Judging by the fact there are eight pages, this post isn't a troll and I'm worried
deletedalmost 9 years
because no one could argue the liberal ideology, because facts just get in their way now.
so drake masterfully tried to deflect by saying the us has a bigger problem with mass shootings. As if starving kids in africa invalidates every other problem in the world
deletedalmost 9 years
Why is this thread about guns and not the immigrants
deletedalmost 9 years
deletedalmost 9 years
Wake me up from this nightmare
deletedalmost 9 years
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
australia had a mass shooting in tasmania in the late 90's. the pm banned guns and forced citizens to turn in their firearms.
australia has not had a mass shooting since.
mass shootings and gun violence can easily be prevented and those claiming banning guns won't stop criminals from obtaining them are stupid
deletedalmost 9 years
Nevermind. I was thinking more on the lines that people wouldn't call a bullet hitting a person an "impact."
deletedalmost 9 years
Ok look Drake i do believe that there is too much gun violence but it isn't something new that is happening in the last 3 years, and that 300 number has mass shooting badly defined. When people genuinely think of mass shootings they dont think of gang shootouts or a few people getting injured they think of tragedies where unarmed innocent people die. That whole number is being pushed around because it sounds scary and it pushes peoples agendas. Hence the reason you keep trying to defend its legitimacy. I'm sorry you blindly listen to your canadian news about American politics. I actually agree with from what i read the executive order, i don't believe that all guns should be outlawed though.
Bullets don't impact their victims literally or mentally...
deletedalmost 9 years
I was talking about the fact that there is a literal impact in a car crash and not in shootings. You know, because you said they're not as "impactful" even though there is an actual impact?
well, you'd include it in a list of car accidents with 3 or 4 victims, since it was a car accident with 3 or 4 victims.
deletedalmost 9 years
I'm comparing it to your definition of mass shootings if there is a car accident where 3 or 4 people get hurt do you go and add it to your map of tragic car accidents? I mean all there families were effected by it
i've never heard of this mass car crash you speak of
deletedalmost 9 years
So is every car crash a mass car crash when more then one person is injured? And i can say with confidence that most of the time that someone is going around doing drive bys the gun isn't legally obtained