• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

92% of mass shootings were in gun free zones.................

L

lefty louie

Banned
Joined
Dec 5, 2017
Messages
2,435
Reaction score
357
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
How's that working for ya?
 
Last edited:
lefty louie said:
How's that working for ya?
Click to expand...

Pretty sure like 98% of large gatherings are gun free zones. So that's actually kind of low. I think you need to be asking yourself why did 8% of mass shootings take place somewhere that guns were allowed? I mean if the presence of all those other guns are supposed to deter violence then I would expect closer to 100% of mass shootings to take place in gun free zones.
 
lefty louie said:
How's that working for ya?
Click to expand...

If guns are easily available outside of these zones, then what is to stop someone from bringing in guns to the zones? The zones by themselves don't do much.

And if gun control laws don't work, why is there is far less gun violence in Canada, the UK and other first world countries?
 
fb81551af9a5d9bbe79a9131c0fa0da4.jpg
 
lefty louie said:
How's that working for ya?
Click to expand...

Been a lot of stupid posts lately but this one tops the lot.
Why would you say something this dumb? Just don't care?
 
MrWonka said:
Pretty sure like 98% of large gatherings are gun free zones. So that's actually kind of low. I think you need to be asking yourself why did 8% of mass shootings take place somewhere that guns were allowed? I mean if the presence of all those other guns are supposed to deter violence then I would expect closer to 100% of mass shootings to take place in gun free zones.
Click to expand...

Typical left wing position. The left wing solution only has “to save one life” and the right wing solution has to be perfect..,
 
lefty louie said:
How's that working for ya?
Click to expand...

You silly-

Did the florida school shooter go there because only the school safety officers (there is no such thing as 'gun' free) would be armed or did he go because he had a grudge against the school and wanted to kill students?

The Virginia Tech shooter had a grudge against the class and an instructor.

The Pulse shooter went to the gay bar to kill gays

Sutherland Springs shooter had a grudge against members of that church.

Dylan Roof picked his Church due to who attended, not a care about would any be carrying...

Nice try, but another fail... :peace
 
Jesus christ, the level of dumb on display in the opening posts is astonishing. You think you are making a valid argument? The fact that's is all gun humpers can seem to muster up as an argument shows they got nothing.

No actual rebuttal to all the facts people throw out.
 
tres borrachos said:
It didn't work out so well for all the dead people.

It was kind of like when you were suckered by Infowars and were spreading a lie on here that Cruz was wearing an Antifa shirt. How'd that work out for ya?

https://www.debatepolitics.com/polls/309623-should-antifa-group-supporters-considered-domestic-terorist-group.html?highlight=antifa
Click to expand...

To the music of beds are burning:

The time has come;
A fact's a fact;
It belongs to them;
Let's take it back;

The time has come;
Enough's enough;
Let's protect our kids;
It's only right.

How do we dance
While our kids are slaughtered?
How do we sleep
Allowing all this carnage?

With this, my Wife and I are having a great weekend at our state wrestling tournament in Champaign, IL., home of the University of Illinois.

It's so wonderful to get away from it all and be with our young men and the young lady who became the first female ever to win a match at State. She is good, she is tough, and she's very strong.

Our colleges and universities are truly our greatest institutions. Enjoy with your young men. You only get one Journey in Life ...
 
notquiteright said:
You silly-

Did the florida school shooter go there because only the school safety officers (there is no such thing as 'gun' free) would be armed or did he go because he had a grudge against the school and wanted to kill students?

The Virginia Tech shooter had a grudge against the class and an instructor.

The Pulse shooter went to the gay bar to kill gays

Sutherland Springs shooter had a grudge against members of that church.

Dylan Roof picked his Church due to who attended, not a care about would any be carrying...

Nice try, but another fail... :peace
Click to expand...

I agree wholeheartedly with everything you said EXCEPT it was a nice try by that poster ...
 
notquiteright said:
You silly-

Did the florida school shooter go there because only the school safety officers (there is no such thing as 'gun' free) would be armed or did he go because he had a grudge against the school and wanted to kill students?

The Virginia Tech shooter had a grudge against the class and an instructor.

The Pulse shooter went to the gay bar to kill gays

Sutherland Springs shooter had a grudge against members of that church.

Dylan Roof picked his Church due to who attended, not a care about would any be carrying...

Nice try, but another fail... :peace
Click to expand...

Yeah he targeted them but also knew that few if any were armed. It's why a robber rarely robs a butcher shop, or the gun shop.
 
92% of right wingers' posts are completely retarded
 
lefty louie said:
How's that working for ya?
Click to expand...

So lets cut to the chase here........ folks like you do NOT want any gun free zones in America? Is that a fair conclusion?

You want to be able to bring and carry firearms anywhere you want to. Is that a fair conclusion?

You do not want any laws to tell you where you can where you cannot bring a firearm. Is that a fair conclusion?
 
Utility Man said:
fb81551af9a5d9bbe79a9131c0fa0da4.jpg
Click to expand...

There are 30,000 gun related deaths per year by firearms, and this number is not disputed. U.S. population 324,059,091 as of Wednesday, June 22, 2016. Do the math: 0.000000925% of the population dies from gun related actions each year. Statistically speaking, this is insignificant! What is never told, however, is a breakdown of those 30,000 deaths, to put them in perspective as compared to other causes of death:
65% of those deaths are by suicide which would never be prevented by gun laws
15% are by law enforcement in the line of duty and justified
17% are through criminal activity, gang and drug related or mentally ill persons gun violence
3% are accidental discharge deaths

So technically, "gun violence" is not 30,000 annually, but drops to 5,100. Still too many? Well, first, how are those deaths spanned across the nation?
480 homicides (9.4%) were in Chicago
344 homicides (6.7%) were in Baltimore
333 homicides (6.5%) were in Detroit
119 homicides (2.3%) were in Washington D.C. (a 54% increase over prior years)

So basically, 25% of all gun crime happens in just 4 cities. All 4 of those cities have strict gun laws, so it is not the lack of law that is the root cause.

This basically leaves 3,825 for the entire rest of the nation, or about 75 deaths per state. That is an average because some States have much higher rates than others. For example, California had 1,169 and Alabama had 1.

Now, who has the strictest gun laws by far? California, of course, but understand, so it is not guns causing this. It is a crime rate spawned by the number of criminal persons residing in those cities and states. So if all cities and states are not created equally, then there must be something other than the tool causing the gun deaths.

Are 5,100 deaths per year horrific? How about in comparison to other deaths? All death is sad and especially so when it is in the commission of a crime but that is the nature of crime. Robbery, death, rape, assault all is done by criminals and thinking that criminals will obey laws is ludicrous. That's why they are criminals.

But what about other deaths each year?
40,000+ die from a drug overdoseTHERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR THAT!
36,000 people die per year from the flu, far exceeding the criminal gun deaths
34,000 people die per year in traffic fatalities(exceeding gun deaths even if you include suicide)

Now it gets good:
200,000+ people die each year (and growing) from preventable medical errors. You are safer in Chicago than when you are in a hospital!

710,000 people die per year from heart disease. It's time to stop the double cheeseburgers! So what is the point? If Obama and the anti-gun movement focused their attention on heart disease, even a 10% decrease in cardiac deaths would save twice the number of lives annually of all gun-related deaths (including suicide, law enforcement, etc.). A 10% reduction in medical errors would be 66% of the total gun deaths or 4 times the number of criminal homicides......Simple, easily preventable 10% reductions!

So you have to ask yourself, in the grand scheme of things, why the focus on guns? It's pretty simple.:
Taking away guns gives control to governments.

The founders of this nation knew that regardless of the form of government, those in power may become corrupt and seek to rule as the British did by trying to disarm the populace of the colonies. It is not difficult to understand that a disarmed populace is a controlled populace.

Thus, the second amendment was proudly and boldly included in the U.S. Constitution. It must be preserved at all costs.

So the next time someone tries to tell you that gun control is about saving lives, look at these facts and remember these words from Noah Webster: "Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword, because the whole body of the people are armed and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States. A military force at the command of Congress can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power."

Remember, when it comes to "gun control," the important word is "control," not "gun."
 
PhysicalRemoval said:
There are 30,000 gun related deaths per year by firearms, and this number is not disputed. U.S. population 324,059,091 as of Wednesday, June 22, 2016. Do the math: 0.000000925% of the population dies from gun related actions each year. Statistically speaking, this is insignificant! What is never told, however, is a breakdown of those 30,000 deaths, to put them in perspective as compared to other causes of death:
65% of those deaths are by suicide which would never be prevented by gun laws
15% are by law enforcement in the line of duty and justified
17% are through criminal activity, gang and drug related or mentally ill persons gun violence
3% are accidental discharge deaths

So technically, "gun violence" is not 30,000 annually, but drops to 5,100. Still too many? Well, first, how are those deaths spanned across the nation?
480 homicides (9.4%) were in Chicago
344 homicides (6.7%) were in Baltimore
333 homicides (6.5%) were in Detroit
119 homicides (2.3%) were in Washington D.C. (a 54% increase over prior years)

So basically, 25% of all gun crime happens in just 4 cities. All 4 of those cities have strict gun laws, so it is not the lack of law that is the root cause.

This basically leaves 3,825 for the entire rest of the nation, or about 75 deaths per state. That is an average because some States have much higher rates than others. For example, California had 1,169 and Alabama had 1.

Now, who has the strictest gun laws by far? California, of course, but understand, so it is not guns causing this. It is a crime rate spawned by the number of criminal persons residing in those cities and states. So if all cities and states are not created equally, then there must be something other than the tool causing the gun deaths.

Are 5,100 deaths per year horrific? How about in comparison to other deaths? All death is sad and especially so when it is in the commission of a crime but that is the nature of crime. Robbery, death, rape, assault all is done by criminals and thinking that criminals will obey laws is ludicrous. That's why they are criminals.

But what about other deaths each year?
40,000+ die from a drug overdoseTHERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR THAT!
36,000 people die per year from the flu, far exceeding the criminal gun deaths
34,000 people die per year in traffic fatalities(exceeding gun deaths even if you include suicide)

Now it gets good:
200,000+ people die each year (and growing) from preventable medical errors. You are safer in Chicago than when you are in a hospital!

710,000 people die per year from heart disease. It's time to stop the double cheeseburgers! So what is the point? If Obama and the anti-gun movement focused their attention on heart disease, even a 10% decrease in cardiac deaths would save twice the number of lives annually of all gun-related deaths (including suicide, law enforcement, etc.). A 10% reduction in medical errors would be 66% of the total gun deaths or 4 times the number of criminal homicides......Simple, easily preventable 10% reductions!

So you have to ask yourself, in the grand scheme of things, why the focus on guns? It's pretty simple.:
Taking away guns gives control to governments.

The founders of this nation knew that regardless of the form of government, those in power may become corrupt and seek to rule as the British did by trying to disarm the populace of the colonies. It is not difficult to understand that a disarmed populace is a controlled populace.

Thus, the second amendment was proudly and boldly included in the U.S. Constitution. It must be preserved at all costs.

So the next time someone tries to tell you that gun control is about saving lives, look at these facts and remember these words from Noah Webster: "Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword, because the whole body of the people are armed and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States. A military force at the command of Congress can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power."

Remember, when it comes to "gun control," the important word is "control," not "gun."
Click to expand...

You should credit Ted Nugent when you copy his Facebook post on here, word for word.

https://www.facebook.com/tednugent/posts/10154772622887297
 
haymarket said:
So lets cut to the chase here........ folks like you do NOT want any gun free zones in America? Is that a fair conclusion?

You want to be able to bring and carry firearms anywhere you want to. Is that a fair conclusion?

You do not want any laws to tell you where you can where you cannot bring a firearm. Is that a fair conclusion?
Click to expand...

Nope not fair. Without giving it much thought I'd say on an airplane or a court room isn't the smartest place for a bunch of guns. I'm sure there are more I can think of.
 
lefty louie said:
How's that working for ya?
Click to expand...

Let us say that many students and teacher are allowed to carry weapons in school. They hear the shots and come out of the classrooms carrying their guns and what do they see, a bunch of other people in the hallway carrying guns. Who do they shoot? With the high tension they are likely to shoot anyone who seems to be aiming at them. Don't know about you, but wouldn't want for myself or any child of mine put into that situation. Maybe it would be better to make things safer and make it harder for the crazies to get guns, but we can't do that. It doesn't go along with the more guns makes us safer thing the NRA pushes. Of course they are just trying to sell guns so they get more money from the gun manufacturers, but so what.
 
lefty louie said:
Yeah he targeted them but also knew that few if any were armed. It's why a robber rarely robs a butcher shop, or the gun shop.
Click to expand...

Your ahhh linkage is faulty, you never heard the old adage 'never bring a knife to a gun fight' so can't get behind your use of a butcher shop. Course absurdum does dominate such arguments by 'gun' rubbers....

Except for police stations no place in the typical civilian world is the rate of carry very high. Pretty much every place you go you can expect few, if any people to be armed. In both Church shootings neither gunman could count on there being no concealed carry person present.

Most mass shooters give little thought to survival as the Vegas, Pulse and Texas Church shootings show.

Another mighty swing and a miss... :peace
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom