Liberal MSM calls Everytown for Gun Safety "Propaganda" for using DISHONEST INFLATED numbers

a reply to: caf1550

is true what you said as well, whenever one of these shootings happen people only blame the weapon used and never put blame on the person whereas for anything else they always blame the person for “getting behind the wheel drunk”

Which sign would be a better deterrent?

a reply to: JBurns

The media has just been horrible at this and none worse than Fox News..


“Shiria law is comming to America”

“War in christmas”

“White genocide”

“Immigrants are comming to get you”


Seems dishonest when scare tactics are literally EVERY SINGLE CONSERVATIVE SITES BREAD AND BUTTER..

Literally the dictionary definition of conservatism is “They are trying to change your traditions!”

a reply to: notsure1

a reply to: JBurns

School shooting deaths are a drop in the bucket compared to all the inner city gun deaths at the hand of thugs.

I could care less what hypocrite liberals want until they address the bigger problem of inner city gun violence.

An oldie but a goodie.

originally posted by: neo96
An oldie but a goodie.

That one makes heads explode.

a reply to: notsure1

Speaking of God.

An accidental shooting does not count as a shooting?

a reply to: neo96

Not what my parents did but clever meme

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Shamrock6

By that same token it's equally annoying whenever someone says, "I want more gun control" and then pro-gun supporters warp that to "They want to come for my guns and ban all guns!"

I happen to want more gun control but also like the 2nd Amendment. Yet people just assume I want to ban all guns anyways.

IMHO, the issue is the gun grabber side is being purposely intellectually dishonest. It makes it hard to take you guys seriously or not suspect alterior motives.

A big problem with regulations is that you give an inch, they take a mile.

Lol. Both sides act intellectually dishonest. The pro-gun side is no better in this regard. I mean you literally had a poster re-write my argument so that he can attack it easier in this very thread. How is that intellectually honest?

Yes, both sides have their moments. I've posted about the dishonesty of concealed carry before. A lot of gun advocates love to try to link concealed carry with reducing urban gun violence. I see no such link because most urban gun violence is one thug shooting another thug with an illegal firearm. In other words, the odds of anyone with a concealed carry being involved with urban gun violence of any sort is slim to none.

Here is my issue summarized:

Gun violence is largely an urban black male problem. Both perpetrators and victims. Vast majority of firearms used in the commission of these crimes are illegally obtained handguns. This is indisputable fact.

Assault weapons bans and other gun control measures will have ZERO impact on the above as it doesn't address that issue.

While there have been mass shootings with assault style weapons, the reality is that they are still a statistically small amount of overall gun deaths. It has been posted before, less than 350 people typically are killed annually (out of like 6,000) with a rifle OF ANY KIND. In addition, functionally, assault weapons are no more dangerous than a typical semi-auto pistol in terms of rate of fire, so the focus on these scary looking rifles just seems to be out of pure ignorance from both a functional standpoint, not too mention factual in terms of actual deaths.

For me, preventing Jimbo from buying an AR-15 at Cabellas will not reduce the larger problem of urban gun violence which is an exponentially bigger problem. Despite the media circus, mass shootings are statistically insignificant events. Trying to prevent them is nice and all, but they will never be zero.

It is obvious access to guns is not really the issue as guns have never been more restricted.

a reply to: JBurns


OMG, its fake news because it includes accedents??? Excuse me, a gun should not be on school grounds to begin with, unless its a licenced person carrying it, accednt or not.

One of these were in Italy all the rest were in the U.S. One shooting happend because a cops gun trigger was pulled by a kid. One Kid committed suicide in a school restroom, shot himself in the head. The rest of the guns were all brought to the school. This article is minimizing something that is clearly an issue. Minimizing it will only make it get WORSE.

Here is a link to all 18 incidents.www.nydailynews.com...

Kim Jong un doesn't allow the North Korean public to own guns

Hitler disarmed Germany.

We should be like them, and just allow our government to protect us

a reply to: kurthall

Actually it looks like at least a few of those were from street fights going down near an inner city School. Meaning rival gangs happened to cross paths on the same block a school happens to be on or something along those lines.

And they all happened in the US. I'm guessing you skimmed through quickly or you'd have seen Italy, Texas. That and the obvious fact many were stray bullet incidents, but you insist these were all intentionally involving a school.

a reply to: visitedbythem

Kim Jong un doesn't allow the North Korean public to own guns

And China, the Peoples Republic of California have made it easier to get weed than own a firearm.

And last, but not least.

RUSSIA!

a reply to: notsure1

Neither...

Because people who do this have already decided to forfeit their lives.

a reply to: seaswine

I’m not seeing the difference....


If a gang member shoots up a school to kill his rival... a bunch of innocent kids might die..


If a militant outcast shoots up a school .. a bunch of innocent kids might get killed..


Sounds like tomato , tamato to me..

a reply to: neo96

Um when was the last from weed?!?!

I guess it’s likely happened once, but good luck finding many cases..

Whe. Was the last time someone killed a rom full of children with a bag of pot?!?!



I swear y’all get every once of pushback from just the retarded logic y’all push..

originally posted by: caf1550
a reply to: neo96

It is true what you said as well, whenever one of these shootings happen people only blame the weapon used and never put blame on the person whereas for anything else they always blame the person for “getting behind the wheel drunk” or “falling asleep with a cigarette or candle lit” I may be dating myself on that example but shootings are the only time where people blame the instruments involved and not the person manipulating the instrument.

Krazyshot...yes the police are holding Cruz in custody and yes they have blamed him for this and he will be charged with 17 counts of murder but the rest of the media, and social media, and twitter don’t put blame on the shooter. You and I both know they put blame on the weapon that the shooter used, Chelsea Handler put blame on every republican in Congress and who voted them in, now what type of rationale is that and how can you have a legitimate discussion with people like that who immediately blame everything and everyone that they are against.

End of rant.

I think most everyone blames the shooter and wishes that he wasn't able able to own a gun while being in such a frame of mind. I can promise that it won't be long before, if you are on mental meds, you will not be able to own a gun. and many here will fight this.