting, but in stating it so soon and so callously she shows total disregard for human pain and suffering and life. She deserved the loss of her job. Victim blaming after tragedies is completely inexcusable in almost every situation.Who specifically? Who so far in this thread has said that?
I think this is not a good argument. Even if something is heavily regulated doesn't mean its being adequately or efficiently regulated. One could argue that neither ethanol, tobacco, or gun use in this country are adequately or efficiently regulated.The ATF regulates guns. Guns are already more restricted and kill far less than alcohol or tobacco, the other things they regulate. Given that it is hard to argue for ever more gun regulations.
Has ISIS ever claimed an attack for which it was actually not responsible? Honest question.
Stop listening to Hillary.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...eally-relevant-to-what-happened-in-las-vegas/
Reportedly there were more than 20 guns found in the hotel room, which include fully automatic rifles. It is nearly impossible to believe this person is a "lone wolf." How do you go about acquiring that many firearms without some help? I am inclined to believe there is a "support group" of sort that enabled this man.
Assuming he did this, that is. I cannot rule out a possibility of him being a victim himself to a real perpetrator who staged a cover-up, considering the magnitude of violence involved here.
Since none of this applies to me I guess I wont feel the need to be offended.
But congrats on using emotion over logic. Your post was splendid in that regard.
I liked what one CNN news guy said. "You would hope congress would be immediately passing gun control laws... but they are not."
I think this is not a good argument. Even if something is heavily regulated doesn't mean its being adequately or efficiently regulated. One could argue that neither ethanol, tobacco, or gun use in this country are adequately or efficiently regulated.