Oh man time to post the popcorn gifs, its about to get real juicy in here.
I can't be the only one posting the .gifs, man.
its your destiny and you know it, dont deny your inner callings
post them, post them ALL
lmfao
deletedalmost 9 years
so ignoring suicides (because no one can argue those are mass shootings, no matter your definition of mass), gun deaths are half what they were in '93 and seem to continue going down
I wonder why it went down from 1993 to now, could it be the residual effects of the 1994 federal assault weapons ban??
doubtful considering assault weapons are responsible for a very small amount of gun deaths. I'd post the fbi.gov statistic but I'm on my phone and about to go out anyway. I'll be back later though
so ignoring suicides (because no one can argue those are mass shootings, no matter your definition of mass), gun deaths are half what they were in '93 and seem to continue going down
I wonder why it went down from 1993 to now, could it be the residual effects of the 1994 federal assault weapons ban??
Anyone who uses the fact that FBI defines mass shooting as _____ is dumb because obviously the federal bureau of investigation wants to limit the work they need to do by limiting "mass shooting" to something that doesn't happen as often.
Why are people hung up on the definition? People are dying from guns no matter what it could be defined as. It's pretty disturbing you think the right to own guns comes before the lives of everyone.
deletedalmost 9 years
What would happen if politicians said "fine, we won't ban guns" but then their next approach was to ban bullets? haha
deletedalmost 9 years
Hi peta. A few things. This thread hasn't been a debate about gun control. You're the one bringing up gun control. No one else has. This has been a debate about mass shootings and how they are reported. Obviously gun control has a place in a mass shooting debate, but don't act like we've been talking about it. Furthermore, my post showing gun homicides going down STEMMED from my post about crime going down across the board...so I did kind of mention that. And because we're debating mass shootings and not gun violence as a whole, no, suicides aren't relevant and saying that doesn't make me a psychopath.
Finally, public service reminder that a kid who got kicked out of my school for sexually harassing/assaulting multiple people like 3 years ago tried approach me as well, but peta still feels the need to bring it up.
It's cool to mention that gun-related homicides have declined but not to mention that (1) gun ownership has gone down; (2) homicides in general have gone down; (3) guns are still involved in 70% of all homicides; (4) the prevalence of gun-related suicides is, contrary to your laughably idiotic, not to mention apparently psychopathic, argument, a reason to LIMIT gun ownership rather than preserve it; and (5) the United States is literally averaging one mass shooting per day.
Please wax eloquent to me on these facts, figures, etc. Godspeed, and God bless, and goddamn.
you realize the only thing i said was his post contained speculation because he said one of my earlier posts contained speculation and nothing else?
haha, you trolled me good. or you just dont know what speculation means and after realizing your mistake, stalled until I left. Either way, good show.
also lol that drake thinks "mass shooting" is defined by the sum of the words and it doesnt have additional meaning beyond that. but once again, I hate arguing semantics, especially against people with a very basic understanding of the world.
I would be curious how this "300 mass shooting statistic" would look if you actually calculated it for past years. Like how can so many people respect a statistic that we cant even see the year over year movements of...
so ignoring suicides (because no one can argue those are mass shootings, no matter your definition of mass), gun deaths are half what they were in '93 and seem to continue going down