Why do Republicans want this to keep happening?

Why do Republicans want this to keep happening?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puckle_gun
washingtonpost.com/graphics/2018/national/mass-shootings-in-america/?utm_term=.0356441c4082
qz.com/1086403/fbi-crime-statistics-us-murders-were-up-in-2016-and-chicago-had-a-lot-to-do-with-it/
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in_U.S._by_year
ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2016/crime-in-the-u.s.-2016/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-4.xls
m.youtube.com/watch?v=wApeDr6-Bdo
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

$

its fun and creates jobs

why do leftists want no self-defense? :/

Right, because self defense worked wonders in these shootings.

>Right, because having no means of self defense totally worked wonders in these shootings.

See? we can all add meaningless bullshit to the conversation

Why do democucks think gun free zones still work?

Why in the hell would gun owners want this to continue? They want to keep their guns.

Based on responses online its nogunz who want this shit to continue so they can bitch about it and virtue signal to their friends

in most mass shootings no one came to self defense
so he's right, y'know

Instead of banning guns just ban killing people. That way we dont have to deal with this anymore.

well yeah, a law abiding citizen cant stop them in a gun free zone can they?

You cant possibly be this retarded.

OOO you mean make murder illegal?

why do little ignorant faggots from tumblr make threads based on logical fallacies?

Yes, that way it would stop the people who truly wanted to murder people.

I know right? youd have to be a fucking mongoloid to think gun free zones would work

Are you lost little nigger faggot?

But still you can't answer the question...funny.

We dont want that happening, we want things like the church attacker to be taken out before cops arrive so people can defend themselves on their on and quicker...

Right, because background checks and other gun laws worked wonders in these shootings. Maybe we should outlaw murder next?

Right, let's just keep things just the way they are :) Ill see you here for your thoughts and prayers same time next week?

Lol, too bad a bunch of school children couldn't bring their glocks to school huh? Sucks that all those concert goers couldn't bring their sharpshooter gear and pick off the guy in the 32nd floor window. You're a fucking retard.

Maybe just ban guns? who the fuck needs them, i mean really?

why didn't democrats do anything in the last 8 years?

Not to country music events, there are a lot of Republicans there. Somebody did not get the memo, I guess.

Any the police could right?

>Lets give up our rights with nothing to replace the function of them!

25 people died in that shooting...that's like a once a decade event in every other developed nation.

Why do democrats keep doing it?

Shouldn’t you tardies be on Facebook with this type of bs?
Ohh that’s right. You came to be a Sup Forums anonymous hacker activist.

IMO, the government should start executing american citizens en masse. there, no more shootings b/c no one left to shoot or be shot

If liberals would at least be honest and admit that their motivation for supporting gun control is that they simply want to see people they disagree with punished or even just inconvenienced a little bit more when they buy guns, then maybe we could at least have a conversation. But like every other issue, you fucking faggots mask your real intentions behind this facade of pretending that you're doing things for justice or the good of everyone else, etc. You're not. You just want to hurt people you don't like.

Yep probably.

The right for americans to own firearms is more important than a dozen dead kids a few times a year.

Boom, dubs, lieberuls BTFO.

To keep the population down I guess

To be fair, the vast majority of homicides are not mass killings, they are done one victim at a time, by a factor of thousands to one.

In those more numerous cases, defending yourself or your neighbor does happen -- we will never have an accurate account because many incidents that are nipped in the bud by just revealing "Hey, dicknuts, I'm armed too" would never get reported.

You want to make laws based on the least common sort of homicide, which will make the most common even more common.

For the (you)s

the bigger question is, why do Democrats keep doing this? 90% of mass shootings have been committed by registered democrats. Fun stat. If we took away guns from Democrat voters our gun crime would drop by over 90%. Get a grip faggot. you're asking the wrong questions.

The police did you retard, in both of those cases. A bunch of strangers with guns don't have the organization or ability to go track down a guy raining death from an elevated position half a mile a way. Not in any reasonable amount of time. Why do you have such a hard on for CCW?

For the same reason the the US don't really sell safety eye protection for New Year or 4th of July.

Money in the pocket at the cost of injuries of others.

Yeah, let's ban marijuana and heroin and cocaine too! That'll stop people from doing drugs! What a bright and intelligent idea! Good job, man!

It keeps people afraid, Republicans always do better when people are afraid.

Some people actually like country music, I don't see the point either honestly.

In both cases the shooters killed themselves before police found them you fucking retard

They didn't like this one, or the Florida one.
Those were Trumpublicans and their children getting shot up.

Something will ALMOST happen, but since Citizen's United, nothing will.

My mind went right to sandy hook for the kids one sorry

For real, its a couple of reasons...

>There's a whole voting block of men with fantasies about using their gun to be a hero like in Die Hard.
>The NRA gives them money and will fund their primary opponents if they don't play ball.
>They correctly assume that whenever one of these shootings happen all they have to do is avoid questions for a news cycle and then everybody will forget about it.

Republicans don't want it to happen. Democrats don't want it to happen. Democrats, however, are happy when it happens because it gives them a reason to restrict Constitutional rights and call Republicans names.

Democrats are ghouls.

Yeah see this is the only place where it's easy to mix up your school shootings. Don't you think that's a little weird?

What would be a sensible approach to background checks? I'm for firearms to some extent, but can we be honest that the definition of a firearm has changed since the laws were first written? I have to imagine that things would have been written different if our founding fathers could have had insight into the weapons that we have at our disposal in modern times.

I understand the desire for self-defense, but shouldn't the bar be a little higher for someone to possess something that can discharge high amounts of bullets rapidly? A handgun at home - okay, I understand. A shotgun? Sure, I can see the argument. Something like an AR-15 though? As a single action rifle, sure, I can see the argument for hunting. Why the need other than the argument of, "well, someone else has it, so I need it as well so that I can compete"?

Am I missing something? Trying to be understanding, I guess. I don't know a lot about firearms.

this has nothing to do with guns, it's people freaking out over reality

as we get more advanced as a civilization, people and their roles in society will become lessened. AI and robots will take over, and all the unskilled assholes out there will be worthless and the rest of society that makes money will have to support them.

also, media and tech has disconnected folks to an insane degree.

basically, nothing matters to anyone anymore and going on a rampage will always be an option no matter what our laws are. we have to decrease depression and anxiety about the future more than anything

Think of the children! Americans should be disarmed for everyone’s safety immediately, no American has an excuse for having weapons in the current year

Bruh i got a black belt in karatay, i can defend 100 people from 10 guns

>I have to imagine that things would have been written different if our founding fathers could have had insight into the weapons that we have at our disposal in modern times.

They'd probably be asking why there are people that want to murder kids in school and why we are not also asking those questions.

The Florida shooting took place in a prominent high school known for academic excellence in a well to do area. Not exactly one of the trailer park style schools in impoverished slums that republitard kids usually attend.

> Being this retarded and living in a bubble

Shits and giggles mate

>the founders of the most powerful country in the world forgot that technology gets better over time

NRA money

This. /thread

That seems likely to me, times have shifted. Back then, the worries were about setting up a country and being able to avoid intervention from other nations. Mental health is such a serious thing these days now that the US is a superpower.

I don't understand?

Nigger if you explained what an IPhone is to people 30 years ago and then said that everyone will have one someday they would have laughed at you.

>I have to imagine that things would have been written different if our founding fathers could have had insight into the weapons that we have at our disposal in modern times.


pointless argument to make. they could never imagine free speech and the internet, or search and seizure of digital data

Honestly theyd probably be pissed that gun control is so strict considering almost all the artillery used in the revolutionary war was privately owned

It thins the herd and increases gun sales.

>You want to make laws based on the least common sort of homicide, which will make the most common even more common.

Of course they do. They want what they think is right at any cost. Some kids die? Make it a headline and keep talking about it- force their families into deep depression/divorce because they can't escape the trauma because it's gonna help you CONTROL people the way you want!

My grandfather has an essay he wrote in college about the future of computers that disagrees with you

They have the same donors as the Republicans they just pretend to be an opposition party by trying to appear more socially liberal so they can't prevent a real opposition party from rising.

Ok sergi. It seems to me the Russians would love the idea of a disarmed American populace

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puckle_gun

Rapid fire Firearms existed for decades before the bill of rights. Saying they couldnt imagine the technological advances is foolish.

so they can prevent a real opposition party from rising*

But the Mitrailleuse

>Right, let's just keep things just the way they are :)
The way things are is that mass killings are actually incredibly uncommon. So yeah, let's not fuck things up.

Since 1966, when some asshat climbed up a clock tower and introduced the "mass killing of random strangers" meme, there have been roughly 1,000 deaths in mass shootings total, all years combined. By comparison, there were 15,000 homicides in 2016 alone.

More homicides happen every year using blunt objects than rifles. More homicides happen every year using punches, kicks and strangling than using rifles. Way more homicides happen every year using knives than using rifles.

And that ALL rifles, not just the scary black ones that people want to ban first for some reason.

If you are serious about stopping killings, there has not been a year since 2016 that had FEWER than 30.000 deaths on the highways and roads.

Maybe work on priorities a little bit. If this is about saving lives.

washingtonpost.com/graphics/2018/national/mass-shootings-in-america/?utm_term=.0356441c4082

qz.com/1086403/fbi-crime-statistics-us-murders-were-up-in-2016-and-chicago-had-a-lot-to-do-with-it/

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in_U.S._by_year

ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2016/crime-in-the-u.s.-2016/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-4.xls

m.youtube.com/watch?v=wApeDr6-Bdo

You are so full of shit it's not even funny. They say, "I want to keep my rights and own a firearm!" and you say, "They're fools, taking bribes, or evil!"

A dissenting opinion on politics does not entitle you to make personal attacks at the person that holds them- dumb cunt.

(((White supremacist)))

What question?

I'm telling you that they weren't stupid people, and would have definitely seen that weapons would become more powerful over time. In fact, they were researchering rapid fire weapons at the time and some of the founding fathers were investing in it.

fpbp

La luz extinguida

How come every gay serial killer is a democrat?

That doesn't answer the question though, it just gives more of an arguement that ALL of the US laws should be fully audited at some point, in my opinion. Which they are, everything is just so influenced by special interests these days. It's sad.

A stationary weapon isn't an AR-15. This conversation just seems fruitless, there's a lot of hair splitting and arguments for argument's sake.

Except she wasn’t

>The founding fathers knew that 200 years in the future everyone will have access to rapid fire death machines that could singlehandedly annihilate whole companies of soldiers in their time. Realizing this, they wrote the second amendment so that everyone would have the right to own these death machines in perpetuity.

Do you even listen to yourselves?

Checked

Except that’s not true. Plus being gay raises the likelihood you’ll vote democrat

Considering they were funding rapid fire weapons, I'd say they saw it coming for sure
>I don't understand what technological innovation is the post
You really think they had no clue they would become a smaller package? Not to mention an AR isn't even rapid fire

His birth mother was and he hated her. His adopted family was hispanic.

>A stationary weapon isn't an AR-15

and a gutenberg press isnt a twitter account with millions of followers.

Do you think their visions of future technology honestly change the intent of the constitution?

Well they had to assume that weapons would continue to evolve. They certainly never meant for darkies to get a hold of them though. Fuck the founding fathers. Bunch of racist cunts. Let’s focus on defending our right to have weapons to defend ourselves against future tyranny. As a Jew I support the second amendment. I can foresee a time when I’ll have to use it b

it is cool, I like waking up in the morning and reading about a shooting
I just laugh, it is like watching a movie. All i have to do in life is live a good peaceful life and I get FREE content on the news!

Except she wasn’t and he never knew her

For fucks sake, someone wrote a letter asking Andrew Jackson if he could put cannons on his ship, to which Andrew replied basically "why are you even asking?"

One of the first fully automatic weapons was invented in the early 1700s. Weapons with a high rate of fire were not beyond their imagination

Wow guys. Run for the hills guys. Got some kind of twelve year old edge lord up in this bitch.

Why can't we all own explosives, nuclear material, and sarin gas then? Surely the founding fathers should have seen that weaponry would continue to evolve. How am I suppose to deter attacks on me and my property without a nerve gas launcher?

Overpopulation

this

Do you think they wrote the first amendment so random assholes can ruin dozens of peoples careers with an anonymous accusation of sexual harassment on twitter?

I'll give you they probably didn't see nuclear weapons coming.

>That doesn't answer the question though, it just gives more of an arguement that ALL of the US laws should be fully audited at some point, in my opinion

They constantly are. And sometimes we change them -- congress writes new laws every year, Presidents and agencies issue new directives and policies, and when people think the Constitution needs to be adjusted they work to make changes.

"It chould just happen" is not worth replying to -- it takles some effort to make it happen, If anti-gun folks want to go to the effort to make the change, they have the right to try, and people who disagree witht hem have the right to oppose them.

If this matters to folks, they need to get busy and do something about it.

Or just keep posting impotently online, I guess.

So it's completely up to the republicans to improve the quality and availability of mental health services in the US?