So, after mass shooting, Australia "banned" guns 20 years ago = ZERO mass killings since

originally posted by: AmericanRealist
a reply to: SudoNim
So, objects not designed to kill people, kill exponentially more people every year, and thats somehow to make the argument in your favor? In fact, that is quite the opposite. It just proves guns are seriously less dangerous than all of those things overall.

Yes it does. Guns are not needed. Cars in this society are. Understand yet?

The bear trap, since it is designed to actually maim when stepped on, sure you can put one in front of my entry door and rear as well. Be a nice burglar trap. Ironic thing is, I can step on guns all day long and it wont set them off. That trap sure as heck would.

And when a non-burglar stands in it you'll just say "we need bear traps to stop the burglars".

You leave guns on the floor to step on? You consider yourself a responsible parent? I'd hate to see another toddler get their face blown off because of a parent like you.

Listen, the fact you have to fall back on personal insults fr the umpteenth time just shows got nothing left .

Maybe you should go # yourself and find out if your manhood is adequate enough eh?

Contridicting yourself in the space of one paragraph. I guess "you've got nothing left".

Oh look, the Senate just rejected all four gun control measures, how pleasant. I hope your so so angry right now. It just, it "boosts my ego" knowing how upset you are. And you ARE upset, seeing as you have to attack my manhood. I fathered 5 kids, and we had fun doing it every time.

I'm not attacking your manhood. I'm just saying you value the right to own a gun over the safety of your children. It's your choice I guess, but if you'd rather endanger them than protect them that's your call. I just feel sorry for your kids.

I'm an Aussie. Australia's gun confiscation was a knee-jerk reaction to a sad situation.

Our guns here in Australia were never the issue, ever.

Just an excuse to disarm good, decent people.

Believe whatever you want to believe, but like it or not, guns are your LAST line of defence against oppressive governments.

Where do we have oppressive governments? Are you friggin kidding me?

Most of you anti gun quacks are total as*holes, limp wristed, and weak.

You might as well bend over right now, drop your pants and say, 'thank you lucifer, l accept the world as new'. Sorry, no lube...

Oh yeah, and the title is extremely misleading. Zero mass killings since our guns were stolen from us. WTF?

How many mass killings have been committed in Australia by guns before gun confiscation?

Ok, and are you saying that we are much safer now, because we don't have our guns?

There are killings everyday here in Oz, just the same as always, business as usual. Are they using guns? You betcha.

People are killed everyday here, everyday. Lately, a lot of people are getting stabbed, in and around Sydney, Melbourne, and Adelaide. Queensland gets its fair share as does the west. However death rates from murder decline somewhat in the NT and tassie.

I think this whole thread is misleading.....boo!

originally posted by: leastofthese
I'm an Aussie. Australia's gun confiscation was a knee-jerk reaction to a sad situation.

Our guns here in Australia were never the issue, ever.

Just an excuse to disarm good, decent people.

Believe whatever you want to believe, but like it or not, guns are your LAST line of defence against oppressive governments.

Where do we have oppressive governments? Are you friggin kidding me?

Most of you anti gun quacks are total as*holes, limp wristed, and weak.

You might as well bend over right now, drop your pants and say, 'thank you lucifer, l accept the world as new'. Sorry, no lube...

Yup, a knee-jerk reaction to 12 massacres in the previous 17 years.

a reply to: SudoNim

Go away...your join date, thread contribution, post content, all of which add up to you being here at just the right time...how convenient?

You sound like a real pussy, no offence.

a reply to: leastofthese

Didn't have an answer to my post then. Shame.

Right time for what? Convenient for who? Is this the usual response for when someone destroys your argument?

Go back to your flat earth threads

a reply to: Jaellma

Doing this won't have an equivalent effect in America as it did in Australia. You guys have a more violent, high strung culture to start with.

a reply to: SudoNim

you have no argument except to try and allude you are a better person than us all by trying to make us all shamed. Your opinion does not matter, it does not set policy, and your wishes have been ignored in the Senate. Thanks for failing at the game of propaganda, but you lose. Try again with another troll account troll.

a reply to: SudoNim

Or cellphone retardation.
It figures I'd have to revert to a speech type that a 3 yr old could grasp, ace.
MAN I hate raising other people's screwups.
30 Rd Mags a neccessary based on a standard THREAT matrix...bigger word matrix but I HOPE you get it.

a reply to: AmericanRealist

Failed?

I am a better person than anyone who owns a gun for protection. And your opinion does matter? Isn't this the tyrannical thinking your guns were supposed to protect us from, where one mans opinion is worth more than another?

Ah! The old fall back, if you can't engage in an intelligent conversation just call the opposition a troll. Thanks for showing your true nature, you are clearly not worth anyone's time.

originally posted by: cavtrooper7
a reply to: SudoNim

Or cellphone retardation.
It figures I'd have to revert to a speech type that a 3 yr old could grasp, ace.
MAN I hate raising other people's screwups.
30 Rd Mags a neccessary based on a standard THREAT matrix...bigger word matrix but I HOPE you get it.

Again, sorry I have no idea what you are trying to say. The broken English, spelling mistakes and lack of grammar is confusing me. If you are using an online translator I suggest you find another one to use.

A questions to People who are against control...Do you know how many people die due to mass shooting in US every year? Hundreds and hundreds die every year cos guns are freely available to every tom dick and harry. Except for Orlando shooting, which was a terror attack, there have been nearly 200 cases of mass shootings in US in last 10 years. Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting.....so many innocent children have died cos of uncontrolled gun culture of America. Guns need to be banned ASAP!

a reply to: tracy18

Yes, I think most of us know. The number varies but its usually something in the range of the dozens up to perhaps a couple hundred (more if you include gang-related incidents, which I don't), and yes, its tragic, but I also have to balance that against the fact that we have another 100 million people in this country who own firearms legally and lawfully. I don't see why those people should lose their rights for the actions of some handful of idiots. Instead, we need to do a better job of identifying and preventing that particular handful of people from purchasing firearms.

In the end, it comes down to the fact that I don't believe in blaming people who aren't actually guilty of crimes.

a reply to: vor78

Because they do f*ck all with those guns and it's pointless them having them.
You are putting your fetish for owning a gun over the lives of innocent people.

Guns aren't preventing crimes, the crime rate is ridiculously high.
Enacting gun control laws will not increase crime/gun violence, it is likely to dramatically decrease it.

Why wouldn't you want to try that? Just because you like to own a weapon. It's selfish.

a reply to: SudoNim

I'm open to laws intended to prevent people like this guy in Orlando from obtaining firearms. I'm also open to laws intended to address the social and economic conditions that lead toward the much larger day-to-day issues with gang related violence. Truth be told, I don't have ANY problem whatsoever with the police and criminal justice system cracking down on violent criminals. Actually, I'm generally all for it.

The one thing I don't support, however, is taking away the rights of a hundred million people who are not committing crimes, regardless of what that right is. You don't have to like that, but that's not something I'm going to change my mind about.

a reply to: vor78

If the Gov't said they wanted to enact Soap Control and restrict the use of certain hand soap because they were considered dangerous and most sensible countries already had strict control over soap. Would you oppose this?

Is it just because people want to blindly follow the words of people who were born and died in a different era?
Is that not what they call a sheep on here?

originally posted by: SudoNim
a reply to: vor78

If the Gov't said they wanted to enact Soap Control and restrict the use of certain hand soap because they were considered dangerous and most sensible countries already had strict control over soap. Would you oppose this?

Is it just because people want to blindly follow the words of people who were born and died in a different era?
Is that not what they call a sheep on here?

It depends on why the soap is considered dangerous, but unless its because people are using it as a weapon, laughable as that sounds, I suggest its a false equivalency. As far as a firearm is concerned, its an inanimate object. It has no intent except that of its user. Its only as dangerous as its user. As it turns out, the vast majority of those users aren't dangerous. That doesn't mean that there won't be occasional accidents, but accidents involving firearms are a small slice of accidental deaths overall.

Ironic that you call me a 'sheep', when you're the one saying we should do something because everyone else does it.

a reply to: vor78

a reply to: tracy18

Both of you are wrong. Unlike the Troll Sudonim who can only cite personal insults and claim superiority with feelings, I have repeatedly researched the facts and figures. Less than 500 people have been killed from mass shootings in 25 years! More people are stomped on and punched to death on an annual basis.

You can literally count the number of mass shootings on a single hand every year, and the casualty is usually under 50 a year unless the Democrats are sponsoring a massacre at the order of the UN after their small arms global disarmament treaty. Facts mean nothing to trolls like Sudonim though, because well, TROLL.

a reply to: AmericanRealist

That's about what I expected. That source does the best job I've seen of breaking it down, but other data sets I've seen also indicate it should be a few dozen victims per year on average. I gave myself a little leeway for particularly bad years, which apparently, I didn't need to do.

a reply to: vor78

Well if use actual average formula, and overestimate at 500, we get an average of 20 deaths a year over 25 years by mass shooters. Jeez, I wonder why that does not get air time in the press???