RedPed
Whatabouter.
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2015
- Messages
- 14,558
They don't even believe in the basic human right to get treated if you fall sick, ffs. Feck 'em.Let's be honest, the country treats these things as just numbers now.
They don't even believe in the basic human right to get treated if you fall sick, ffs. Feck 'em.Let's be honest, the country treats these things as just numbers now.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
You screwed that up.<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">8 YEAR-OLD who was at the Nats game: "It was my 2nd shooting, so I was kind of prepared. I’m always expecting something to happen." <br><br>A gun-sick nation. <a href="https://t.co/EJOA9HUrq1">pic.twitter.com/EJOA9HUrq1</a></p>— The Tennessee Holler (@TheTNHoller) <a href="">July 19, 2021</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Should work now.You screwed that up.
As a result, funding for research on guns lags far behind funding for other common causes of death (note the logarithmic scale!):Federal funds for firearms research have been heavily restricted ever since the 1996 Dickey Amendment, a clause added to that year’s annual spending bill that barred the CDC from funding any effort that advocates or promotes gun control.
Although the amendment did not explicitly ban research on firearms, the CDC saw its budget cut by $2.6 million in the year it passed — the same amount the agency was spending on the topic. CDC administrators saw the move as a message to steer clear, says Andrew Morral, a behavioural scientist at the Rand Corporation in Washington DC and director of the National Collaborative on Gun Violence Research, a consortium of foundations that fund firearms research.
The amendment remained in subsequent spending bills, and researchers who continued to work on gun violence say that their work received more scrutiny. “Any research we would put forward would create just a waterfall of backlash,” says Charles Branas, an epidemiologist at Columbia University’s Mailman School of Public Health in New York City. The gun lobby would argue that the work was biased, Branas says. Lawmakers would start asking questions. “That’s not something a cancer researcher has to contend with,” he says. “I think it scared off a lot of potential young scientists.”
So schools shouldn't do fire drills, either?No child should ever, ever have to think their lives are in danger at school
It’s a bit different unless the cause is billy bob flame throwing the athletics fieldSo schools shouldn't do fire drills, either?
That's completely different mate. I get the need for the active shooter drills, it just makes me sick thinking about it.So schools shouldn't do fire drills, either?
Well, to be fair, it could be. Fires happen for all sorts of reasons, arson included. And I wouldn't put it past someone like billy bob to do just what you've described. I know what these folks are like, heck I'm almost one of them.It’s a bit different unless the cause is billy bob flame throwing the athletics field
I'm just trying to wind you up mate.That's completely different mate. I get the need for the active shooter drills, it just makes me sick thinking about it.
I just think how I would feel if my kids had to have done them and how the poor kids must be feeling while doing them let alone how they feel during an actual event.
I'm just trying to wind you up mate.
Drills are drills, practicing a calm and smart reaction to the emergency is important but there are lots of other controls for fire detection and prevention systems in buildings like schools (pretty sure these are mandated by law, too). The fire drills are the icing on the cake because you're taking steps to prevent fires from happening and if they do, stop them from spreading. The drills are almost unnecessary.
Why not take similar preventive action against the gun violence?
If I ever met someone actually named Billy Bob I'm not sure I could take them seriouslyIt’s a bit different unless the cause is billy bob flame throwing the athletics field
If I ever met someone actually named Billy Bob I'm not sure I could take them seriously
Win/win situation. If she survived that would be great, and if not it would have been a short trip.
Just a bizarre mentality you guys have about pretty much everything. Can't get my head around it.Win/win situation. If she survived that would be great, and if not it would have been a short trip.
at this point I feel so numb about these things that dark “humor” is all I got.No amount of protesting or campaigning for the “right” candidate has moved the needle even a millimeter. I am at a loss as to what more we can do.I mostly hate my country
At this point my mentality is one of hopelessness. The wife and I have marched in protests, donated money to anti gun groups and campaigned for candidates with strong gun control platforms. I hate guns. Hate them. They exist for one purpose, to kill. People can talk all they want about target shooting and all that bullshit, but at the end of the day guns were created, and continuously improved, so as to be able to kill as many humans as fast as possible. Anyone who owns or uses a gun is contributing to the perpetuation of this and is part of the reason why tens of thousands of people die each year.I am not saying that they are doing the killing, only that it is through the business of the 90% of responsible gun owners that gun companies are able to exist and lobby against meaningful reform. Every dollar they spend on a new gun or ammo is a dollar that will be used to lobby against legislation that would have protected that little girl.Just a bizarre mentality you guys have about pretty much everything. Can't get my head around it.
I really don't care about all the casualties who are gun owners themselves or the stories you hear about firearms being left unsecured in homes and kids getting their hands on them and accidentally shooting either themselves or family members etc. It's the innocent ones I feel sorry for. But as you're alluding to, exactly how many people are truly innocent? I would be interested to hear how many US households are actually completely gun-free.At this point my mentality is one of hopelessness. The wife and I have marched in protests, donated money to anti gun groups and campaigned for candidates with strong gun control platforms. I hate guns. Hate them. They exist for one purpose, to kill. People can talk all they want about target shooting and all that bullshit, but at the end of the day guns were created, and continuously improved, so as to be able to kill as many humans as fast as possible. Anyone who owns or uses a gun is contributing to the perpetuation of this and is part of the reason why tens of thousands of people die each year.I am not saying that they are doing the killing, only that it is through the business of the 90% of responsible gun owners that gun companies are able to exist and lobby against meaningful reform. Every dollar they spend on a new gun or ammo is a dollar that will be used to lobby against legislation that would have protected that little girl.
I really don't care about all the casualties who are gun owners themselves or the stories you hear about firearms being left unsecured in homes and kids getting their hands on them and accidentally shooting either themselves or family members etc. It's the innocent ones I feel sorry for. But as you're alluding to, exactly how many people are truly innocent? I would be interested to hear how many US households are actually completely gun-free.
I mean, whatever lame-ass argument is used in support of gun ownership, nobody has been able to give me a rational explanation for the need for your average American to own weapons like those below. And they usually own more than one.
Somebody, help me understand.
PS. I hate that term 'RESPONSIBLE GUN OWNER'.
Those figures seem kind of low, though that is reassuring to know. Although I don't understand how the minority would be permitted to influence the whole of society to such a large extent. How have the majority of the US population not been able to affect any change to ay meaningful degree? I read somewhere that there are more guns then people in the US, so all of those guns are condensed within a third of the whole population? That's mad.According to this poll 32% of adult Americans own guns and 44% live in a gun household. If true this means a majority of us do not have guns.
As I've said before there's no such thing as a responsible gun owner. When you look at the stats and the amount of mass shootings and killings that occur in the US and even compare to the rest of civilised society across the world, the 'responsible' thing to do would be to ban guns in the first place. So even owning a gun is just compounding and perpetuating the problem. I've tried engaging with gun owners on here but they just come out with the same lame-ass arguments. They're no different to those smokers or pitbull owners who try to defend the indefensible.Have you not seen the size of the cockroaches over there?
Also, you have two very responsible gun owners on here. @Carolina Red and @Dwazza Gunnar Solskjær are both gun owners and both are intelligent and articulate lads who will happily debate with you and explain their love of guns. You might not agree with them but they will at least bother to help you try to understand their stance.
In a perfect world where there was proper gun restrictions or if Americans weren’t such bloodthirsty cnuts I would have zero issues with people owning guns. Shotguns and bolt action rifles for hunting? Hell, I’m sort of at peace with that now. Without hunting season the deer population of Wisconsin would explode (thanks to the loss of almost all natural predators, but that’s a different thread.) Handguns though? feck those. Those have one purpose, to kill fellow humans.Have you not seen the size of the cockroaches over there?
Also, you have two very responsible gun owners on here. @Carolina Red and @Dwazza Gunnar Solskjær are both gun owners and both are intelligent and articulate lads who will happily debate with you and explain their love of guns. You might not agree with them but they will at least bother to help you try to understand their stance.
Im sure that poll was for legal owned guns, then we have people who inherited guns from parents, others who bought the gun from friends/black market and off course the ones who can’t legally own a gun and mostly do, is a lot of guns in this country.According to this poll 32% of adult Americans own guns and 44% live in a gun household. If true this means a majority of us do not have guns.
The fact that nearly every second house you go to in America has a gun in it is crazy.According to this poll 32% of adult Americans own guns and 44% live in a gun household. If true this means a majority of us do not have guns.
Madness. I shudder to imagine living 1000s of metres within a 'known' gun owner but in America you would never be more than a few feet.The fact that nearly every second house you go to in America has a gun in it is crazy.
Maybe if he's camped outside the airport? There's 0% chance he could hit anything actually moving some distance up in the air, surely. Sounds like bragging.Shows me a custom built sniper and claims that it can hit a plane from the ground
Did it look anything like this?Weird conversation in the pub today. American friend of an acquaintance showing off his gun collection (it’s his hobby). Shows me a custom built sniper and claims that it can hit a plane from the ground … surely possessing something like that is not legal even in the US? Not sure whether to believe him or if he’s just full of hot air
probably bullshit. It's not likely that the bullet would reach beyond 15k feet. This is a nice table, though it doesn't have the mac-daddy sniper rounds of 50 cal and .338 lapua, the listed muzzle velocites for 7.62 NATO and 30-06 are in the right range.Weird conversation in the pub today. American friend of an acquaintance showing off his gun collection (it’s his hobby). Shows me a custom built sniper and claims that it can hit a plane from the ground … surely possessing something like that is not legal even in the US? Not sure whether to believe him or if he’s just full of hot air
Figured as much just the fact that the other guy at the table was hanging on every word like gospel made me almost fall for itprobably bullshit. It's not likely that the bullet would reach beyond 15k feet. This is a nice table, though it doesn't have the mac-daddy sniper rounds of 50 cal and .338 lapua, the listed muzzle velocites for 7.62 NATO and 30-06 are in the right range.
I was about to Google “sniper that can shoot down planes” to see if I can find a picture for you but then remembered I don’t want to appear on any watch listsDid it look anything like this?