An inconvenient study.

Anders Bering Brevik shot 69 kids in Norway.

The equivalent in population terms of a US death toll of 4300.

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: UKTruth

Actually tighter gun laws in the US result in more deaths.

See Chicago with some of the toughest gun restrictions in the country.

See California where they let a murder off the hook because he was an illegal immigrant.

Does Chicago have border checkpoints?

now this makes me smile. Do people find a way into places they shouldn't be, regardless of laws, rules, lack of walls, or sovereign borders?

(It's rhetorical, so you don't have to tax yourself to answer)

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
a reply to: neo96

Because we are all far more alike, than what you want to give credit to!

oh my god, don't say that!!....the Russian trolls won't like it, and trying to bring together Americans in ATS political threads is INSANE!!!.....we are here to gut punch each other and foster as much chaos and division as possible.....

originally posted by: jimmyx

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
a reply to: neo96

Because we are all far more alike, than what you want to give credit to!

oh my god, don't say that!!....the Russian trolls won't like it, and trying to bring together Americans in ATS political threads is INSANE!!!.....we are here to gut punch each other and foster as much chaos and division as possible.....

well Jimmy, you can only hope that the work you have done to unite us all doesn't go un-noticed. perhaps a medal is in your future, perhaps a statue. Just know that your effort means something to us all. Thanks for being you.

a reply to: Subaeruginosa


Umm you do know and are internationally leaving out part of what he said. he said SOME teachers not all.

originally posted by: Blue Shift

originally posted by: yuppa
yes were all humans but we all have different MORALS and ETHNIC backgrounds.

I think that in general everybody pretty much wants the same thing. They want the security to live their lives and hopefully peacefully procreate. Now, there are certainly differences in how people think they should go about that, but overall, people would rather not fight wars, would rather be safe and well-fed, and would rather see their children grow up safely. Do you know of any ethnic or national group that wants otherwise?

the PLO. Iran....turkey...china...the list goes on.

a reply to: yuppa

The Palestinians were forcibly removed from the land they were living on.

The Iranians had the Shah imposed on them by the CIA.

The Turks have been at war with Europe for most of the last thousand years.

The Chinese expelled a violently colonizing foreign civilization or two.

With the possible exception of the Turks all these people have fought back.

It is quite possible that seems reasonable to them.

They might even have preferred to be left in peace in the first place ?

originally posted by: draoicht
a reply to: yuppa

The Palestinians were forcibly removed from the land they were living on.

The Iranians had the Shah imposed on them by the CIA.

The Turks have been at war with Europe for most of the last thousand years.

The Chinese expelled a violently colonizing foreign civilization or two.

With the possible exception of the Turks all these people have fought back.

It is quite possible that seems reasonable to them.

They might even have preferred to be left in peace in the first place ?

The palestinians before the PLOsaid so didnt exist. the KGB has testimony on file it was a OP to hinder the US in the med. if you want to get technical the ones currently called israelis were called palestinians under roman rule. ARAFAT HIMSELF said they made it up to get land the arabs lost in the wars since they cant beat them militarally. Oh dont forget they were refugees and traitors to their countries who still cant go back today after 20 yrs or more .

a reply to: yuppa

The British administered the territory after WW1. The Palestinian Mandate.

The history of the events that led to the state of Israel seems clear to me.

The Jews were expelled from Israel by the Romans.

When they returned after WW2 the land was not empty.

People were living there.

As the territory was marked on the map as Palestine it seems quite reasonable to refer to these people as Palestinians.

US foreign policy in that part of the world is not exactly covered in Glory.

The wars you refer to happened long after the declaration of the state of Israel.

Feel free to read a little about the history of the other people you accused.

originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: UKTruth


There s nothing impractical or nonsense about them. They are measures used across the world that have been shown to reduce gun crime.

The reason there is less availability in the UK and elsewhere is because of stricter gun laws. That is how you reduce the supply of illegal guns.

The only way to reduce that 300 million number is to enact and enforce stricter in control.

The impractical fantasy is believing you can significantly reduce gun violence by any other means than stricter gun laws.

E
Perhaps we here in the US are a little more innovative, prohibition...alcohol available at the speakeasy, hell even started what became muscle cars and racing. The war on drugs, drugs of any and all kinds available. So tell me how it would keep guns out of the hands of anyone that wants one. You folks across the pond may be in for a surprise when anyone will be able to just 3D print a gun.

originally posted by: draoicht
a reply to: yuppa

The British administered the territory after WW1. The Palestinian Mandate.

The history of the events that led to the state of Israel seems clear to me.

The Jews were expelled from Israel by the Romans.

When they returned after WW2 the land was not empty.

People were living there.

As the territory was marked on the map as Palestine it seems quite reasonable to refer to these people as Palestinians.

US foreign policy in that part of the world is not exactly covered in Glory.

The wars you refer to happened long after the declaration of the state of Israel.

Feel free to read a little about the history of the other people you accused.

No there were Jews/hebrews living there during the ottoman empire and after. They didnt all come from Europe. they came from surrounding middle east countries for the most part. Your lack of history on where they came from is telling. When they announced the creation of Israel The people living there who you would had called palestinia who were hebrew/jews adopted the name Israelis.

Romans wrongly renamed Israel/judea into palestinia. By todays standards its a war crime and was being corrected by the british and the league of nations. Also those other nations were also created by the League as well into th ecountries you know today.

Also The ROmans didnt expel anyone they took alot of them As slaves but not all of them were caught.

So go sell that BS to someone else. Arafatt THE GREATEST PALESTINIAN FROM EGYPT and the PLO themselves said the Palestinian ARAB came into being magically overnight In a hot mike moment.

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: UKTruth

Actually tighter gun laws in the US result in more deaths.

See Chicago with some of the toughest gun restrictions in the country.

See California where they let a murder off the hook because he was an illegal immigrant.

Does Chicago have border checkpoints?

now this makes me smile. Do people find a way into places they shouldn't be, regardless of laws, rules, lack of walls, or sovereign borders?

(It's rhetorical, so you don't have to tax yourself to answer)

So the Trump wall really is completely pointless then?

Gun laws don't 100% prevent gun crime. Border checks don't 100% stop smuggling. Speed limits don't 100% stop RTAs No medicine is a 100% effective, doesn't mean they don't work.

originally posted by: draoicht
Anders Bering Brevik shot 69 kids in Norway.

The equivalent in population terms of a US death toll of 4300.

And that year, even after that horrific mass shooting, the homicide rate was still only half that of the US.

This in a country that has widespread gun ownership but has strict licensing laws.

originally posted by: uninspired

originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: UKTruth


There s nothing impractical or nonsense about them. They are measures used across the world that have been shown to reduce gun crime.

The reason there is less availability in the UK and elsewhere is because of stricter gun laws. That is how you reduce the supply of illegal guns.

The only way to reduce that 300 million number is to enact and enforce stricter in control.

The impractical fantasy is believing you can significantly reduce gun violence by any other means than stricter gun laws.

E
Perhaps we here in the US are a little more innovative, prohibition...alcohol available at the speakeasy, hell even started what became muscle cars and racing. The war on drugs, drugs of any and all kinds available. So tell me how it would keep guns out of the hands of anyone that wants one. You folks across the pond may be in for a surprise when anyone will be able to just 3D print a gun.

The rest of the developed world seems to manage gun control.

Someone who is determined to get a gun can get a gun pretty much anywhere. However proper gun legislation makes it harder and increased the change they get on the police radar before they kill someone.

It also dramatically reduces unplanned homicides as guns are far less likely to be around in a fight or other crime.

a reply to: ScepticScot

I think the Norwegian murder rate is far lower than that of the US because of socio economic reasons.

The question of gun control has a very limited influence on this.

Switzerland is another country with a large number of guns and a low murder rate.

Neither the Swiss or the Norwegians have a large, disenfranchised and poorly educated social underclass.

This seems to me to have a far greater influence on a countries murder rate.

(

Yuppa my friend, the history of Palestine is completely off topic. I will confine myself to suggesting that you start a thread on the subject.

originally posted by: draoicht
a reply to: ScepticScot

I think the Norwegian murder rate is far lower than that of the US because of socio economic reasons.

The question of gun control has a very limited influence on this.

Switzerland is another country with a large number of guns and a low murder rate.

Neither the Swiss or the Norwegians have a large, disenfranchised and poorly educated social underclass.

This seems to me to have a far greater influence on a countries murder rate.

(

Yuppa my friend, the history of Palestine is completely off topic. I will confine myself to suggesting that you start a thread on the subject.

In certainly wouldn't disagree that social & economic conditions are a factor but I think the easy availability of guns is the dominant factor.

Norway and Switzerland have high number of guns but much more regulated than the US.

Look at the UK or France that certainly do have a significant social underclass and the homicide rate is much lower than the US.

a reply to: neo96

Here's why the Dems will lose the midterms and next election. They will be confiscating guns from their own voting base.

originally posted by: thepixelpusher
a reply to: neo96

Here's why the Dems will lose the midterms and next election. They will be confiscating guns from their own voting base.

Hardly an exhaustive list of mass shootings and many on that list are wrong.

a reply to: ScepticScot

Prove it.

originally posted by: thepixelpusher
a reply to: ScepticScot

Prove it.

Shall we start with Booth not being a Democrat?