At 10/13/11 11:39 PM, akmeteor wrote: You posted raw data unrelated to half of what I'm talking about. Pretty sure you're the deluded one here

Topic: 8 dead in SoCal shooting.

Post:

At 10/13/11 09:56 AM, akmeteor wrote: Hi, I live in the U.S.A. We have a large amount of illegal immigration from about 3-4 different countries. So their offspring and sometimes them are often the attackers in these crimes. Well outside of the projects.

"these crimes"

"These crimes" are shootings. I posted data about shootings in the US versus in the UK. Clearly you have trouble reading, so I'll post the image again for you.

At 10/13/11 11:37 PM, EddyFromEEnE wrote:

At 10/13/11 07:14 PM, chipotleaway wrote: Travis, I respect you as a user, but you are being an ass. He doesnt do it on purpose. He's more attracted to stuff that happens in his local area and race.
Its cool, brah.

This happened absolutely nowhere near me. About 7-8 hours.

Hey, hey, hey, was I talking to you though?

At 10/13/11 11:44 PM, chipotleaway wrote:

This happened absolutely nowhere near me. About 7-8 hours.

Hey, hey, hey, was I talking to you though?

I'm correcting you, Chip.

Stop messing with EEnE, especially you travis.

At 10/13/11 11:44 PM, LardLord wrote:

"These crimes" are shootings. I posted data about shootings in the US versus in the UK. Clearly you have trouble reading, so I'll post the image again for you.

No these crimes meaning violent crimes fuck face.

In the real world, you can't single a crime down to a specific type. You have to be broad with violent, petty, and mass theft. These are seen as the three major types of crimes.

At 10/14/11 12:15 AM, akmeteor wrote: No these crimes meaning violent crimes fuck face.

Come on, bro, you can do better than "fuck face" lol.

In the real world, you can't single a crime down to a specific type. You have to be broad with violent, petty, and mass theft. These are seen as the three major types of crimes.

This is a topic about gun crime, I posted statistics about gun crime, (which is what this topic is about, you'll hopefully not fail to notice once again since it's both in the topic title and composes the entire discussion of this thread). We're discussing the feasibility of gun control, not crime control. If you read everything from Wade's post onward, it will become clear that is the entire point of the discussion.

I have not and you have not made any arguments about crime and I frankly don't care at all about crime in general because that cannot be controlled, whereas guns can, and have been in the UK, which has exponentially lower rates of gun crime than the US, despite the fact that you claimed the UK had 300% more gun crime than the US, which was an outright made up statistic.

At 10/13/11 05:53 PM, akmeteor wrote:

Yet they have over 300% more violent crimes....

Something about your theory is wrong, and I just can't put my finger on it....

Oh boy! It sure says gun crimes in this post!

At 10/14/11 12:24 AM, LardLord wrote: I have not and you have not made any arguments about crime and I frankly don't care at all about crime in general because that cannot be controlled, whereas guns can, and have been in the UK, which has exponentially lower rates of gun crime than the US, despite the fact that you claimed the UK had 300% more gun crime than the US, which was an outright made up statistic.

While it is true the US has more gun crime, the UK has A LOT more violent crime than we do.

At 10/14/11 12:26 AM, akmeteor wrote: Oh boy! It sure says gun crimes in this post!

The whole thread is about gun control.

How many times do I have to say it lol.

Read the topic title.

8 dead in SoCal shooting.

Not 8 dead in SoCal Stabbing, beating, etc.

If you're not talking about guns, what are you even doing posting in this thread?

At 10/13/11 09:39 AM, akmeteor wrote: While it supposedly is a guy mad about a custody battle. What you're saying makes sense. Hell California is only one of like what, 10 states? That doesn't allow even open carry, let alone concealed carry.

An armed society is a protected society.

Also, I just noticed you were talking about gun control on the first page. Thus validating everything I've said.

At 10/14/11 12:33 AM, LardLord wrote:

At 10/14/11 12:26 AM, akmeteor wrote: Oh boy! It sure says gun crimes in this post!

The whole thread is about gun control.

How many times do I have to say it lol.

Read the topic title.

8 dead in SoCal shooting.

Not 8 dead in SoCal Stabbing, beating, etc.

If you're not talking about guns, what are you even doing posting in this thread?

Regardless if guns were involved or not, it was a violent crime. Why are you questioning why I am posting in this thread when it is not your prerogative to do so?

At 10/13/11 09:42 AM, CaveStoryGrounds wrote:

At 10/13/11 09:39 AM, akmeteor wrote: An armed society is a protected society.

An armed society is a paranoid and dangerous society.

An armed society, is a society that makes enemies weary of invading it.

At 10/14/11 12:36 AM, LardLord wrote:

At 10/13/11 09:39 AM, akmeteor wrote: While it supposedly is a guy mad about a custody battle. What you're saying makes sense. Hell California is only one of like what, 10 states? That doesn't allow even open carry, let alone concealed carry.

An armed society is a protected society.

Also, I just noticed you were talking about gun control on the first page. Thus validating everything I've said.

Hurr durr since your using logic I find regularly on 4chan I should use 4chan logic to bring mine in, I however won't.

Guns prevent violent crimes. Had open carry not been removed. This whole thing could've ended with much less civilian casualty.

lrn2causeandeffect.

At 10/14/11 12:27 AM, MercatorMapV2 wrote: While it is true the US has more gun crime, the UK has A LOT more violent crime than we do.

Per capita the UK has more violent crimes, but in total the US has 2x the amount (5+ million).

At 10/14/11 12:39 AM, ModernPatriot wrote: An armed society, is a society that makes enemies weary of invading it.

What if the criminal portion of that society has more and/or better weaponry?

At 10/14/11 12:38 AM, MercatorMapV2 wrote: Regardless if guns were involved or not, it was a violent crime. Why are you questioning why I am posting in this thread when it is not your prerogative to do so?

It was specifically a gun crime, thus why guns were used in it. You're on the wrong track because you're not classifying the crime in the context of this thread, which is about shooting specifically, not about violence in general. You were discussing gun control in your first post, not violence control (which isn't even a tangible thing), so you were on the right track initially, but you've since moved the goalposts because the data on guns didn't suit your hypothesis.

At 10/13/11 10:47 PM, Bryan wrote: Why do you have to say "SoCal"?

Because that's the colloquial way of saying it?

At 10/14/11 12:43 AM, CaveStoryGrounds wrote:

At 10/14/11 12:39 AM, ModernPatriot wrote: An armed society, is a society that makes enemies weary of invading it.

What if the criminal portion of that society has more and/or better weaponry?

With effective policing, this is not possible, because it would be prohibitively expensive for the criminal portion to have more and better weaponry.

At 10/13/11 10:50 PM, CaveStoryGrounds wrote:

At 10/13/11 06:12 PM, cheshirepus wrote: They're pretty easy to spot, to be honest, as they'll be considerably more likely to be polite for no reason and generally go out of their way to avoid any kind of conflict.

You just described the majority of Canadians. We actually are commonly nice, or less rude then people of other countries. We tend to hold open the door for others and we talk things out. If we have a problem with something you just did, when we walk away we'll mumble about it and quickly forget dependent on its importance or the effectiveness of the issue.

Ultimately, like I said. An armed society is a paranoid society. More guns does not equal increased protection, it just means more guns and a larger opportunity that more people will get harmed or killed including bystanders. If people were just more educated, hand less time on their hands to contemplate doing stupid shit, and were just more positive and content...then you would have a more secure society.

Actually, increased protection is exactly what more guns equals. While you might put faith in your government to create a more secure society, the fact remains that Americans have good reason to be paranoid considering our history is built on a foundation of war between those who wish to be free and those who wish to rule. Maybe you don't (or can't) understand this, but to many Americans, having a gun in hand means they are free and have the means to secure their own freedom if the need should ever arise.

An armed society is a society left alone, as you cannot force your will on such a society, but must instead resort to peaceful negotiation less you desire war.

At 10/14/11 12:48 AM, cheshirepus wrote: Maybe you don't (or can't) understand this, but to many Americans, having a gun in hand means they are free and have the means to secure their own freedom if the need should ever arise.

Murka. Murka the beautiful. Murka the brave.

Picture from the memorial outside the salon.

Thread derailed into gun debate.

At 10/14/11 12:46 AM, MercatorMapV2 wrote: With effective policing

Because America is well known for that, right? You bring a knife, I bring a gun, you bring a rifle, I bring an RPG, and it continues from there. We have biochemical thermonuclear weaponry, soon enough it will be dark matter pulse lasers from satellites. The pattern has existed since the first neanderthal threw a small rock at the guy with a big rock. Having a weapon is not a deterrent, if one can get their hands on something better or can harm you when you least suspect it which is rather easy to accomplish in today's world, let alone America.

At 10/14/11 12:58 AM, Kevin wrote:

Thread derailed into gun debate.

Never let a good crisis go to waste...

At 10/14/11 01:01 AM, CaveStoryGrounds wrote:

At 10/14/11 12:46 AM, MercatorMapV2 wrote: With effective policing

Because America is well known for that, right? You bring a knife, I bring a gun, you bring a rifle, I bring an RPG, and it continues from there. We have biochemical thermonuclear weaponry, soon enough it will be dark matter pulse lasers from satellites. The pattern has existed since the first neanderthal threw a small rock at the guy with a big rock. Having a weapon is not a deterrent, if one can get their hands on something better or can harm you when you least suspect it which is rather easy to accomplish in today's world, let alone America.

Actually, indeed it is known for effective policing. If you can prove otherwise in comparison to other countries, then please do so.

That are horrible news. My condolences go out to the families and friends of the persons who died in such a miserable and unneeded way. It makes me sad when such incidents happen and it seems like they happen very often nowadays.

At 10/14/11 06:24 AM, Asandir wrote: That are horrible news. My condolences go out to the families and friends of the persons who died in such a miserable and unneeded way. It makes me sad when such incidents happen and it seems like they happen very often nowadays.

I know