How many on ATS actually believe the propaganda....

originally posted by: theonenonlyone

originally posted by: six67seven

originally posted by: theonenonlyone
History has shown the world otherwise that the biggest threat to America is the fact that mentally unstable people have access to guns or that you are more likely to be killed by American born mass shooters.

They are one in the same..."They" being the mentally unstable & mass shooters.

That said, Syed Farook IS AMERICAN BORN.

Would you like to start over?

Not sure if actually made any point there?

My point is the OP is a tautology.

I get what the poster is getting at, but it wasnt thought out/presented properly.

originally posted by: Vroomfondel
I would say that taking historical US numbers into account against a relatively new terrorist threat isn't a fair comparison. I would like to see the numbers compared over the same time period. I am sure that if it is sectioned off enough times either side of coin can find a time span that supports their position. But there has to be a majority somewhere in recent history where both threats were realized.

I have done a little reading about this topic and what it says is that since 9/11 70 or so have been killed by Islamic terrorists in America while over 10,000 americans are killed yearly by gun violence that includes mass shooters, gang related, suicide..etc. Point being that it is you are more likely to be killed by your own people or yourself than any terrorist organization. I do not care about your guns nor do I want them but one should not focus all attention on only one group and be vigilant about all of them so as not leave yourself open for an attack by other groups.

originally posted by: neo96
AN ILLUSTRATED HISTORY OF TERROR ATTACKS PRIOR TO 9/11

Why is the 4th image in that first link the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building?

That sure wasn't an Islamic attack.

History has shown the world otherwise that the biggest threat to America is the fact that mentally unstable people have access to guns or that you are more likely to be killed by American born mass shooters.

This has been PROVEN FALSE numerous times.

(4) has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution;

Gun Control Act of 1968.

Has been adjudicated as a mental defective or committed to a mental institution;

Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act

I particularly like this little FACT:

n its 1997 decision in the case, the Supreme Court ruled that the provision of the Brady Act that compelled state and local law enforcement officials to perform the background checks was unconstitutional on 10th amendment grounds.

The anti gunner need to get their facts straight instead of spewing PROPAGANDA.

originally posted by: neo96
AN ILLUSTRATED HISTORY OF TERROR ATTACKS PRIOR TO 9/11

List: Islamic Terror Attacks against USA before 9/11

Global terrorism on rise: Fivefold increase in terror-related deaths since 2000

The only propaganda I am hearing are those trying to deny terrorism exists.

And telling Americans they should give up their constitutional RIGHT.

To the one biggest arms dealer, and financier of TERRORISTS in the world.

What is it with you and guns. No one is asking for your guns, so stop creating false scenarios about what I wrote.

So your defense to my question is by spreading propaganda in a thread asking if people are falling for it?

originally posted by: theonenonlyone

What is it with you and guns. No one is asking for your guns, so stop creating false scenarios about what I wrote.

So your defense to my question is by spreading propaganda in a thread asking if people are falling for it?

Tune in tomorrow at 8 bud

a reply to: neo96

Says the guy with more propaganda. The same guy that repeats that cars should be banned because they kill more than guns.

But did you know that you have a have 4 times more chances to win the lottery than getting killed by a terrorist.

Also you have more chances to get hit by lightning that getting killed by a terrorist, lets ban lightning.

originally posted by: six67seven


My point is the OP is a tautology.

I get what the poster is getting at, but it wasnt thought out/presented properly.

Sorry about that, there is a reason I made wrote what did. In other threads people were talking talking about mass shooting be done by mentally unstable people and they were saying the Islamic terrorists are not mentally unstable.

I did it for them..

originally posted by: mandelaeffect
What was the real reason Hiroshima and Nagasaki civilian populations were NUKED/ATOMBOMBED?

Ok , I am buying . Why ?

originally posted by: neo96

History has shown the world otherwise that the biggest threat to America is the fact that mentally unstable people have access to guns or that you are more likely to be killed by American born mass shooters.

This has been PROVEN FALSE numerous times.


The anti gunner need to get their facts straight instead of spewing PROPAGANDA.

You did not prove nothing as the stats disagree with you. The majority of mass shooters are mentally unstable and the that the laws you are showing apparently aren't stopping that.

Show me where it is proven false that mentally ill people are not going on shooting sprees. You stated and I quote "

This has been PROVEN FALSE numerous times.

in regards to what I said "

the biggest threat to America is the fact that mentally unstable people have access to guns or that you are more likely to be killed by American born mass shooters

.

Prove that is false by showing me that it is not mentally ill people committing these acts of violence. Posting ineffective laws proves nothing.

Out for the night so will reply tomorrow.

a reply to: theonenonlyone

but one should not focus all attention on only one group and be vigilant about all of them so as not leave yourself open for an attack by other groups.

The ones that are allowed to carry firearms already are. We certainly do not need anyone else telling us this.
Check out YOUR numbers and find what percentage of those occurred in a no-carry or gun-free zone. EASY to leave out certain factors to try and show your point , yes ?

a reply to: theonenonlyone

Where the issues exist, is with people...period. Granted their strategies and tactics are o'plenty...culture, nature, nurture, religion, race, creed, ethnicity...what have you.

We...as a species...are tainted, misinformed and disinformed, until that changes and we can all be one...propoganda will reign supreme.

I for one, am over the ignorance...I can deny it all I want, but that doesn't make it any less prevalent. The trick is, identify, adapt, and then overcome, therein, is what makes this website a powerful tool.

Read between the lines and the propoganda is nothing more than rhetoric for those that are paying attention.

a reply to: Gothmog

Analysis of Mass Shootings

Ninety-one of the 133 incidents (68%) took place wholly in private residences. Of the 37 incidents in public spaces, at least 21 took place wholly or in part where concealed guns could be lawfully carried. All told, no more than 17 of the shootings (13%) took place entirely in public spaces that were so-called “gun-free zones.”

Not terribly worried about either one, frankly.

I'm certainly not going to be watching for evil Muslims, or evil right-wingers, or evil whatevers.

I try to be aware of what's going on around me, but that's the same as looking both ways before crossing the street.

originally posted by: theonenonlyone

originally posted by: Vroomfondel
I would say that taking historical US numbers into account against a relatively new terrorist threat isn't a fair comparison. I would like to see the numbers compared over the same time period. I am sure that if it is sectioned off enough times either side of coin can find a time span that supports their position. But there has to be a majority somewhere in recent history where both threats were realized.

I have done a little reading about this topic and what it says is that since 9/11 70 or so have been killed by Islamic terrorists in America while over 10,000 americans are killed yearly by gun violence that includes mass shooters, gang related, suicide..etc. Point being that it is you are more likely to be killed by your own people or yourself than any terrorist organization. I do not care about your guns nor do I want them but one should not focus all attention on only one group and be vigilant about all of them so as not leave yourself open for an attack by other groups.

You are entitled to your opinion, but the information you presented is not entirely accurate. The way you are presenting the data is like lumping the worst gang ridden ghetto in the city in with the some small town in the country and averaging their crime rate per capita. It simply isnt accurate.

a reply to: theonenonlyone

Only 1 subset , please try again

Ninety-one of the 133 incidents (68%) took place wholly in private residences

Of families that probably were not gun owners.

And with that, Game over , you are all out of tokens