Shooting range School
@THE 0NE WH0 KN0CKS,
@InsaneAnimeCleavage, it’s all banter, got to take it a bit less seriously
@Nosferatu Zodd, fair point
@THE 0NE WH0 KN0CKS, kitchen knife weapons of war
@AN AMERICAN, You know you can jump to a new line with the enter button, right?
@THE 0NE WH0 KN0CKS, Let's see if some of the cowards who dislikes the comment will stand up for their views
@THE 0NE WH0 KN0CKS,
@Awesome Naked Taco, allow teachers to conceal carry.
@THE 0NE WH0 KN0CKS, healthcare freehealthcare
@big freedom, Sure, that will totally scare the school shooting psychopaths from shooting up the school. Sure, that tooootally won't make teachers even bigger target in a school shooting. Sure, because everyone knows that when confronted with a school shooter, a middleschool teacher will, per reflex, draw their weapon and shoot the school shooter. Sure, because any responsible teacher LOVES the idea of bringing guns to a school full of children. Do you ever think? Do you ever educate yourself on topics? Or do you just grab the first and best opinion that you TV screen throws at you?
@Awesome Naked Taco, do you think? “Concealed” carry. Teachers are already targets. Why not allow them to defend themselves and their students if they chose to. The “gun free zone” works 100% of the time, until it doesn’t. Then there is nothing between the shooter and targets. This would at least allow them to attempt to defend.
Get the fûck outta here with your bûllshît fallacies. Use facts and reason rather than emotion.
@big freedom, The rest of the world has no nationwide gun problem, you know, the 100% gun free zone rest of the world. 64% of killings are gun-related in the US. In the UK that number is 4.5%. God, I wish there was something that could change the current gun epidemic that America can't control.
@Awesome Naked Taco, yeah I wish the gun epidemic would be fixed too. More people need to have guns.
@Awesome Naked Taco, did you know that 73.4% of statistics are made up on the spot? Murders happen everywhere. I’m pro freedom of choice. ALL choices. I personally chose to own a firearm so I can defend my family if necessary. My gun has never killed anyone and never will unless my family is in danger.
I accept your choice to not be armed. Do everyone else the same courtesy and don’t try to decide for them.
@muckian21, “free” LOL
@Richard Cypher, My favourite two idiots on this app.
@big freedom, I'm pro life. That means I believe in taking any measure that will save lives in the thousands.
@Awesome Naked Taco, pssst hey... literally every single person on earth will die. Some actually give a shît about how their time on earth is spent and don’t try to control everyone else, and don’t want to be controlled by others.
Some people are complete busy bodies. They want to regulate every aspect of everyone else’s lives, and try to eliminate all risk, and live in a fairy tale utopia where everyone is perfectly safe from birth to death.
How about this, YOU live YOUR life as YOU see fit. And EVERYONE else does the same. holy shît what a novel fûcking concept.
@Awesome Naked Taco, did you know the UK also has the highest rate of acid attacks per capita in the entire world? You guys should ban acid. Or make everyone wear acid suits. Maybe make it illegal to harm another person! That sounds like a good law. I’m sure everyone, even the criminals, would follow it.
Did you also know that the nhs(“free” healthcare)has an abnormally high rate of doctors and nurses leaving the system and going to other countries like the US? Did you also know that the vast majority of ALL medical research is conducted by the private sector in the US? More medical journals written and cited and research conducted in the US than anywhere else in the world. In case you dont understand that means that most of the great medical advancements and treatments you have are thanks to the US(though arguably much better care in the US).
Did I also mention the mortality rate in the UK NHS is around 47% higher than the US? Maybe you should ban hospitals since they kill so many
@big freedom, I thought I read that the ‘gun free zones’ meant ‘no guns unless you’re authorised’ - which is how campus police (I’m not sure the correct term) can carry. If that’s the case, couldn’t areas which want armed teachers simply designate the teachers as authorised people? Or is it more complicated than that? (From a legal point of view, not a should they/shouldn’t they moralistic sense - I’m staying out of that one).
@Nellybert , if it works I’m all for it
@Richard Cypher, he can’t handle facts bro. He only gets ad hominem attacks and silly emotional arguments.
@big freedom, The UK spends 22% of tax income on healthcare. A person on the average salary (£27.6k) with no deduction will pay £3,148 income tax. 22% of that is £692, so the average taxpayer spends £692/annum for universal healthcare - covering everything from the time I had my tonsils out to my dad’s 15 years of cancer treatment, all without us ever being invoiced for additional payments.
What was your insurance premium this year?
@Awesome Naked Taco, did you know that you could save every single life? Simply lock everyone in an 8x10 cell for their entire life. They will be perfectly safe from all harm. ANY measure necessary to save lives, right?
Or is that taking it too far? How far, in your infinite wisdom, should we go? At what point is the cure worse than the disease?
@big freedom, what’s also interesting is that their “free” healthcare system has a higher rate of death than gun crime in the US
@big freedom, I have no idea what would work, I’m just trying to get my head around the laws over there - the plethora of different federal, state and city laws are hard to keep up with. I’m from the UK, so our gun laws are basically “no” - which makes US gun laws seem quite confusing at times!
@Richard Cypher, How do you compare death rates between gun crime and healthcare?
@Nellybert , ever hear the saying “you get what you pay for”?
@big freedom, This cell - does it have Netflix?
@Nellybert , lol! Sure. And “free” porn and “free” healthcare and “free” education.
@big freedom, “In the summer, US think tank the Commonwealth Fund ranked the NHS the number one health system in a comparison of 11 countries for safety, affordability and efficiency. It did less well when it came to cancer survival
The US was ranked last out of the 11 countries.
The American health system came off badly in comparison when it came to infant mortality, life expectancy, and preventable deaths, but did relatively better on cancer, heart attack and stroke survival.”
@big freedom, I always wondered who is actually paying for all the ‘free’ porn out there. Seriously, someone must be handing over cash, but who?
@Nellybert , selling ads.
@Nellybert , good info. I’d be curious to see what it was when the government was a lot less involved. (They make things A LOT less efficient than the free market)
@big freedom, But that would rely on people actually clicking on those ads and buying stuff. Who is doing that? Is anyone actually going “oh wow, this pill will give me a six-pack and a 12 inch penis? I’ll buy a bottle of those!”
@big freedom, The US government? I thought their involvement in healthcare was more on insisting that people have insurance rather than actual delivery.
@Nellybert , nah, they got really involved in the micro management of doctors. I’ve spoken with dr’s leaving the business because of how it’s changed. Used to be a very personal interaction. Now it’s checking boxes on a computer rather than really interacting with patients.
@big freedom, Ah, ok. I think a degree of oversight is important (of the ‘stopping unqualified people blagging it to have a go at heart surgery, and not letting drug companies hide horrendous side effects’ type) but I’m against bureaucrats getting involved in the day to day stuff. I’d like to think that most doctors have the patients’ best interests at heart, so will look after them.
I like our NHS, but I’d oppose our government re-nationalising stuff like the trains and energy companies.
@Nellybert , I like the way you think!
@Nellybert , it’s just the rates for each per 100,000 population.
I’m curious about your taxes. Are healthcare taxes part of income tax or are they 2 separate taxes
@big freedom, While I do think that there often needs to be someone in a position to kick the arses of companies who try to use a monopoly/necessity situation to really take the piss, I don’t blindly assume that the government can automatically be assumed to be competent to do the job better than the private sector.
@Nellybert , I always assume the government to be less competent. Private sector can be fired if they’re not good enough. Nothing an individual can do about it when the government is in charge.
@Richard Cypher, What rates per 100,000? I honestly can’t see how you can compare the two.
We pay Income Tax and National Insurance. Income Tax pays for the NHS, police, army, education etc; National Insurance is for our state pension and certain benefits - like statutory maternity pay, disability payments, Jobseeker’s Allowance etc.
@big freedom, Fair point. I balance an assumption of laziness/lack of expertise on one side, with an assumption of greed & a hint of evil on the other. 😝
@Nellybert , gun crime deaths for the US is around 3.9 per 100,000 population. The nhs numbers are all over the place but I found a range and took the mean of 5,000 avoidable deaths for the nhs and compared to the population it’s about 7.5ish per 100,000 population. It’s in no way an official number with precise numbers but it was just illustrating a number for the Taco man.
So for that tax bracket the rate is around 32% for income tax and national insurance together if I am googling correctly?
@Richard Cypher, Oh wait, acid is banned...
@Awesome Naked Taco, you mean to tell me that acid is banned and yet criminals are still finding a way to get it and using it against people? That’s crazy
@Richard Cypher, Yeah yeah, nice facts and arguments. They don't relate to guns in any way whatsoever so I'll dismiss them. I'm not fighting against American hospitals, nor am I fighting for UK hospitals.
@big freedom, That's just ridiculous. The suicide rates would be through the roof. I'm not dumb you know. Even if you locked people in a way that they couldn't do any self-harm, there would still be guards, doctors etc. who would be capable of harming. So no, your suggestion does in no way relate to my policy on saving lives. Don't be ridiculous.
@Richard Cypher, Bear in mind that people who are dying go to the hospital in the UK, whereas some people just leave themselves to die, afraid of the huge bills that treatments will land them, in the US.
@Awesome Naked Taco, I’m not fighting about the hospitals either. I think both systems are incredibly flawed and far from perfect
@big freedom, Being a doctor in the USA is just as bad, charging people thousands of dollars for basic treatment and declaring people sick.
@Awesome Naked Taco, “I’m not dumb you know” - Awesome Naked Taco
When all the evidence points in one direction...
I’m glad you puzzled out the ridiculousness of my extreme example. Yes it is. Now, somewhere between that and complete anarchy is a happy zone. In my opinion your desire for no guns is on the ridiculous side.
Where would you move the needle to? How much safety is enough? How much freedom of choice is acceptable?
Let’s see if you can come up with a logical, fact based argument to persuade me to give up my right to defend myself.
@big freedom, About the "nothing an individual can do about it" thing, how exactly does the individual have any power over private companies? No CEO ever got fired for screwing over the public, but you can be sure as heck that it will hurt a political party if the public is screwed over by their policies.
@Awesome Naked Taco, Wrong on both counts. Private business close all the time because they either fûcked up or aren’t meeting the needs of their customers.
US Congress has 95%+ disapproval rating while at the same time has 98% re-election rate.
I don’t have to do business with a company I don’t like. I cannot Just not do business with my government.
@Richard Cypher, Well, contrating acid isn't really that hard. There is a black market for everything, but it's not like (Unlike the US) every citizen can legally obtain said chemicals. They are regulated. (And in my opinion, I wouldn't mind if they were even more regulated.) Besides, you can't compare a non-lethal, close range weapon with a kill-on-hit, long range lethal weapon, like the obtainability of the one, justifies the obtainability of the other.
@big freedom, The very fact that the rest of the world does not allow bearing arms, hand guns and semi-automatic weapons, should be more than enough to conclude that the high gun crime rate very well could be caused by this.
You will always have the right to defend yourself, but do you really honestly think that 100 million guns will lower gun crimes compared to, say, 100.000 illegal weapons that, if seen, will be taken away on sight. I don't. I believe it is impossible to distinguish a criminal from a non-criminal in the US, causing unnecessary police shootings and victims of police being too fast to pull the trigger. In the "gun free" rest of the world, if someone bears an arm, they can easily be identified as a criminal and they will be charged with gun possesion. Availability is the key word. Since guns are so available, the black market is impossible to regulate. I am sorry for calling you an idiot and being rude towards you.
@big freedom, I disagree that businesses are cloaed all the time. Just look at Equifax. It has had absolutely no consequence, that they leaked personally identifiable information of millions of Americans. Had Barack Obama done that, he would have had his head on a spike within a day. Against huge businesses, you have no influence. If you close e.g. Ford, millions would loose their job, hundreds of billions of tax dollars would be lost. If a political scandal blows up, a couple, maybe 10 people will loose their job, thousands of dollars will be lost.
@Awesome Naked Taco, I’m pretty sure throwing acid on people is illegal in the US too but we don’t have an acid epidemic. you seem to misunderstand firearms.
1) that’s news to me that every citizen can legally obtain a firearm. I was pretty sure there were quite a few regulations specifically saying certain people CANT get them.
2) kill on hit? You watch too many movies. Humans are typically much more resilient than is shown in movies. One shot to anything other than heart or brain is usually pretty survivable(though even head shots aren’t 100% guaranteed as some people survive those too.
@Awesome Naked Taco, your logical fallacy is: bandwagon fallacy
Thanks for the apology
Btw The rest of the world is not “gun free” that’s another logical fallacy: straw man
I’m not that concerned about your inability to distinguish a criminal from non criminal. I don’t want to live in a world where everything is perfectly safe at all times. I believe struggle and hardship are necessary for humans to continue to evolve.
Life is 100% fatal. I chose to live my way and respect others to do the same.
@Awesome Naked Taco, Equifax is protected by the government. In free market they would already be gone. But since they have bought the politicians, they get to write their own regulation.
Barack Obama’s and his administration blocked conservative groups from becoming non-profit approved. He lied about ACA.
Congress has terrible approval rating but they ALL get reelected. This is not a hard concept if you remove your emotion and look at it rationally
@big freedom, allowing teachers to conceal carry is the dumbest idea ever. It makes the teachers and 20-30 kids that are typically around them a bigger target. Armed guards, patrolling the premises? Sure.
Armed guards like police are very trained with firearms and on how to handle stressful, particularly dangerous situations. The average gun owner like a teacher isn’t held up to any official standard. Giving them a gun in this situation could potentially make matters worse.
More people shooting/holding guns will make it confusing snd even more difficult to obtain the shooter. If a teacher is walking down the hallway with a gun out, how are one of the other teachers supposed to know if they are the shooter or not? Also having more guns means more crossfire, meaning more potential accidental casualties.
@big freedom, not to mention the various other issues like
-having a gun in the classroom at all times will raise tensions lead to plenty of kids being nervous and unfocused. Even if you feel perfectly comfortable around a gun, a lot of people, especially kids, are not.
-The potential of students or other staff members obtaining guns. In middle school, but mainly high school, a lot of students are bigger and stronger than teachers. If one wanted to, they or even a couple kids could jump the teacher and get the gun.
-imagine what it will do to a school’s reputation if a child gets accidentally shot, or even if a gun just accidentally gets fired in a classroom.
- it puts a really bug burden on teachers. Even if teachers don’t want to carry, the pressure for them to do so will be put on them. They will be blamed in the event of a shooting if a teacher freezes (understandably) in a shooting. If a teacher doesn’t carry, they will be likely blamed by many for not carrying when they could
@Richard Cypher, I’m gonna reply on the tax thing in a sec - it’ll be less confusing to deal with these separately.
You can’t compare rates of ‘people killed with a gun’ to ‘people that could perhaps have been saved by doctors if something had gone better’. It’s a meaningless comparison.
@K1l, so many flaws in your argument.
1. Nobody has to know who is armed.
2. Why would them being armed make them more of a target? Especially if nobody knows.
3. The other teachers would obviously know who’s a teacher and who’s not. Cmon
4. Gun could be locked in bio metric safe. No possible chance of student getting weapon
5. You keep using the words “potentially worse”. As it is now, they are COMPLETELY HELPLESS. I would allow teachers that want to carry and pass strict background and training classes the ABILITY to be ABLE to defend themselves should a crisis occur.
Will it stop all school shootings? Of course not. Will it prevent some? Absolutely as a simple deterrent. And it has the potential to have less deaths should a school shooting still happen.
@Richard Cypher, Using rounded numbers for simplicity: we get an annual tax free allowance of £11k, then we pay 20% income tax and 12% NI on the next £34k. Once you’re earning £45k, tax goes up to 40% but NI drops to 2% on earnings above that level.
So if you earned £50k, you’d pay £8.5k in tax and £4.5k in NI - giving an average tax rate of 26%. But then we get a state pension at the end of it, plus things like child benefits and the NHS.
@Richard Cypher, No matter how hard you try, you cannot one-hit kill someone with acid, but there are quite many spots on the body that, when hit with one bullet, will kill you instantly, or have you bleed out in a few minutes.
@big freedom, The NRA also buya the government, even more so than Equifax.
@Awesome Naked Taco, false again. Look up how much the NRA contributes to politicians. Very little.
The NRA mobilizes voters.
Btw I’m not an NRA member. Never have been
@big freedom, I think you're consciously ignoring logical arguments, setting up unrealistic realities where those arguments don't apply. Of course people will know wether or not a teacher is armed, either by asking or by it being visible (Unless you wear tonnes of clothea, you can't realistically conceal a gun while doing everyday activities.). Look, I agree with you, with the premise that guns are not gonna become work-only tools in the near future. I do think there should be armed people at public places. That is litterally the only way to protect the people. But is a gun crime rate 10x that of "gun free" countries (Gun free by law), enormous expenses from placing armed forces at public places (To protect from mass shootings), hundreds of avoidable deaths, a police force that fears for their life when giving speeding tickets or approaching an angry person who COULD carry a concealed gun, guns being VEEEERY easily available for a few hundred bucks to anyone at any age 1/2
@big freedom, 2/2 on the black market, worth it? Are all those downsides really worth your "freedom"? Are you not willing to give up your guns for the greater good? There is no denying that your gun laws are the single reason that gun-related crimes are multiple times that of other countries.
@Awesome Naked Taco,
1. Of course a country with guns will have a higher rate of gun crime than a country that bans guns. That’s an idiotic argument.
2. Armed teachers can keep weapons in a biometric safe in their room. Nobody would know it’s there or that the teacher has access to it.
Cmon man use just a little brain power to get past the knee-jerk “guns are bad” “argument”.
There are a lot of ways to creatively disrupt an active school shooter. An armed defender in the classroom would certainly be one of them.
@Awesome Naked Taco, 2/2 any government that wants to suppress and enslave the people always first disarms them. No, I am not willing to give up my right for the greater good.
The difference between you and me: you believe that a “right” is something that the government allows you to have. I believe the government’s only purpose is to make sure our rights are not taken away. That’s what a “right” is, something that cannot be denied to you.
@big freedom, You don't have the right to kill, you don't have the right to own explosives, you don't have the right to rape, you don't have the right to build whatever you want; even on your own property, you don't have the right to be nude in public. How come you are not oppressed, even though all of these right have been stripped right off you? Also, why would the American government enslave you? The way a political power rises beyond the power of the government is the way Hitler did it, it's the way Donald Trump is doing it. By creating separation, by creating fanatics, by turning people against each other. By expanding their legal power, the way Erdogan is doing it. Your guns won't prevent that the slightest. Not. Even. A. Little. Bit. Heck, your guns won't do jack shjt if the government turns against the people. They have access to military flights, missiles, bombs etc. The American people wouldn't stand a chance, none, against the military. Just face it, guns bring 1/2
@big freedom, more downsides and no upsides, except they're cool. None of the problems that guns "solve" would be problems, had it not been because of guns. Guns harm people, never the opposite. That's reality, that's fact. That's not suppressing your rights, liberty or freedom, that you Americans are brainwashed to think you have more of than other countries. Sure, a gun can kill a gunman, but had it not been for a gun in the hands of the gunman, there would have been no problem. You're completely dismissing that guns bring the gun-related crime rate from 4.5% in normal countries, to 64%! I don't even care what your rights or freedoms are, that is bulletproof, clear as day evidence that guns. Are. Really. Fvcking. Bad. For. Society.
@big freedom, I understand that you don't feel like guns are a problem, because you are a responsible gun owner and if everyone were responsible gun owners, there would be no problem. But you can't test people for responsibility. You can't regulate guns in any way so that no irresponsible people get their hands on guns. It's just impossible.
@Awesome Naked Taco, since you went to Godwin’s law, the end of any reasonable argument, I will say good day. There’s no way that us continuing that either of us will ever persuade the other. See ya around
@big freedom, I also intended to end it here. I thank you for the debate, it was fun and interesting. See you in the next one ;)
@big freedom, armed security at schools, takes burden of teachers
@Awesome Naked Taco, are.. you aware of anything? In the world? Buddy boy do you ever have some leanin' to do about the violence of this world and the rampant amount of untraced illegal weapons that flow right past your super safe front door
@Awesome Naked Taco, Hi, I know my comments are a little out of sequence, but in regards to you being pro-life. That's great, I hear ya, saving lives is important. Being alive is also pointless without freedom, live free or die my friend there is no alternative for many of us. The areas in these horrifically dangerous United States that are the safest also tend to correspond with high numbers of legally owned firearms by the populace
@Medic135, Please educate me on illegal guns in, say, Scandinavia vs America, because you're right, I know nothing about illegal guns in my country, in fact, I've never seen a hand pistol, let alone an illegal gun. Also, I'd love to know which statistics you refer to when claiming that the amount of guns per household tend to be higher in the safer areas.
@Nellybert , I currently would pay $40* American dollars per pay (twice monthly) and have a $5000 deductible a vast majority of which is paid by my employer. After that is paid then the insurance company pays all expenses, I'm not crazy about my insurance but I mean it's cheap and so far it's not done me wrong
@Medic135, I’m not 100% on how it works, so I just want to check my understanding. You pay $40/day ($14,600/annum) for insurance? Is a deductible like an insurance excess, so you/your employer pay the first $5k and the rest is covered by insurance?
@Medic135, My sources (An article on Scientific American, also the first article on google, also I am not going to read the research papers for the research that is referred to, because I don't have the time and I do trust this website I just stumbled upon, which supports my belief.)
"In a 2015 study using data from the FBI and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, for example, researchers at Boston Children's Hospital and Harvard University reported that firearm assaults were 6.8 times more common in the states with the most guns versus those with the least."
@K1l, damn you and your rational arguments that I can't disagree with
@Awesome Naked Taco, you can't realistically conceal a gun doing daily activities? Dude. Where are you even from, I do this daily I'd argue 35% or more of FP users over the age of 21 do
@Nellybert , not per day, per PAY which is bi-weekly
@Medic135, Ah, right, gotcha. That makes a lot more sense - $14,000 did not sound like cheap insurance! 🤣 Is my understanding of the term ‘deductible’ right?
@Awesome Naked Taco, standby I'll gather some sources for you if you want, but off the top of my head it is not even arguable that the majority of all murder by firearm occur in Chicago/LA/Washington DC/ and New York. All US cities with extremely strict and bureaucratic anti gun laws. Amazing how those laws aren't working, I'll hit you with a few sources soon
@Nellybert , yes you are correct on deductible, and again my employer does nearly 4k of that and it's broken up so I'm never hit with one massive bill
@Medic135, Cool, thanks.
@Medic135, please tell me how you conceal (Which means someone looking at you wouldn't be able to know you have a gun on you.) A pistol wearing a shirt and pants or a t-shirt and pants.
@Awesome Naked Taco, Prison pocket.
@Nellybert , I don't think that's a viable option in the long run.
@Awesome Naked Taco, gladly, as that's my usual wear T-shirt jeans or T-shirt cargo shorts in the summers.
You said earlier you've never even seen a handgun, maybe don't make claims about them then? I have a Colt mustang .380 automatic which is a very small handgun and standard holds 7 rounds. It fits roughly into the palm of my hand, I either place it in a cloth material holster that goes inside my waistband and by default under my t shirt and no it is not visible until I draw it
OR (this is my favorite) I just toss it in my shorts pocket. Front right pocket specifically, I have a little hard plastic holder that it sits in to cover the shape of the gun it looks like a large cell phone (Galaxy) or a wallet. It's very easy, and obviously in winter when I'm dressed thicker I have more options I typically shoulder a larger handgun in the cold months
@Medic135, Alright, you got me. I didn't think of smaller pistols.
@Awesome Naked Taco, I feel like you just pictured the wild west and me and big freedom were just walking around with Stetsons and large revolvers hanging off our hips
@Medic135, I was picturing the teachers as looking more like Robin Williams in Dead Poets Society, but with an assault (looking) rifle hanging across their chest in that way that special forces soldiers (and never been in the army civilians who think that carrying a rifle that way makes them look like a Navy SEAL) carry them.
Except in Texas, there I’m assuming that the teachers who choose to be armed would have a massive pistol hanging off their hip. And possible cowboy boots.
@Awesome Naked Taco,
So I found you a well written article by NPR which was actually written after the Las Vegas massacre, the United States in all it's gun toting glory is actually only 31st in violent gun deaths (it seems violent is used to separate homicide from suicide here but I could be incorrect, suicide is often added to gun death statistics to make it seem as though there's more murder) the top countries for gun related homicide are almost exclusively ones where firearms are banned Mexico being a major example.
The US also ranks 9th among socioeconomic success, being bested conveniently by nation's such as Norway, Finland, Denmark etc (Scandinavians as you requested) and despite the US being just below these nation's, they all enjoy drastically lower violence rates as a whole. Norway specifically actually has an estimated 33 legal firearms per 100 citizens
@Awesome Naked Taco, that's quite high compared to other nations in that category, so why the low violence rate with all those guns buddy? I have a theory, Norway for one enjoys a generally less damaged society then us at the moment, and also has an actual mental health system where as so many of those programs in the US have been cut.
Tl;Dr Norway has lots of guns and lots of sane healthy people, the US has lots of guns and lots of nuts. The issue is not the guns alone but the sick people that we've neglected
@Awesome Naked Taco, I tried my best to cover the things you asked about but if you want anything else I'll look for you
@Medic135, You can not compare the gun problems of a lawenforcementless country like Mexico, with the ones of America
@Awesome Naked Taco, um? I'm gonna take that as "statistics only apply where I want them to and everything else is an outlier"
@Medic135, So you honestly believe that you can compare Mexico, a country that is run by drug cartels, who in no way have the power to enforce gun bans, where people are shot and killed on public streets daily, then hung up for display, with the USA not having these situations as well as not banning guns? That's just absurd. That's like saying "Look at Turkey, they have banned guns and as a result of that, they have a dictator". That's beyond arguability and logic.
@Awesome Naked Taco, no that's exactly my logic, find me a dictatorship that didn't disarm it's populace. The UK is even going to prison for memes now as this very meme implies, it is pathetic. And here we have you, the self righteous Scandinavian who admittedly is not even familiar with the topic he is so upset over and when you ask for someone's reasons to believe what they do you disregard it. Maybe you should take a lesson from K1l who is open minded in several aspects or Nellybert who often plays devil's advocate in the most respectful ways
@Medic135, Now, as for Norway, your theory is partially right, but it is not the mean reason.
You see, hunting is very popular in cold biomes, with natural wildlife, especially in Norway. However, unlike America, Norway does not allow automatic guns. A vast majority of guns in Norway are rifles and hand guns are only allowed in low caliber. Rifles and shotguns are required to be stored in approvel security safes, that are securely bolted to a non-moving part of your house. You must always have a valid reason to transport a gun and you can not have it worn on your body and it has to be empty. For these reasons, anyone with a gun in public are considered dangerous, unless they are transporting it concealed and securely.
Now, guns are allowed for self-defense, but the vast vast vast majority of guns are used for sporting events or hunting.
Norway is not a gun-obsessed country like America. In Norway, a gun is a tool, an instrument, not a toy.
@Medic135, Well, if that is your logic, I am sorry to say, you are just beyond common sense. Your guns will not protect you from dictatorship, as long as 50% of your population are uneducated morons. You blindly fell into the reality TV show that is Donald Trump's presidency. He is in no way capable or suited for leading the country, yet hebis the president. To the rest of the world, that is a warning sign, like none other. No, the gullible and dumb part of America will fall into dictatorship just as easily as Turkey does. A popular narcissist running the country is the #1 trait of a dictatorship.
Maybe I have never held a gun in my hand, you haven't been to Norway (I doubt you've even been outside of America), but that sure as hell does not prevent me from seeing the obvious. America has a HUGE problem with gun crimes and the single reason for that is that guns are so easily available.
@Awesome Naked Taco, oh my God, do you know what an automatic weapon even is? The caliber of a gun is not relative at all to it being semi or full automatic, and if the vast majority are for hunting, unless you hunt nothing but small game and varmints, they are NOT small caliber.
Guns are allowed for self defense, but nobody does it? That's what it sounds like you're trying to say. You've obviously never looked into anything you say, the US is not a lawless wasteland our gun ownership is held to so many regulations it's impossible to tell you all of them.
Not a gun obsessed country = one of the highest rates of gun ownership. And I'm glad a gun isn't a toy in Norway? I didn't realize it was a toy anywhere. You really have no idea what you're talking about do you, you're just convinced anything American must be awful, you're a snob not a revolutionary
@Awesome Naked Taco, I'm glad that all your specific beliefs are common sense, maybe if you go yelling about how commonly sensible you are to the millions of people who would disagree with you about how uncommon and nonsensical they are maybe they will fall in line!
@Medic135, Low caliber hand guns...
@Medic135, Thank you for the personal insults and disregarding every single one of my factually based arguments. I'm not continuing this conversation, with all your assumptions of what I know and don't know.
@Awesome Naked Taco, there's no point in continuing, you have no facts you ask others for theirs, and then you disregard them because they don't fit what you consider to be a fair comparison. It was wrong of me to ever think I could speak to someone who's knowledge of all things is so advanced! Ignorance must be bliss
@Nellybert , definite cowboy boots*
@Medic135, Hold up - no one in the UK is going to prison for memes.
1) The EU law which could have applied copyright laws to memes was not passed.
2) The UK is leaving the EU, so we could soon be the last bastion of memes on the continent.
@Nellybert , best wishes friend!
@Medic135, To paraphrase our neighbours to the North “they can take our lives, but they canna take our memes!”
@K1l, saying something “is the dumbest idea ever” doesn’t really allow for reasonable debate does it? And I love how you haven’t even given 2 seconds deeper thought to after your initial gut reaction. That’s the difference between us. I want laws based on facts, reality and reason. You want laws hat make you “feel good”.
@big freedom, well, my comments were lengthy and very thought out. It wasn’t a “gut reaction”. And I would have responded to your comment sooner had I seen it in my notifications. Excuse me for not checking this app every 5 minutes. And I don’t want laws based on feelings. I’ve been down this debate several times and I’ve seen arguments from the other side, but none convince me it isn’t a bad idea.
1. Even if one kid finds out, the entire school will find out through them. The kids will know who’s armed within days, stuff gets around very fast in schools.
2. Shooters will go after the threats first. It’s terrorism 101 to kill the people who can stop you first.
3. I meant the other teachers may not know if another teacher was a shooter. In that type of situation anyone holding a gun will be seen as a threat. It will make it more confusing for security and the other teachers. Plus, in the moment other teachers may not recognize someone
@big freedom, or they may just see anyone firing a gun as a threat. Too many people with guns can make it confusing. Having like 3 or so trained Armed guards will be much more efficient, tactical and safer when neutralizing a threat than a bunch of civilians with guns.
5. I use the word potentially because I can’t see the future. You even used “potentially” when saying it could save lives, which it very well could, but it “potentially” could cause many other issues, so I find it to not be a good solution. Like I states in my original comment, armed guards patrolling premises will have less problems and they will be more effective at taking down and preventing shootings
@K1l, 1. Florida shooter had trained, armed security. They weren’t able to stop the shooter.
2. Any school that chooses to have armed teachers, I’m sure would go through many training drills with local, state and even national Law enforcement. So they could effectively react to an active shooter if they chose to engage.
3. The policy is changing rapidly from duck and cover, to engage the shooter at the earliest possible chance. Even a slight delay can disrupt the shooter. Equals difference between a couple dead and many more dead.
I think it’s an entirely reasonable option for those that would chose it and are able to demonstrate the ability.
@K1l, and what’s with the hostility about your reaction time? I never said anything about the time... why are you so defensive?
@big freedom, you said that I hadn’t “given 2 seconds deeper thought after your (my) guy reaction”. I thought that was an implication that I hadn’t responded since. If that wasn’t what you meant by that im sorry, that’s just what I took it as.
We could go back and forth for days because I got a busy schedule the next few days and I’ll only be able to respond so often, so I’ll just end it now. I have refutes for your points and im sure you’ll have refutes for my refutes and so on, but in the end we’re just gonna finish at some point without our minds changed and arguing about it on a meme app isn’t getting us anywhere. Though I disagree, im glad you care about the topic and want solve the issue.
@Awesome Naked Taco, emotional screeching =/= fact based arguments. You have not brought facts and reason, you bring “America is stupid and everyone thinks so” emotional nonsense. Like medic135 said, you are a snob. I would add that you are also very ignorant (not stupid, just ignorant). You come across as an entitled 13 year old screeching about how you know everything and your parents are just stupid. You have a lot of growing up to do.
My first suggestion would be for you to finish middle school, then graduate from high school. Join the military and serve your country or join the peace corps and volunteer somewhere outside of your protected bubble.
Come back and talk once you have even a semblance of wisdom, rather than the rheeeeeeeeeee you contribute now.
@big freedom, I said I'm done. You can't cover your insults with semi-constructive criticism
@Awesome Naked Taco, but then you continued your nonsense with medic135.
@big freedom, And to clarify, the military isn't a place to gain wisdom, it's a place where knuckleheads have a chance of contributing to society without having any abilities
@Awesome Naked Taco, your ignorance is showing again
@Awesome Naked Taco, says the sheltered, spoiled brat.
I get the joke, but it’s ironic that the picture is about UK/US differences in language and “felony” is a US only word to describe the seriousness of a crime.
@Pangbot, yeah in the UK a serious crime is just a suspended sentence
@Pangbot, thought the term felony came from English common law.
@Light Skinned Brotha, I'm British and I've never once in my life heard a single brit say felony. I always think it's an American word
Freedom of speech hate crime
Uh oh friend, looks like you've had a bit too much to think. Better watch out for the thought police.
But brexit will save the memes from oppression
Healty body - fat
Ha! It's funny because they're not a free country anymore
Boring conversation Comedy
Comedy Annoying shouting
Unless I’m mistaken, the U.K. dies t actually have free speech as we used to know it in the U.S. but rather, it’s just been tolerated fir the most part.
Your girlfriend. Your sister.
Is THAT why they’re fish and CHIPS!!?? Also, I’ll have a 6” underpass.