Shooting in Florida School

[sean miguel]

psychological evaluation: you must be crazy to want to own a gun.

 

[Jack Davenport]

I don't know, do the maths for yourself.
My point is Europe has twice more people, stricter gun laws and 8 time less mass shootings.
Less guns, less crimes. Deal with it

Wait! You’re getting pissy because you are losing the argument. The amount of people doesn’t matter. Throw that out.

You have stricter gun laws, ( not compared to our largest cities) but overall yes. The only thing that matters in this argument are the amount of guns privately owned.
The U.S. has 300 million legally owned guns. Only 15 percent of legally obtained guns are involved in the commission of crimes.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...have-been-saying-for-a-long-time-about-crime/

That’s 85 percent of legal gun owners that never break the law.
Guess how many illegally obtained weapons are used in the commission of crimes?

More than 60 percent and that is being conservative.
http://www.nationalreview.com/corne...ty-gun-crime-isnt-committed-lawful-gun-owners

Your contention that stricter gun laws equals less crime is preposterous.
Our bluest cities have some of the strictest laws and the laws have zero effect on criminals obtaining weapons.
Another factor is the gun crime within the black and Hispanic communities and especially amongst gangs.

Which is a part of American culture not experienced widely in Europe.

Try again johan.

 

[sean miguel]

 

[meesterperfect]

Strange.
I looked up that girl alexa miednik on goggle and it showed her tweeter page.
https://twitter.com/babymiednik/media
She was the one on the MSN news smiling her ass off while talking about the mass murder she just witnessed.
She claims there were multiple shooters because she saw and spoke directly to the GUNMAN who she claims she knows during the shooting.



Anyway on her tweeter page was a link to meadow pollack, the girl you just posted about.
https://twitter.com/meadow_pollack/media

I wonder why those 2 would be connected.

So I looked up meadow pollack and found 3 bookface accounts all titled "Remembering meadow pollack".

The news just came out today that she was deceased. I guess someone updated her status in all 3 pages as being dead right away.
https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100009678407474

this one says she is a student at Broward College.
https://www.facebook.com/princesmeadowxo

and this one says she "was" from Pennsylvania. One of her friends on that profile is Alexa Miednek also from the same town in PA.
https://www.facebook.com/meadow.pol...102364175:1518758437&source_ref=pb_friends_tl

https://www.facebook.com/alexa.miednik.7/photos?pnref=lhc

Several photos of them together, they look to be BFF's.

Funny what you find in a simple goggle search.

 

[georges]

Trey Growdy shows Dems that they are out of the reality with gun control
https://conservativetribune.com/tre...ign=breaking&utm_content=conservative-tribune

 

[Johan]

There's no law that could prevent mass shootings. But every gun legislation passed will help lowering the chance for mass shootings to happen and/or help lowering the death toll

Nos it's a facture : volunteers with stricter gun laws have lower crime raté and lower fin death. Same goes for us states with stricter gun laws : they have less gun death (I posted a proof of that here a few hours ago).

 

[Johan]

Wait! You’re getting pissy because you are losing the argument. The amount of people doesn’t matter. Throw that out.

You have stricter gun laws, ( not compared to our largest cities) but overall yes. The only thing that matters in this argument are the amount of guns privately owned.
The U.S. has 300 million legally owned guns. Only 15 percent of legally obtained guns are involved in the commission of crimes.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...have-been-saying-for-a-long-time-about-crime/

That’s 85 percent of legal gun owners that never break the law.
Guess how many illegally obtained weapons are used in the commission of crimes?

More than 60 percent and that is being conservative.
http://www.nationalreview.com/corne...ty-gun-crime-isnt-committed-lawful-gun-owners

Your contention that stricter gun laws equals less crime is preposterous.
Our bluest cities have some of the strictest laws and the laws have zero effect on criminals obtaining weapons.
Another factor is the gun crime within the black and Hispanic communities and especially amongst gangs.

Which is a part of American culture not experienced widely in Europe.

Try again johan.

Less legal guns = less guns to steal = less illegal guns = less crimes.
Less guns = less crimes

 

[Johan]

so can serve in the military but not own a firearm?

even so, how would any of those have prevented this shooting?

he already broke the law by committing 17 counts of premeditated murder.

what other laws would have stopped him?

what laws stop gang members from shooting each other?

I think having served on thé military could get you a gun licence.

Ok, he already broke the the law so no laws would have stoped him so no gun laws should be passed ?
Criminals don't care about guns laws so congress shouldn't pass any gun laws ? I would argue that laws don't stop rapists and murderers so why do we have laws against rape and murder ? These laws aren't effective, repeal them

 

[Jack Davenport]

There's no law that could prevent mass shootings. But every gun legislation passed will help lowering the chance for mass shootings to happen and/or help lowering the death toll

Nos it's a facture : volunteers with stricter gun laws have lower crime raté and lower fin death. Same goes for us states with stricter gun laws : they have less gun death (I posted a proof of that here a few hours ago).

Guess what most of the top 30 U.S. cities have in common?
The strictest gun laws
Increased gun violence


http://www.businessinsider.com/homicide-rates-in-major-us-cities-to-break-records-in-2017-2017-7

The Brennan Center, the left-leaning think tank, the 2016 murder rate for the 30 largest American cities increased by 14 percent from 2015.

All run by Democrats.

 

[Johan]

1) these gun laws were passed too late
2) a single city with strict gun laws on a state or a country with much less gun laws is stupid, just like "gun free zones". Only country-wide legislation, federal legislation can be really effective

 

[Johan]

But the worst part of all this is that, as a country, you're not even trying to solve the problem, you're not even trying to save these kids, you're not even trying to prevent this from happening again.
You're just saying "nothing would guarantee it won't happen again si let's do nothing". And for that, as a country, as a nation, you deserved that shooting. And you deserve every other shooting that will happen 'til you do something

 

[georges]

There's no law that could prevent mass shootings. But every gun legislation passed will help lowering the chance for mass shootings to happen and/or help lowering the death toll

Nos it's a facture : volunteers with stricter gun laws have lower crime raté and lower fin death. Same goes for us states with stricter gun laws : they have less gun death (I posted a proof of that here a few hours ago).

No, it won't. The guns involved in crimes were obtained illegally by some scumbag illegals. It is only the liberal bleedhearts who want so badly to sabotage and undermine the right bear and keep arms. When one has a twisted mind and is ready to kill, psychological tests won't detect it because there are people who can outsmart polygraphs or lie detectors. Just look at Chicago which is the worst of the worst, strictest and dumbest gunlaws and yet highest crime rate. How many died the 13th November 2015 and during Charlie Hebdo's attacks in France due to the fact that there were no civilian or no armed guard packing a gun ?Do the maths and you will see that anyone who is antigun doesn't believe in self defense rights. You shoot a robber or a burglar in France, you go in jail instead of him. Isn't that fucked up? In France, you always have the right to be a victim and self defense is very complicated. As says our article 122-5 from our penal code:
"Article 122-5
Is not criminally responsible for a person who, in the face of an unjustified attack on himself or another, performs at the same time an act ordered by the necessity of the self-defense of himself or of others, except there is a disproportion between the defenses employed and the seriousness of the attack.

Is not criminally responsible for the person who, to interrupt the execution of a crime or an offense against a property, performs an act of defense, other than a voluntary homicide, when this act is strictly necessary for the purpose pursued the means employed are proportionate to the gravity of the infringement."

 

[Jack Davenport]

But the worst part of all this is that, as a country, you're not even trying to solve the problem, you're not even trying to save these kids, you're not even trying to prevent this from happening again.
You're just saying "nothing would guarantee it won't happen again si let's do nothing". And for that, as a country, as a nation, you deserved that shooting. And you deserve every other shooting that will happen 'til you do something

Yes, we do want to stop it and with Trump in office we are going to implement measures to secure our schools. Liberals do not want armed security at our schools but that is what is going to happen. We have various school resource officers at some schools across the country but nothing on a comprehensive nationwide effort.

To libs, mass murder of school children is acceptable collateral damage in the ultimate goal of overturning second amendment rights.
The liberal goal of a majority Supreme Court is geared toward nullifying the second amendment.

It is the main reason they want control of the court.

There is one thing that I can guarantee, even if the left were successful in taking away the right to bear arms, the second they were ordered surrendered or they were ordered to be confiscated, the deadliest civil war would break out in this country that would make the first civil war look like a skirmish.

Our guns are not going anywhere.

 

[Johan]

Armes security ? And how do you make sure these armes guards won't end up dead ?

 

[pool_hustler]

To libs, mass murder of school children is acceptable collateral damage in the ultimate goal of overturning second amendment rights.

:1orglaugh

Actually I shouldn't be laughing. Beyond being laughable, this is also a truly repugnant claim to make.
Not to mention being paranoid, but then that's a given.

The liberal goal of a majority Supreme Court is geared toward nullifying the second amendment.
It is the main reason they want control of the court.

:1orglaugh
Yep. We try to keep that on the down low, but you righties are so brilliantly insightful you're able to read right through us :1orglaugh

There is one thing that I can guarantee, even if the left were successful in taking away the right to bear arms, the second they were ordered surrendered or they were ordered to be confiscated, the deadliest civil war would break out in this country that would make the first civil war look like a skirmish.

That's the only thing in your post that makes any sense, and one of the reasons it does is because millions of moderate liberals and liberal gun owners would stand alongside you in that fight, including myself. But it isn't ever going to come to that, because they'd stand alongside you politically on that point first.

 

[pool_hustler]

Yikes look at California. 60% non white, "they're not sending us their best", 3 million or so illegals, yet gun deaths are quite low.
Must be because of all the leaf blower homicides that have taken their place.

 

[Supafly]

Here is an example of a mass shooting in Germany as late as 2016. Germany has very strict gun laws, upon whose hands does the blood of these victims cover?

Mass shootings NEVER happen in Europe.

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/4wb9p3/mass-shootings-in-europe-in-2016

You try your best to see the exact point:

HERE, such shootings are a one-off thing, at home, in the USA, you have one pretty much every other day.

Plus:

We are NOT talking "Gun Laws". We are talking "Mass Killing Weapon Laws". If there were just normal revolvers, pistols, winchester-style rifles, there would not be this spree of mass killings. It is the careless legalization of weapons clearly and only designed for mass killings, that are the problem.

Are you too thick to understand this simple difference?

I am absolutely fine with allowing the "classic" firearms, that are for hunting, normal self-defense, etc. What are AR-15s etc for? Mass Murder.

 

[Supafly]

 

[sean miguel]

How Israel avoids school shootings:

 

[Jack Davenport]

Yikes look at California. 60% non white, "they're not sending us their best", 3 million or so illegals, yet gun deaths are quite low.
Must be because of all the leaf blower homicides that have taken their place.

Are these “ gun deaths” being factored the same way as the “ 18 school shootings so far this year” lie.

If we’ve learned anything with you liberals is that your statistics always are skewed with dishonest and misleading information, the Obama lowering of the deficit each year comes to mind.

John Lott is not only pro 2nd amendment but he backs up his information with a cross section of data and is relentless with his obsession for accuracy. If your graph can withstand the metrics used here:

https://www.americas1stfreedom.org/articles/2017/3/30/john-lott-qa-debunking-vox-com-gun-lies/

Get back to us.

I can’t really quote your post from a previous page but suffice it to say, liberals laughing uproariously when presented with an assertion that their motives are not what they appear to be is a good indication judging by past experiences that we probably hit the nail on the head.

You live in a hell of a place out there in California where milk still is delivered to doorsteps and “ America Love It Or Leave bumper stickers are commonplace. I have relatives in Orange County which was somewhat conservative, they tell me it is not that way anymore. Would love to see some video of all the people in your neck of the woods thanking the liberal Vietnam veterans for their service.

You try your best to see the exact point:

HERE, such shootings are a one-off thing, at home, in the USA, you have one pretty much every other day.

Plus:

We are NOT talking "Gun Laws". We are talking "Mass Killing Weapon Laws". If there were just normal revolvers, pistols, winchester-style rifles, there would not be this spree of mass killings. It is the careless legalization of weapons clearly and only designed for mass killings, that are the problem.

Are you too thick to understand this simple difference?

I am absolutely fine with allowing the "classic" firearms, that are for hunting, normal self-defense, etc. What are AR-15s etc for? Mass Murder.

:1orglaugh

Actually I shouldn't be laughing. Beyond being laughable, this is also a truly repugnant claim to make.
Not to mention being paranoid, but then that's a given.

The liberal goal of a majority Supreme Court is geared toward nullifying the second amendment.
It is the main reason they want control of the court.

:1orglaugh
Yep. We try to keep that on the down low, but you righties are so brilliantly insightful you're able to read right through us :1orglaugh

There is one thing that I can guarantee, even if the left were successful in taking away the right to bear arms, the second they were ordered surrendered or they were ordered to be confiscated, the deadliest civil war would break out in this country that would make the first civil war look like a skirmish.

That's the only thing in your post that makes any sense, and one of the reasons it does is because millions of moderate liberals and liberal gun owners would stand alongside you in that fight, including myself. But it isn't ever going to come to that, because they'd stand alongside you politically on that point first.

Edit: Somehow I quoted the previous page anyway and this response should be to Ze Fly:



About the only thing worthy of response here is that AR-15’s are used for hunting too and not just humans. The overwhelming majority of gun owners like to go to places they can legally discharge a firearm and shoot at targets. It’s great fun. People as a general rule do not die during this exercise of our 2nd amendment rights.

Anyway, the multi quote feature makes me all verklempt at times. You guys can figure out who I was responding to.