50 dead at Orlando club shooting.

  • Thread starter Dennisch
  • 609 comments
  • 26,704 views
And you think training equals action? It doesn't work that way in football, why in God's name do you think it will work precisely the same when your life and many others are in danger?
The entire point of training is to prepare you, to give you an idea of what to do if you're put in a situation. That's miles better than nothing at all.

I'm amused you thought I thought that. Of course I would need to forcefully remove it from him/her. I would go behind his back and know him out, or have a buddy help me.
You're the one who said you would grab and take the rifle off them, wording it as if it was just that easy. The reality remains: you're not doing a damn thing because you'd be piss scared like most people to mess with someone holding that weapon. Your buddy would be too, because should your fantasy go the other way (despite you thinking "nothing" would stop you), both of you are likely to be injured in self defense.


Who says I can't make a decision? If I know what I like and I know what I don't like, it's easy for me to make a decision for myself.

What the law does is take decisions for us because we are born into it. Do you think I would follow everything the law tells me to do if I didn't have to and weren't punished because of it? Or anybody else, for that matter?
You said the basis of law is someone else making decisions for you that you would make for yourself as support that your preferences "apparently do" get to decide for others. I asked what happens when that someone makes a decision for you that you wouldn't make yourself. The point is the your preferences aren't going to be given any more favor than another. You don't prefer rifles, others do. For now, the law stands in favor of the opposing side.

And in my opinion, there are no substitutes at all to things people "do not need" that can't be banned on the basis of "it may kill someone".

Otherwise we would only have our bodies and nothing else to do things. No cars, no tools, no nothing.
You spoke on the terms of rifles not needed except for being fun and that there are substitutes to them to have fun. The same can applied to anything used for fun.
Exactly. Except there's no correlation at all between playing a video game and killing people because of a videogame. At all.

I'm tired of this and frankly I don't care anymore. I guess I'm just lucky to live in a place that shares my beliefs.
The correlation is that people wanted certain video games banned because the crimes wouldn't have been committed if the game wasn't available to influence them to commit the crimes. People argue this crime wouldn't have been committed if the AR-15 was banned from the public to use to commit the shooting. They're blaming an object instead of the person. If the gun was banned from the public & he still got a hold of it who would be to blame? Can't blame the gun, it was banned.
 
No, they don't, you're missing 20,000 suicides from those figures, that table only shows murders. There are also about 1850 deaths per year without an attributed weapon type.

People aren't committing suicide a la Cobain with a Rifle...one the effort would be quite stupid cause of the expense, two the utility for said objective being minimal and so on.

Also when it comes to the argument at hand, I don't see how what you've pointed out has anything to do with the subject matter other than a shift.
 
Does it need to be 50 before it's bad enough to count?

I've got eight kids (15 other injuries), 29 commuters (143 other injuries) by eight perpetrators, eleven kids and a woman in a hospital, 20 random neighbours (12 other injuries)...

You can bet the numbers would have been much higher with an assault rifle, which was the whole point of the "I would like to see" argument. Especially in the case when it was 8 people with knives, and not just one.

I felt obligated to respond to you at least once. Won't comment on this thread again.
 
I look at any tragedy like this with disgust and feel for the families and loved ones of those lost. We can debate guns and gun control all day, it won't bring those lost back sadly.

Not much more I can say.

sorry, phone decided to post before I was ready.
 
Last edited:
Well we are way behind on Force Field research people... Why ban it when you can render it useless, or even deadly to the agressor instead of victims.

Not gonna happen I know, but hey crazier ideas have panned out eventually...
 
It may wont bring them back. However it can prevent same thing happen in the future.

No it won't, people have proven time and time again that they will go to whatever lengths to kill one another, whether that is making a homemade bomb, hijacking an airplane or anything else someone can think of in order to kill people.

I'm on my phone now so I can't look it up, but wasn't there a huge death toll from a night club fire (arson, the guy wanted to kill people) in New York in the nineties? If I recall correctly the death toll was even higher than this tragedy.
 
No it won't, people have proven time and time again that they will go to whatever lengths to kill one another, whether that is making a homemade bomb, hijacking an airplane or anything else someone can think of in order to kill people.

I'm on my phone now so I can't look it up, but wasn't there a huge death toll from a night club fire (arson, the guy wanted to kill people) in New York in the nineties? If I recall correctly the death toll was even higher than this tragedy.
The only reason for that nightfire causing so many deaths is the doors opened inwards and the crush of people trying to get out prevented the ones at the front from opening the doors. Hence why all public buildings open outward now.
 
The only reason for that nightfire causing so many deaths is the doors opened inwards and the crush of people trying to get out prevented the ones at the front from opening the doors. Hence why all public buildings open outward now.

Thanks, I didn't know that. I remember being told it was because the man who set the fire blocked the doors.
 
It may wont bring them back. However it can prevent same thing happen in the future.

Not certain if that can really make the situation any better by decreased number of crimes by the guns / firearms by gun regulations following this kind of tragic and appalling incident, but since US is the only nation among the current advanced nations that allows the citizens to carry guns and rifles as the means of self-defense, it may do something different and we may see something going better.
 
Not certain if that can really make the situation any better by decreased number of crimes by the guns / firearms by gun regulations following this kind of tragic and appalling incident, but since US is the only nation among the current advanced nations that allows the citizens to carry guns and rifles as the means of self-defense, it may do something different and we may see something going better.
I posted about gun control happenings in the last couple days over in the America thread but nobody seems to care.
 
You can bet the numbers would have been much higher with an assault rifle, which was the whole point of the "I would like to see" argument.
The question is why it matters what device people choose when they determine that large numbers of other humans deserve to die.

The thing that Orlando, Osaka and Boston have in common is that people chose to kill lots of other people by perverting tools that people use safely every day for their intended purpose - and sometimes injure themselves with (in the case of knives and guns, on purpose sometimes).

What needs working out is why people choose to kill others in numbers, not pointless dickwaving about their choice of loadout.
 
I'll say this and say it again but no amount of gun control will prevent incidents like this as someone would just find a bigger and better way of inflicting greater harm. 9/11 should've taught us this when a group of individuals decided to use planes as the mode of inflicting harm.

That said if we're going to ban guns we should follow suit with knives, scissors, cars and yes airplanes.

If there is one lesson I learned in life is that you don't sweep problem under the rug because all you're doing is making the problem worst; In the case of the gun prohibitionist they see gun control as a means to end other than the fact it make things worst.
 
Last edited:
I'll say this and say it again but no amount of gun control will prevent incidents like this as someone would just find a bigger and better way of inflicting greater harm. 9/11 should've taught us this when a group of individuals decided to use planes as the mode of inflicting harm.

That said if we're going to guns we should follow suit with knives, scissors, cars and yes airplanes.
Is there an echo in here?
 
Since this convo has turned almost entirely to gun control I'm going to go out on a limb and guess they have confirmed radical Islamic ties?!

Really don't know, just asking since it was so taboo to address it a few days ago.

Edit:
Btw, don't think I can be bothered with this thread, reading through it is clear many here try to make a point and others simply ignore it or discount the point on a "it would have been" sort of basis.
Essentially, I feel bad for Famine even trying to get through to some of you.
 
I posted about gun control happenings in the last couple days over in the America thread but nobody seems to care.

Why not the gun thread, where people will actually take the time to talk about it, rather than a general thread on America? It seems a bit counter intuitive and almost expected on your part.
 
It will level out the playing field though.
Again, so much better...

/sarcasm
Why not the gun thread, where people will actually take the time to talk about it, rather than a general thread on America? It seems a bit counter intuitive and almost expected on your part.
I looked for said thread (other than the Gun thread in the Rumble Strip where debate doesn't belong) and couldn't find it. But let's be honest here, it fits in either thread.
 
I looked for said thread (other than the Gun thread in the Rumble Strip where debate doesn't belong) and couldn't find it. But let's be honest here, it fits in either thread.

I am being honest, I see it fitting in one thread, America thread goes from serious to nonchalant in nature all the time so I don't feel any one will give you the real time of day you expect, unless you did it where I've stated.

Also I Real Guns in the the gun sharing thread, where members post pictures and casual advice as well as safety. Guns Thread as you're aware is not that, and I too took the time to Search it and on the first page of search it shows up once and then on the second page of search it shows up 3 times from what I saw. I just typed "Guns Thread" in the search bar...and got it in 45 seconds.

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/threads/guns.33891/page-130
 
I am being honest, I see it fitting in one thread, America thread goes from serious to nonchalant in nature all the time so I don't feel any one will give you the real time of day you expect, unless you did it where I've stated.

Also I Real Guns in the the gun sharing thread, where members post pictures and casual advice as well as safety. Guns Thread as you're aware is not that, and I too took the time to Search it and on the first page of search it shows up once and then on the second page of search it shows up 3 times from what I saw. I just typed "Guns Thread" in the search bar...and got it in 45 seconds.

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/threads/guns.33891/page-130
Well then flag it to be moved, I'm in a "don't care" mood today.
 
What's even more ironic is you spending this whole thread lauding the "responsibility" of gun owners who, it turns out, relish the chance to intimidate others with their weapons.

antagonize
(ænˈtæɡəˌnaɪz) or
antagonise
vb (tr)

to act in opposition to or counteract


in·tim·i·date
(ĭn-tĭm′ĭ-dāt′)
tr.v. in·tim·i·dat·ed, in·tim·i·dat·ing, in·tim·i·dates
1.
To make timid; fill with fear: The size of the opposing players intimidated us.
2. To coerce or deter, as with threats: The police intimidated the suspect into signing a false statement.

English, it's a wonderful language.
 
Try to rebuff his points; i know i'm posting quite a lot of his videos, but that's only because IMO he's speaking the truth:

 
Back