Jason Whitlock and Bob Costas jumped aboard the crazy train- Re: Belcher and Guns

[88m3]

Except, in Switzerland, attempted killings and killings do occur, and the blade is used more than the gun. Why?

Because knives are still more readily accessible than a firearm stop acting like a fakkit.

 

[Dusty Bake Activate]

How am I drawing strawman. If Whitlock's premise is correct, that guns are the motivating factor of these types of deaths, then Switzerland should reflect that. If not, then guns are not the primary problem.

Whitlock's argument, nor my argument in this thread is that guns are THE cause of murders. The argument is that guns make it easier and increases the probability of these sort of in-the-heat-of-the-moment crime of passion type murders to occur, and many of them would not occur if guns were not present. A prime example would the piece of shyt visiting Jacksonville for his son's wedding.

As far as the impetus of such violent acts, obviously it's not as simple as "I have a gun so therefore I think I'm going to shoot someone." No one is that simplistic unless they're a complete moron. There are a number of factors as to why the murder rates are so different in Switzerland and the U. S. (history, culture, socioeconomic conditions).

It seems you're reciting talking points for a gun control debate, and they don't even really apply.

 

[Type Username Here]

Because knives are still more readily accessible than a firearm stop acting like a fakkit.

Posting evidence, data and logical argument is "acting like a fakkit"?

 

[88m3]

Posting evidence, data and logical argument is "acting like a fakkit"?

You should be intelligent enough to see what's wrong with your argument.

 

[Type Username Here]

As far as the impetus of such violent acts, obviously it's not as simple as "I have a gun so therefore I think I'm going to shoot someone." No one is that simplistic unless they're a complete moron. There are a number of factors as to why the murder rates are so different in Switzerland and the U. S. (history, culture, socioeconomic conditions).

Number of factors but not the abundance or possession of the actual weapons, which is my point Vic.

You asked me a question and I answered it, now it is your turn:

As a gun owner, do you grab your gun and try to kill someone every time you are enraged? If not, then what separates you from someone who does? Be Honest.

 

[Dusty Bake Activate]

Number of factors but not the abundance or possession of the actual weapons, which is my point Vic.

You asked me a question and I answered it, now it is your turn:

As a gun owner, do you grab your gun and try to kill someone every time you are enraged? If not, then what separates you from someone who does? Be Honest.

Do you still not get it? I don't know how to explain myself any more clear than I did in the post you just quoted.

If you read and processed everything I said in this thread, I don't know why you would ask the bolded question, but it doesn't even apply.

The fact that you have already admitted that the a$$hole in Jacksonville wouldn't have killed the kid if he didn't have a gun pretty much ends the debate.

 

[iceberg_is_on_fire]

We need psychological tests for gun owners.

 

[Type Username Here]

Do you still not get it? I don't know how to explain myself any more clear than I did in the post you just quoted.

If you read and processed everything I said in this thread, I don't know why you would ask the bolded question, but it doesn't even apply.

The fact that you have already admitted that the a$$hole in Jacksonville wouldn't have killed the kid if he didn't have a gun pretty much ends the debate.

The a$$hole in Jacksonville and this situation are completely different. If he decided to run over the kid or kids, what it have made the situation somehow better?

Simple question:
As a gun owner, when you get enraged, do you grab your gun and go shooting at people? If not, then what separates you from someone who does? The question is relevant.

 

[you're NOT "n!ggas"]

i saw that shyt live... knew it was gon be everywhere the moment it came out his mouth. i'll agree that if it wasn't a gun, he woulda used somethin else (see oj ) but still, i don't necessarily take that as an excuse to dismiss the debate about gun culture in this country. i repeat, in THIS country. if belcher's story speaks on his mental health, then it should ALSO speak on the accessibility (legally at least) of handguns for people WITH mental health issues. its not just a "gun", its the capacity to take another person's life away... there shouldn't be anything wrong with ensuring you're not a threat to the public at large

 

[Dusty Bake Activate]

The a$$hole in Jacksonville and this situation are completely different. If he decided to run over the kid or kids, what it have made the situation somehow better?

The kid was in an SUV, it would've been impossible to run him over. You know he wouldn't have killed him if he didn't have a gun. You basically agree with me. I don't know why or what you're still arguing.

Simple question:
As a gun owner, when you get enraged, do you grab your gun and go shooting at people? If not, then what separates you from someone who does? The question is relevant.

Because I'm not crazy or unstable. But this has 0 relevance to anything I'm saying. It seems you're trying to argue against some abstract gun control policy, when all I'm saying and all Whitlock said was the presence of guns in many situations lead to deaths that would not occur if they were not present.

 

[Real N Quotes]

guns are not the problem...guns in the hands of mentally or emotionally disturbed people is the problem

 

[Type Username Here]

Because I'm not crazy or unstable.

Okay, thank you

all Whitlock said was the presence of guns in many situations lead to deaths that would not occur if they were not present

This is the line I took part with, and I have stated that since the first thread:

What I believe is, if he didn’t possess/own a gun, he and Kasandra Perkins would both be alive today.

There is not the same thing you said friend.

 

[Dusty Bake Activate]

Okay, thank you




This is the line I took part with, and I have stated that since the first thread:



There is not the same thing you said friend.

As far as I go, I've consistently said the exact same central premise in every post in this thread. I think you just like arguing for the sake of arguing sometimes.

As far as Whitlock's quote, we all agree that there are some murders that wouldn't occur if guns were not present. Whitlock just said he thinks--not knows--but thinks this was one of those cases. Nobody knows if he's right or wrong, but it's not crazy talk. I think you just have your guns out about this issue (pun intended).

 

[Type Username Here]

As far as I go, I've consistently said the exact same central premise in every post in this thread. I think you just like arguing for the sake of arguing sometimes.

As far as Whitlock's quote, we all agree that there are some murders that wouldn't occur if guns were not present. Whitlock just said he thinks--not knows--but thinks this was one of those cases. Nobody knows if he's right or wrong, but it's not crazy talk. I think you just have your guns out about this issue (pun intended).

Okay, then we'll move on and let the thread die.

Did you hear about these two Pakistani dudes they caught down here by my house? Did that news make it up there? Dudes trying to get a hold and detonate a WMD here in Florida?

 

[Dusty Bake Activate]

Okay, then we'll move on and let the thread die.

Did you hear about these two Pakistani dudes they caught down here by my house? Did that news make it up there? Dudes trying to get a hold and detonate a WMD here in Florida?

Yeah, I heard it in brief...not details. I'll check it out.