• 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!

Austin Bomber Blows Self Up

Tigerace117 said:
What you can't seem to grasp is that an event from almost a century ago does not help your case that bombings are easy to pull off; if they were you wouldn't have to go back more than eighty years for your example.

So in other words the bombing was thwarted, whereas the mass shooting was not.

Hmm.

Seems you don't read what you post before you do so.
Click to expand...

You continue to evade the following:

"Name one mass shooting, anywhere, that has equalled the Bali Bombing."

Your desperation is showing.
 
B'smith said:
If you'll read your source more closely, you'll see that these questionable findings only relate to adults, not school kids.(1)


"No evidence to support link between violent video games and behavior"

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/01/180116131317.htm

EXCERPT ""We also only tested these theories on adults, so more work is needed to understand whether a different effect is evident in children players."CONTINUED


Because children's minds are still developing, children are more susceptible to the desensitizing effect of violent video games.
Click to expand...

When other predictors of violence are accounted for, there is no significant correlation between playing video games and violence among 8th graders. Is that young enough for you?
 
B'smith said:
You continue to evade the following:

"Name one mass shooting, anywhere, that has equalled the Bali Bombing."

Your desperation is showing.
Click to expand...

You keep ignoring the fact that a single bombing from almost a century ago is not a pattern in any way, shape or form.

The Bali bombing? Oh really? We are using an Indonesian terrorist attack as an example now?
 
 
Tigerace117 said:
https://tribune.com.pk/story/473955/premature-detonation-suicide-bomber-aide-killed-in-explosion/

London Underground terror attack: Train bomb at Parsons Green tube station

Premature detonation kills 2 Taliban militants in Kunduz

https://www.timesofisrael.com/uk-ex...t-detonate-properly-couldve-left-dozens-dead/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunmurry_train_bombing

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenwich_Village_townhouse_explosion

Hmm...seems basic research skills is another thing you lack.
Click to expand...



Now, how many bomb builders succeeded in killing scores of people around the world?

Wake up, the Bali bombing proves that bombs are deadlier than firearms.

You still can't refute that one simple fact no matter how many lonely hours you waste Googling
 
Last edited:
B'smith said:
Now, how many bomb builders succeeded in killing scores of people around the world?

Wake up, the Bali bombing proves that bombs are deadlier than firearms.

You still can't refute the fact that
Click to expand...

Not even close. Death toll from guns is much much higher
 
vegas giants said:
Not even close. Death toll from guns is much much higher
Click to expand...


Then please name a single mass shooting that exceeded the Bali bombing that killed over 200 people.

Or,

Now, please name a school shooting that had a death toll exceeding that in Bath Michigan back in 1927.

Now do you see that bombs are deadlier than firearms?


"The 1927 Bombing That Remains America’s Deadliest School Massacre"
"Ninety years ago, a school in Bath, Michigan was rigged with explosives in a brutal act that stunned the town"
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/hist...chool-massacre-180963355/#KSipwm4IUrIbB9uc.99
EXCERPTS "In the end 44 people died, 38 of them students. It wasn’t the first bombing in the country’s history—at least eight were killed during the Haymarket Square rally in Chicago in 1886, and 30 when a bomb exploded in Manhattan in 1920. But none had been so deadly as this, or affected so many children."CONTINUED
 
B'smith said:
Then please name a single mass shooting that exceeded the Bali bombing that killed over 200 people.

Or,

Now, please name a school shooting that had a death toll exceeding that in Bath Michigan back in 1927.

Now do you see that bombs are deadlier than firearms?


"The 1927 Bombing That Remains America’s Deadliest School Massacre"
"Ninety years ago, a school in Bath, Michigan was rigged with explosives in a brutal act that stunned the town"
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/hist...chool-massacre-180963355/#KSipwm4IUrIbB9uc.99
EXCERPTS "In the end 44 people died, 38 of them students. It wasn’t the first bombing in the country’s history—at least eight were killed during the Haymarket Square rally in Chicago in 1886, and 30 when a bomb exploded in Manhattan in 1920. But none had been so deadly as this, or affected so many children."CONTINUED
Click to expand...

Many many many more people have died from guns rather than bombs. This is hilarious!
 
Critter7r said:
Just because building a bomb takes knowledge and time, and grabbing a gun from your (or your parents) gun cabinet is easy.
Click to expand...

A quart sized glass bottle with a cap, a bit of gasoline, rubbing alcohol, toothpowder, detergent, a well oiled rag or a short candle, a bag of marbles, preferably steelies, some old nails, preferably rusty, ammonia, a can of insecticide, and wood matches, a few other household items, 15 minutes for a bomb that will do serious damage, likely kill, definitely injure and the napalm will destroy a 50's radius or so. 4 of those will take out a city block. Two will destroy a class or court room. Leave out the nail, right through a metal detector.
 
B'smith said:
Now, how many bomb builders succeeded in killing scores of people around the world?

Wake up, the Bali bombing proves that bombs are deadlier than firearms.

You still can't refute that one simple fact no matter how many lonely hours you waste Googling
Click to expand...

And flying jumbo jets into buildings is pretty deadly too. Luckily, there isn't a steady stream of these types of incidents. And I doubt that would-be shooters would choose that method if guns were eliminated.
 
OldFatGuy said:
A quart sized glass bottle with a cap, a bit of gasoline, rubbing alcohol, toothpowder, detergent, a well oiled rag or a short candle, a bag of marbles, preferably steelies, some old nails, preferably rusty, ammonia, a can of insecticide, and wood matches, a few other household items, 15 minutes for a bomb that will do serious damage, likely kill, definitely injure and the napalm will destroy a 50's radius or so. 4 of those will take out a city block. Two will destroy a class or court room. Leave out the nail, right through a metal detector.
Click to expand...

Somehow, I expect that the guards manning that metal detector would notice a quart-sized glass jar.

"Is that a bomb in your pocket? Or are you just happy to be here, sir?"

And backpacks aren't allowed in our local courthouse, and most others. And certainly not without being searched and/or x-ray'd.
 
Critter7r said:
And flying jumbo jets into buildings is pretty deadly too. Luckily, there isn't a steady stream of these types of incidents. And I doubt that would-be shooters would choose that method if guns were eliminated.
Click to expand...

Is your position, then, that all guns should be eliminated?

It didn't take a gun or a bomb to kill 87 people at the "Happy Land" nightclub..... just $1 worth of gasoline(1)


(1) "Happy Land fire"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Happy_Land_fire
EXCERPT "González went to an Amoco gas station, then returned to the establishment with a plastic container with $1 worth of gasoline.[2][4] He spread the fuel at the base of a staircase, the only access into the club, and then ignited the gasoline.[5]
Eighty-seven people died in the resulting fire."CONTINUED
 
B'smith said:
Is your position, then, that all guns should be eliminated?
Click to expand...

It is not.


But. If those bemoaning gun violence really want to effect actual change, then it IS my position that the only logical way to go about curbing gun violence (not completely, but significantly) is to eliminate all guns. Short of that, a ban and physical removal from existence of all automatic and semi-automatic weapons would also go a pretty long way toward achieving that goal.
 
vegas giants said:
Many many many more people have died from guns rather than bombs. This is hilarious!
Click to expand...


Yet you are unable to cite just ONE incident in which a mass shooting exceeded the bombing incidents in lethality that I noted.

I'm afraid your opinion is not as persuasive as the facts I've repeatedly presented.
 
B'smith said:
Yet you are unable to cite just ONE incident in which a mass shooting exceeded the bombing incidents in lethality that I noted.

I'm afraid your opinion is not as persuasive as the facts I've repeatedly presented.
Click to expand...

Quit trolling already, it's getting tired.

There are hundreds (maybe even thousands) of shootings that take place for every bombing incident. That a single shooting event isn't able to top the death toll of a single bombing event doesn't reduce the monstrosity of all those shooting events.
 
B'smith said:
Yet you are unable to cite just ONE incident in which a mass shooting exceeded the bombing incidents in lethality that I noted.

I'm afraid your opinion is not as persuasive as the facts I've repeatedly presented.
Click to expand...

Las Vegas.
 
B'smith said:
Yet you are unable to cite just ONE incident in which a mass shooting exceeded the bombing incidents in lethality that I noted.

I'm afraid your opinion is not as persuasive as the facts I've repeatedly presented.
Click to expand...

Every mass shooting event exceeds this "troubled" suicide bomber's bombings.
 
Critter7r said:
It is not.


But. If those bemoaning gun violence really want to effect actual change, then it IS my position that the only logical way to go about curbing gun violence (not completely, but significantly) is to eliminate all guns. Short of that, a ban and physical removal from existence of all automatic and semi-automatic weapons would also go a pretty long way toward achieving that goal.
Click to expand...


The FBI statistics(1) prove that you're wrong.

There are more semi auto firearms in America than ever before in our nation's history.

But homicides are at a 51 year low. It is additionally noteworthy that homicides plummeted by 49% AFTER the expiration of the Clinton era Assault Weapons Ban in 2004

So, clearly, the the widespread ownership of guns is not the problem.

Re:
Short of that, a ban and physical removal from existence of all automatic and semi-automatic weapons
Click to expand...
"Banning & removing" was precisely the goal of Prohibition & has been the policy in America's fatally flawed "War on Drugs" however "banning & removing" semi automatic firearms will fail just as dismally and create yet another violent & deadly Black Market for semi-autos.

"Those that fail to learn from history, are doomed to repeat it."
Winston Churchill

Gun bans are simply a cheap & easy, Do-Nothing, feel-good abrogation of our responsibility to fix our broken Mental Health system. I would be willing to pay more in taxes for both increased security at our schools and funding the same broken mental health system in which I worked for 10 years.




(1) "FBI: US Homicide Rate at 51-Year Low"
https://mises.org/wire/fbi-us-homicide-rate-51-year-low
Public Unaware that Homicide Rates Have Fallen
EXCERPT "As Pew has reported in recent years, in fact, the American public is "unaware" that the homicide rate in the United States has fallen by 49 percent over the past twenty years. And while Pew doesn't report on it, it's also a safe bet that the public is also unaware that homicide rates have collapsed as total gun ownership in the United States has increased significantly."CONTINUED
 
Manc Skipper said:
Every mass shooting event exceeds this "troubled" suicide bomber's bombings.
Click to expand...

If you're going to jump in on an ongoing discussion, please at least read previous posts so I don't have to repeat myself for everyone hostile to the 2nd Amendment.

Then please name a single mass shooting that exceeded the Bali bombing that killed over 200 people.

Or,

Now, please name a school shooting that had a death toll exceeding that in Bath Michigan back in 1927.

Now do you see that bombs are deadlier than firearms?


"The 1927 Bombing That Remains America’s Deadliest School Massacre"
"Ninety years ago, a school in Bath, Michigan was rigged with explosives in a brutal act that stunned the town"
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/histo...m4IUrIbB9uc.99
EXCERPTS "In the end 44 people died, 38 of them students. It wasn’t the first bombing in the country’s history—at least eight were killed during the Haymarket Square rally in Chicago in 1886, and 30 when a bomb exploded in Manhattan in 1920. But none had been so deadly as this, or affected so many children."CONTINUED
 
Critter7r said:
Quit trolling already, it's getting tired.

There are hundreds (maybe even thousands) of shootings that take place for every bombing incident. That a single shooting event isn't able to top the death toll of a single bombing event doesn't reduce the monstrosity of all those shooting events.
Click to expand...

I'm simply responding to & debunking Gun Ban Trolls who want to eviscerate the 2nd Amendment & can't refute FBI statistics(1) or the fact that bombs are deadlier than firearms.




(1) "FBI: US Homicide Rate at 51-Year Low"
https://mises.org/wire/fbi-us-homicide-rate-51-year-low
Public Unaware that Homicide Rates Have Fallen
EXCERPT "As Pew has reported in recent years, in fact, the American public is "unaware" that the homicide rate in the United States has fallen by 49 percent over the past twenty years. And while Pew doesn't report on it, it's also a safe bet that the public is also unaware that homicide rates have collapsed as total gun ownership in the United States has increased significantly."CONTINUED
 
B'smith said:
I'm simply responding to & debunking Gun Ban Trolls who want to eviscerate the 2nd Amendment & can't refute FBI statistics(1) or the fact that bombs are deadlier than firearms.
Click to expand...

Well, because that's far from a "fact".

There are interpretations that negate your claim of "fact". For instance, a single bombing incident may be deadlier than a single shooting spree incident, but certainly a gun has the potential to kill many more people than a bomb, limited only by the number of bullets available. And it may well be that in general, an individual bombing incident claims more lives than an individual shooting incident, but there are many more shootings than bombings.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom