• 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!

Thailand Shooting Spree

DebateChallenge said:
You've admitted yourself that no amount of gun control is going to stop somebody whose well funded....
Click to expand...

No, I said well funded/resourced organizations - like criminal gangs and terrorists, you know shady characters with underground connections

Paddock doesn't come into that category.

Why don't rich people cause mass shootings in the UK ?


Bombings and arsons on the average kill more people than shootings or stabbings.
Click to expand...

Yes


Have you been watching the news the last few years?
Click to expand...

Yes


You don't need to hi-jack a plane you privately own to fly it into a building or some other area where there's lots of people.
Click to expand...


Or you can release nerve agent into a subway station


Technically NJ does issue CCWs but its very rarely ever done. NJ is a may issue state which means they may issue you a CCW if you apply for one if a judge decides you need one and most NJ judges are not going to issue a CCW for most reasons. The only way I can think of that can guarantee you would get a CCW in NJ is if you have a job where you carry a gun.
Click to expand...

But you accept that terrorists with gun over knives are more dangerous ?


And as I pointed out there are other methods of mass killing that can kill just as many or more people than mass shootings.
Click to expand...

So what ?
 
Rich2018 said:
Is that just in the USA or other countries too ?
Click to expand...

I'd say it's easier to get whatever one wants in the US, but enough money gets it done anywhere.
 
Rich2018 said:
So why don't rich people in countries like the UK become mass shooters ?
Click to expand...
The Cumbria shootings was a shooting spree which occurred on 2 June 2010 when a lone gunman, taxi driver Derrick Bird, killed twelve people and injured eleven others before killing himself in Cumbria, England, United Kingdom.
Click to expand...
Cumbria shootings - Wikipedia

On Sunday, 12 August 2018, a mass shooting happened in the Manchester neighbourhood of Moss Side.
Click to expand...
Moss Side mass shooting - Wikipedia
 
Rich2018 said:
No, I said well funded/resourced organizations - like criminal gangs and terrorists, you know shady characters with underground connections

Paddock doesn't come into that category.
Click to expand...
Paddock was a multimillionaire and a multimillionaire will have such connections if they want them.

Rich2018 said:
Why don't rich people cause mass shootings in the UK ?
Click to expand...
Maybe because rich people don't want to cause mass shootings in the UK?

Rich2018 said:
Yes
Click to expand...
So if guns are unavailable mass killers will just turn to bombings and arson, those that haven't already.

Rich2018 said:
Yes
Click to expand...
Then you should know that vehicular assaults are the latest trend in Europe.

Rich2018 said:
Or you can release nerve agent into a subway station
Click to expand...
Which proves my point all the more, making guns harder to get will not cut down on mass killings it will just change the methods.

Rich2018 said:
But you accept that terrorists with gun over knives are more dangerous ?
Click to expand...
That depends. Terrorists with rifles are definitely more dangerous than terrorists with knives, (most terrorists that use guns use rifles as their primary weapons BTW) terrorists with just handguns on the other hand aren't necessarily more dangerous than terrorists with knives.

Rich2018 said:
So what ?
Click to expand...
As I said before, if guns are unavailable the frequency and numbers of the killings won't stop or decline, just the methods will change.
 
Rich2018 said:
I asked why don't rich people become mass shooters

The Cumbria shooting was a taxi driver, the Moss Side shooter was not identified.
Click to expand...

Proving one needn't be rich to commit a mass shooting in the UK.
 
DebateChallenge said:
Paddock was a multimillionaire and a multimillionaire will have such connections if they want them.
Click to expand...

Source ? (you're just spouting personal opinion, just because you're wealthy doesn't mean you have underworld contacts)

When has a rich person been a mass shooter in Britain ?



Maybe because rich people don't want to cause mass shootings in the UK?
Click to expand...

Why not, what makes them different to rich people in the US ?


So if guns are unavailable mass killers will just turn to bombings and arson, those that haven't already.
Click to expand...

Where is your evidence for this ?


Then you should know that vehicular assaults are the latest trend in Europe.
Click to expand...

So what ?


Which proves my point all the more, making guns harder to get will not cut down on mass killings it will just change the methods.
Click to expand...

What evidence do you have of this ?


...terrorists with just handguns on the other hand aren't necessarily more dangerous than terrorists with knives.
Click to expand...

What evidence do you have for that ?


...if guns are unavailable the frequency and numbers of the killings won't stop or decline, just the methods will change.
Click to expand...


What evidence do you have for that claim ?
 
ecofarm said:
Proving one needn't be rich to commit a mass shooting in the UK.
Click to expand...

But with legally held shotguns. Does it not prove that wealthy men can't get semi-automatic rifles and pistol just because they're wealthy

You indicated that wealthy mean could access anything they want



I asked why no rich men become mass killers in the UK. You gave me two examples - neither of which was about a rich man.
 
Rich2018 said:
But with legally held shotguns. Does it not prove that wealthy men can't get semi-automatic rifles and pistol just because they're wealthy

You indicated that wealthy mean could access anything they want



I asked why no rich men become mass killers in the UK. You gave me two examples - neither of which was about a rich man.
Click to expand...

I never said anyone needs to be rich.
 
Rich2018 said:
LOL, you're not in a country that has banned guns - like the UK
Click to expand...

I've lived in Europe and Africa, each for years. Been to S. America too.
 
Rich2018 said:
Source ? (you're just spouting personal opinion, just because you're wealthy doesn't mean you have underworld contacts)
Click to expand...
Not all wealthy people have underworld contacts because not all wealthy people want underworld contacts. The point is with enough money you can get such connections if you want them.

Rich2018 said:
When has a rich person been a mass shooter in Britain ?
Click to expand...
I don't know of any exceptionally rich person who has been a mass shooter in Britain and I also don't know of any exceptionally rich person who has been a shooter in the USA aside from Paddock.

Rich2018 said:
Why not, what makes them different to rich people in the US ?
Click to expand...
In order to be a mass shooter you have to have the intent. The reason there hasn't been any super rich people in the UK who are mass shooters is because there hasn't been any super rich person in the UK with the intent to be a mass shooter. Most super rich people in the USA don't have the intent to be mass shooters either, Paddock was the exception.

Rich2018 said:
Where is your evidence for this ?
Click to expand...
All the vehicular assaults and bombings and arson in Europe and Japan as well as such stuff happening in the USA is my evidence.

Rich2018 said:
So what ?
Click to expand...
See above.

Rich2018 said:
What evidence do you have of this ?
Click to expand...
See above.

Rich2018 said:
What evidence do you have for that ?
Click to expand...
Handguns are ballistically deficient. Most anybody who knows the basics on handguns would know this. The victim of a handgun shot can usually be saved if prompt medical attention is provided. When a person dies from a handgun shot usually its from bleeding out unless the shot penetrates the brain. Bleeding can be stopped with prompt and proper medical attention.

I've known people who've been both shot with handguns and who've been stabbed. They said if they had to do it over again they would rather be shot than stabbed.

Rich2018 said:
What evidence do you have for that claim ?
Click to expand...
Are you going to keep asking that over and over again? As I said before, see above.
 
Rich2018 said:
But then the mass shooting has already happened...would you place a guard on the guards...how about a guard on them...and a guard on them.

If everyone has a gun, you have the Wild West.

Better no-one has guns except law enforcement.
Click to expand...
What happens if LE starts mass shooting, who guards them?
 
=Rich2018;1071342589]How would you suggest armed citizens protect from a shooting like we saw from Stephen Paddock in Vegas ?
Click to expand...
How would you suggest LE protect from it? Oh wait I guess they didn't. Through no fault of theirs.
Seems to work where there's a gun ban
eg: the UK and three recent terrorist attacks in London (where the terrorists had no access to guns)
Click to expand...
Terror in the UK: Timeline of attacks | UK News | Sky News I'm sure they could have had access. They seemed to gain access to bomb material.
True I have plenty under the sink and in cleaning cupboards. But something tells me all of those weren't home cleaning supplies.

Contrast this with a terrorist incident in New Jersey last year:
Click to expand...
Gun laws up the butt = terrorist wet dream.
4 deaths, including a cop. Where were your armed citizens to stop it?
Click to expand...

Bad gun laws = very poorly armed citizenry.
 
Last edited:
DebateChallenge said:
Not all wealthy people have underworld contacts....
Click to expand...

I would say very few because wealthy people don't want to go to jail (unless of course it was criminal behavior that made them rich like being a drug lord)


I don't know of any exceptionally rich person who has been a mass shooter in Britain and I also don't know of any exceptionally rich person who has been a shooter in the USA aside from Paddock.
Click to expand...


So the risk of the wealthy being able to buy guns if they have enough money (or crash their plane into a target) is very small as to be not worth considering


All the vehicular assaults and bombings and arson in Europe and Japan as well as such stuff happening in the USA is my evidence.
Click to expand...


How is that evidence ?

Remember your claims:

So if guns are unavailable mass killers will just turn to bombings and arson, those that haven't already.

Which proves my point all the more, making guns harder to get will not cut down on mass killings it will just change the methods.
What evidence do you have of this ?


If guns are unavailable the frequency and numbers of the killings won't stop or decline, just the methods will change.
Click to expand...



And how many instances compared to mass shooting occurrences ?

What is your proof that American mass shooters will turn into terrorists (which is what the INFREQUENT attacks you alluded too are) and just simply not commit a mass killing ?

Why wouldn't a lack of access to guns mean America's mass shooters just don't kill anyone ?


Handguns are ballistically deficient...
Click to expand...

What does that mean and what relevance is it ?


...the victim of a handgun shot can usually be saved if prompt medical attention is provided....
Click to expand...

What evidence do you have of this ?


I've known people who've been both shot with handguns and who've been stabbed. They said if they had to do it over again they would rather be shot than stabbed.
Click to expand...

Evidence other than your claim of personal knowledge (which unless you can prove is worthless) ?

Are you going to keep asking that over and over again?
Click to expand...

Are you going to keep on making claims with no evidence ?
 
Last edited:
zsu2357 said:
What happens if LE starts mass shooting, who guards them?
Click to expand...

Other LEO.

But that problem exists in the USA today....I've read that there's no legal way you can stop a cop, even if what he's doing is illegal
 
zsu2357 said:
What happens if LE starts mass shooting, who guards them?
Click to expand...

Other LEO.

But that problem exists in the USA today....I've read that there's no legal way you can stop a cop, even if what he's doing is illegal



How would you suggest LE protect from it? Oh wait I guess they didn't. Through no fault of theirs.
Click to expand...

Sound like you're saying there is no physical protection that would work


I'm sure they could have had access.
Click to expand...

Why ?


Has there ever been a man who got access to illegal gun for a mass shooting in the UK ?

Gun laws up the butt = terrorist wet dream.
Click to expand...

Explain


Bad gun laws = very poorly armed citizenry.
Click to expand...


Good gun laws = a well armed people (ie: only muzzle loaders, bolt action rifles and shot guns holding no more than three shells)


The British people are well armed

The American people are badly armed.
 
Rich2018 said:
Other LEO.

But that problem exists in the USA today....I've read that there's no legal way you can stop a cop, even if what he's doing is illegal
Click to expand...

Yes you can. If a cop is trying to rape and murder you, you can use any means to stop him.
 
Rich2018 said:
The British people are well armed

The American people are badly armed.
Click to expand...

You've got to be kidding me. You expect British armed citizens, what few of them there are and armed with their bolt action rifles and break open shotguns to prevail against the American armed citizens who not only vastly outnumber them but are also armed with semi automatic rifles, semi automatic shotguns, handguns, and in some cases full automatics?
 
DebateChallenge said:
Yes you can. If a cop is trying to rape and murder you, you can use any means to stop him.
Click to expand...

No you can't, that's called resisting arrest - which is what he will claim

If you lay a hand on an officer on duty, you are breaking the law. It's crazy but it's true.
(in the UK, it's illegal to obstruct an officer performing his/her duties, so you can argue if they are acting illegally, they are not performing their duties)
Not so in the USA


You've got to be kidding me. You expect British armed citizens, what few of them there are and armed with their bolt action rifles and break open shotguns to prevail against the American armed citizens who not only vastly outnumber them but are also armed with semi automatic rifles, semi automatic shotguns, handguns, and in some cases full automatics?
Click to expand...

I didn't say that

I said British citizens are well armed and US citizens are badly armed

That is in my opinion of course.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom