• ‘Students have just had enough:’ Walkouts begin across the nation one month after Florida shooting
    198 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;53201187]So why even post? All it does is cement people further into their camps if posters go around leaving offhand remarks and being generally combative. I have simply presented the underlying issues of gun violence that should be addressed, while criticizing the main motive of the protest. [B]If anything, I fear this protest will be turned on its head by the NRA and the GOP, who will most definitely use it as a propaganda piece against students rights and public demonstration.[/B][/QUOTE] That would happen regardless of what they're protesting.
[QUOTE=NoOneKnowsMe;53201191]This is a pretty bad argument, because handguns, while still deadly, aren't as deadly as assault rifles. If the ban of assault rifles and other similar caliber weapons can reduce the casualties when a shooting happens, it should be done. I already posted [URL="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/04/health/parkland-shooting-victims-ar15.html"]this link here[/URL] in the last thread, but I guess it's relevant again.[/QUOTE] It's a completely irrelevant propaganda piece because the round is what determines the damage, and those rounds can be shot in a multitude of guns ranging from pistol form to bolt action rifle form. It has nothing to do with the rifle.
[QUOTE=UnidentifiedFlyingTard;53201198]So far I haven't seen a decent argument from you or any other pro gun peeps on FP.[/QUOTE] Okay, how? In what way have I not presented a good argument?
[QUOTE=UnidentifiedFlyingTard;53201198]So far I haven't seen a decent argument from you or any other pro gun peeps on FP.[/QUOTE] Then care to actually present a counterargument? If there are no “decent arguments” it shouldbe easy to come up with a good counter argument then.
My school was a mess with this whole protest. It basically turned into two movements, “walk out” and “walk up” where walk up was a spin-off saying “don’t walk out, walk up to someone alone and talk to them” (?????) When all the students gathered in the main lobby area they weren’t allowed to leave and basically instead of protesting were like “yeah sure we’ll go back to class” and nothing ever happened It was basically the total opposite of an effective protest. Also, there was a ton of fucking morons who brought confederate flags and played country music calling everyone “libtard faggots”. Classic highschool
[QUOTE=UnidentifiedFlyingTard;53201198]So far I haven't seen a decent argument from you or any other pro gun peeps on FP.[/QUOTE] I always notice the same people giving agree/star ratings to their posts too, whether or not the post actually made a decent argument or even made any sense. It's like they have a alert set up for any gun thread posted in SH/Politics and then just agree with each other ad nauseam. [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Dont comment on ratings" - Mezzokoko))[/highlight]
[QUOTE=ShimTaco;53201208] When all the students gathered in the main lobby area they weren’t allowed to leave and basically instead of protesting were like “yeah sure we’ll go back to class” and nothing ever happened[/QUOTE] Really? Was it school policy or were they threatened with punishments? Either way that's asinine
[QUOTE=Scot;53201179]Your mind is made up so I don't really see a point.[/QUOTE] His mind is made up based on fact. Crimes with "assault weapons" make up such an overwhelming minority that even if you [I]were[/I] to ban them, and even if they were to disappear overnight, you wouldn't see a meaningful dip in any kind of violent crime. It's entirely an appeal to emotion. Do you deny that "assault weapon" bans are nothing more than feel-good garbage that have no basis in reality? What good do they actually do?
[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;53201109]And that's what these students need to recognize as the things they should protest. I'm not trying to be "Well why don't they care about X!", but I kinda have to be. Pushing for assault weapons bans or increased age limits doesn't really affect much when a majority of firearm crime is handguns, committed by gangs. If these students were to attack the lawmakers on those grounds, basically surrounding them in a metaphorical pincer maneuver, they'd probably make some change. Instead, the Republicans and NRA will use this as ammo (no pun intended) to be further combative against the Democrats, further thrusting a divide politically.[/QUOTE] Why do you assume that any of these kids haven't protested for any of those things? Just because people aren't protesting the healthcare system in the form of a school walkout doesn't mean that they aren't angry about it. Not to mention these are just kids, they don't exactly all have the means to march on Washington whenever they want, especially if they live in Colorado.
[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;53201199]I am not disputing the fact that a rifle does tend to be more deadly than a handgun. What I'm saying is that rifle crime is a tiny factor of gun violence in the United States. According to the FBI [URL="https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2014/crime-in-the-u.s.-2014/tables/expanded-homicide-data/expanded_homicide_data_table_8_murder_victims_by_weapon_2010-2014.xls"]more people[/URL] were killed by "Personal Weapons (Hands, Fists, Etc.)" than rifles, while handguns made up the majority of gun crime.[/QUOTE] That's "great", maybe you can also improve the gun laws for other weapons. [QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;53201201]It's a completely irrelevant propaganda piece because the round is what determines the damage, and those rounds can be shot in a multitude of guns ranging from pistol form to bolt action rifle form. It has nothing to do with the rifle.[/QUOTE] It's not a propaganda piece just because you don't agree with it. It doesn't matter that there are other guns that are just as deadly, the end result is the same. They should all only be available to very specific people (e.g. hunters). Also relevant: [URL="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/03/02/world/international-gun-laws.html"]Gun laws in US compared to other countries[/URL].
[QUOTE=Scot;53201213]I always notice the same people giving agree/star ratings to their posts too, whether or not the post actually made a decent argument or even made any sense. It's like they have a alert set up for any gun thread posted in SH/Politics and then just agree with each other ad nauseam.[/QUOTE] what's the point of this post? are you able to have an actual discussion or are you more worried about trying to make stupid "gotcha" posts aimed at pro-gun posters????
[QUOTE=cdr248;53201221]Why do you assume that any of these kids haven't protested for any of those things?[/QUOTE] Not meaning to sound like I'm assuming, let me clarify, it's just that I would personally have preferred it be part of the forefront of their protest. [editline]14th March 2018[/editline] [QUOTE=NoOneKnowsMe;53201224]That's "great", maybe you can also improve the gun laws for other weapons.[/QUOTE] Okay, what laws do you have in mind?
[QUOTE=bdd458;53201206]Then care to actually present a counterargument? If there are no “decent arguments” it shouldbe easy to come up with a good counter argument then.[/QUOTE] I think some people recognise that it's a complex issue and it isn't easy to just present a solution. That's what we have politicians for. And why I think arguing about it on the internet is a bit silly. [QUOTE=bdd458;53201227]what's the point of this post? are you able to have an actual discussion or are you more worried about trying to make stupid "gotcha" posts aimed at pro-gun posters????[/QUOTE] I don't really feel qualified to make much of an argument tbh. I'm just a guy who would like to see the US in a better place and believes that guns are a problem.
[QUOTE=ShimTaco;53201208]where walk up was a spin-off saying “don’t walk out, walk up to someone alone and talk to them” (?????) [/QUOTE] Yeah that doesn't sound dangerous at all. [editline]14th March 2018[/editline] [QUOTE=Scot;53201231]I think some people recognise that it's a complex issue and it isn't easy to just present a solution. That's what we have politicians for. [/QUOTE] God help the planet if you politicians will help find better solutions. [QUOTE=Scot;53201231]And why I think arguing about it on the internet is a bit silly.[/quote] Then what are you even doing in the thread :v:
[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;53201228]Not meaning to sound like I'm assuming, let me clarify, it's just that I would personally have preferred it be part of the forefront of their protest. [editline]14th March 2018[/editline] Okay, what laws do you have in mind?[/QUOTE] It would be a great if you just started to follow what other countries are doing, see this article I added to my other post: [URL]https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/03/02/world/international-gun-laws.html[/URL]
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;53201232] God help the planet if you politicians will help find better solutions.[/QUOTE] In a lot of countries they do. I know the US is a bit of a mess in that regard. [QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;53201232]Then what are you even doing in the thread :v:[/QUOTE] Just having some friendly chat with my fellow forum members.
[QUOTE=Scot;53201231] I don't really feel qualified to make much of an argument tbh. I'm just a guy who would like to see the US in a better place and believes that guns are a problem.[/QUOTE] Then why not discuss why you think guns are a problem? Why not try and get that word out there, and have it talked about? I also would like to see the US in a better place, and I feel that the problem is far, [I]far[/I] more complex than just firearms. [editline]14th March 2018[/editline] [QUOTE=NoOneKnowsMe;53201244]It would be a great start if you just started to follow what other countries are doing[/QUOTE] Many of those other countries did not have the gun culture, nor the sheer saturation of firearms to begin with. Some of those laws are also breaches of constitutional protections against search and seizure, as having police enter a home without a warrant (outside of an emergency) is unconstitutional.
[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;53201246]Then why not discuss why you think guns are a problem? Why not try and get that word out there, and have it talked about? I also would like to see the US in a better place, and I feel that the problem is far, [I]far[/I] more complex than just firearms.[/QUOTE] I have argued it before, with most of the people in this thread, but here we are again in the exact same situation. It's clear to me now that nothing will change some people's minds. Even children being gunned down in schools.
[QUOTE=UnidentifiedFlyingTard;53201198]So far I haven't seen a decent argument from you or any other pro gun peeps on FP.[/QUOTE] Are you kidding me?
[QUOTE=Scot;53201252]I have argued it before, with most of the people in this thread[/QUOTE] I haven't seen your posts on the topic outside of remarks like you made earlier in the thread. [QUOTE=Scot;53201252]It's clear to me now that nothing will change some people's minds. Even children being gunned down in schools.[/quote] What? This is such a blatant appeal to emotion and doesn't really help anything. No, I don't think children getting shot is good, I don't think that's a hard leap for someone to make.
[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;53201257]No, I don't think children getting shot is good, I don't think that's a hard leap for someone to make.[/QUOTE] I know you don't. But for some reason you avoid the most obvious course of action. And I don't know why.
[QUOTE=Scot;53201263]I know you don't. But for some reason you avoid the most obvious course of action. And I don't know why.[/QUOTE] The "most obvious course of action" did not stop Columbine or Virginia Tech, nor did/does it stop the myriad of killings in cities like Chicago or Los Angeles. Sweeping firearms bans would not be effective in the United States unless massive changes to the constitution were made to allow for the government to seize private property, which would make millions of law abiding citizens criminals under the law. Every nation is different, and applying the laws of other countries that are [I]radically[/I] different from the United States is futile. I have presented, numerous times, that there [I]is[/I] legislation that can be made to both reduce gun violence while simultaneously not making it an issue of rights, as have other posters in threads like these.
[QUOTE=Scot;53201263]I know you don't. But for some reason you avoid the most obvious course of action. And I don't know why.[/QUOTE] If you think the most obvious course of action is an assault weapon ban then just stop, because that's not the most obvious, it's the most misguided and ineffective course of action as we have explained and proved time and time again in countless threads dealing with people like you who simply don't care for actual discussion and ignore relevant statistics
[QUOTE=Scot;53201263]I know you don't. But for some reason you avoid the most obvious course of action. And I don't know why.[/QUOTE] I know I'm being baited and you actually have no interest in this so I don't know why I'm walking into it again but this is why: 1) It's been done before multiple times, here and in other places. It has, demonstrably, had no impact on violent crime rates. Not here, not in other countries, nowhere. 2) Countries like Serbia and the Czech Republic and Switzerland show you can have lots of guns AND minimal gun violence. Because again, the defining factor for crime rates isn't banning guns, it's having a stable society. Which we do not have. 3) Even if it was a magic solution you're talking about confiscating an absurd amount of property from legitimate owners, either at enormous cost to the government or to the people. These things are expensive. Not to mention many are irreplaceable historic items. There are options. There's so much we could do that would basically completely end the primary sources of violence in the US. But apparently those "aren't good arguments," so what do you want us to do? Lay down and let you roll over us with your crooked idea of "progress"? Maybe if you'd listen to anything we were saying we could find a solution together.
The above issues of private prisons, healthcare, helping the homeless and poor, etc, all need to be taken care of first. It's likely a significant portion of violence in general will go down with such changes. If gun violence is still a problem somehow, then we can consider gun laws. Until then, we should focus on things that matter far more to millions of people.
[QUOTE=Grenadiac;53201274]I know I'm being baited and you actually have no interest in this so I don't know why I'm walking into it again but this is why: 1) It's been done before multiple times, here and in other places. It has, demonstrably, had no impact on violent crime rates. Not here, not in other countries, nowhere. 2) Countries like Serbia and the Czech Republic and Switzerland show you can have lots of guns AND minimal gun violence. Because again, the defining factor for crime rates isn't banning guns, it's having a stable society. Which we do not have.[/QUOTE] And it seems like a stable society isn't really on the table for the US. At least not any time soon. So if that element of the equation can't be removed, I wonder what element could...
These "protests" won't do anything but give more emotional force to the idiotic Assault Weapon Ban type policies. It's another example, in a long list, of aimless disagreement with a result, but with no meaningful answer to it. It's yelling into the wind and hoping something changes.
[QUOTE=Scot;53201280]And it seems like a stable society isn't really on the table for the US. At least not any time soon. So if that element of the equation can't be removed, I wonder what element could...[/QUOTE] You're right. If we banned children, it'd be impossible for children to die in shootings.
[QUOTE=Scot;53201280]And it seems like a stable society isn't really on the table for the US. At least not any time soon. So if that element of the equation can't be removed, I wonder what element could...[/QUOTE] The unstable society will continue to be unstable even if the laws to purchase firearms are incredibly restrictive. Mexico has strict legislation nearly barring the purchases of firearms for most people, and in 2016, the murder rate (stated as "intentional homicide") was 23,000. That is second only to Syria, which is locked in a civil war [url=http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/mexico-murder-tally-numbers-2016-second-syria-beats-homicides-iraq-afghanistan-armed-conflict-survey-a7727631.html]Source[/url]. Firearms do not inherently make a society unstable. An unstable society cannot be fixed by legislation that does nothing to address actual problems.
[QUOTE=Scot;53201280]And it seems like a stable society isn't really on the table for the US. At least not any time soon. So if that element of the equation can't be removed, I wonder what element could...[/QUOTE] This defeatist attitude does not contribute to any solution at all. [QUOTE=Blackavar;53201278]The above issues of private prisons, healthcare, helping the homeless and poor, etc, all need to be taken care of first. It's likely a significant portion of violence in general will go down with such changes. If gun violence is still a problem somehow, then we can consider gun laws. Until then, we should focus on things that matter far more to millions of people.[/QUOTE] I agree with this post heavily, though I do personally advocate for more gun control along the lines of training and registration - but that is something more active gun owners / hobbyist should take a look at, as I don't know as much as I should about it.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.