User Tag List

Page 11 of 11 FirstFirst ... 891011
Results 151 to 158 of 158

Thread: New Zealand gunmen kill 49 people at two mosques

  1. #151
    Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle Stripe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Taipei, Taiwan
    Posts
    18,156
    Thanks
    401
    Thanked 11,771 Times in 8,422 Posts

    Blog Entries
    2
    Mentioned
    35 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147838
    Quote Originally Posted by Town Heretic View Post
    We actually did ban certain cars here, when they proved inherently unsafe in design.
    So you think something "inherently unsafe in design" is not necessarily "badly designed"?

    It looks like you'll just say anything to make sure you're always arguing.
    Where is the evidence for a global flood?
    E≈mc2
    When the world is a monster
    Bad to swallow you whole
    Kick the clay that holds the teeth in
    Throw your trolls out the door

    "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
    -Bob B.

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to Stripe For Your Post:

    JudgeRightly (Yesterday)

  3. #152
    Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle Stripe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Taipei, Taiwan
    Posts
    18,156
    Thanks
    401
    Thanked 11,771 Times in 8,422 Posts

    Blog Entries
    2
    Mentioned
    35 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147838
    Quote Originally Posted by Town Heretic View Post
    How many preventable killings does a nation need before acting in a way that appears to largely prevent them is reasonable?
    None.

    We could have authorized armed guards at any time.

    If no one died of cancer we probably wouldn't be looking for a cure.
    There's nothing fair about that effort, unless you see the word reactionary as neutral or good.


    Rather, the demonstrably better course to follow if you want fewer mass shootings and lower levels of homicidal violence is to do what New Zealand is about to do, because it has worked across a great many nations that are safer for the measures.
    Did you miss the facts? There have been five such incidents in the past 30 years. Two of those involved weapons that are not being banned.

    You'll almost have to go into negative numbers to reduce the number of incidents.

    Having armed police in place more visibly while those better measures are being put in place wouldn't be a bad idea at all.
    Banning weapons will do nothing to help. It will advance the public sentiment that the state will protect people.

    As we've seen, it won't.
    Where is the evidence for a global flood?
    E≈mc2
    When the world is a monster
    Bad to swallow you whole
    Kick the clay that holds the teeth in
    Throw your trolls out the door

    "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
    -Bob B.

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to Stripe For Your Post:

    JudgeRightly (Yesterday)

  5. #153
    Out of Order Town Heretic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Within a whisper of rivers...
    Posts
    20,528
    Thanks
    3,671
    Thanked 7,977 Times in 4,642 Posts

    Blog Entries
    15
    Mentioned
    46 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147830
    Quote Originally Posted by Stripe View Post
    None.

    We could have authorized armed guards at any time.
    In transition, and if by armed guards you mean police, sure.


    Did you miss the facts? There have been five such incidents in the past 30 years.
    And if they change the laws they might not have any for the next 30. There'd been 13 in Australia over nearly twenty years and none in the more than 20 years since they changed the laws.

    You gotta love progress.

    Banning weapons will do nothing to help.
    All evidence to the contrary.

    It will advance the public sentiment that the state will protect people.
    It will advance the fact that intelligent law applied to gun safety can actually promote safety and the public good.
    You aren't what you eat, but you're always what you swallow.

    Pro-Life







  6. #154
    Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle Stripe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Taipei, Taiwan
    Posts
    18,156
    Thanks
    401
    Thanked 11,771 Times in 8,422 Posts

    Blog Entries
    2
    Mentioned
    35 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147838
    Quote Originally Posted by Town Heretic View Post
    In transition, and if by armed guards you mean police, sure.
    Nope. We have police. They arrived after all the damage had been done.

    I think we'll stick with what I say, not with what you wish I would say.

    And if they change the laws they might not have any for the next 30. There'd been 13 in Australia over nearly twenty years and none in the more than 20 years since they changed the laws.
    You're conflating issues to pretend the statistics match your agenda. Shooting incidents in New Zealand and Australia have typically been committed using shotguns. Of the 13 you speak of in Australia, most would not have been stopped under the bans you propose.

    And if you want to keep those 13, there are plenty of similar incidents post-Port Arthur that you've ignored.

    All evidence to the contrary.
    Only evidence you make up or refuse to present.
    Where is the evidence for a global flood?
    E≈mc2
    When the world is a monster
    Bad to swallow you whole
    Kick the clay that holds the teeth in
    Throw your trolls out the door

    "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
    -Bob B.

  7. The Following User Says Thank You to Stripe For Your Post:

    JudgeRightly (Yesterday)

  8. #155
    Out of Order Town Heretic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Within a whisper of rivers...
    Posts
    20,528
    Thanks
    3,671
    Thanked 7,977 Times in 4,642 Posts

    Blog Entries
    15
    Mentioned
    46 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147830
    Quote Originally Posted by Stripe View Post
    Nope. We have police. They arrived after all the damage had been done.
    You said we could have authorized guards to protect people. I said I'm okay with that in transition if those guards are police. In that case we'd at least have people with training and background, who could be further trained by people with even greater experience within other police departments and/or the military. As stop gaps go it's not a bad idea.

    As a substitute for the laws I'm in favor of, no.

    You're conflating issues to pretend the statistics match your agenda.
    My agenda is a safer world. That's it. I own guns and support the right we have here, in my country, to own them. I don't support the unfettered exercise of that right. And while I'm glad to see you working a new word into your functional vocabulary, you've mishandled it there. Conflating isn't applicable or demonstrated in what follows by you.

    Shooting incidents in New Zealand and Australia have typically been committed using shotguns.
    I don't know if that's true, but it seems likely given the common ownership of that weapon and that the assault rifle hasn't been as aggressively and cheaply marketed until relatively recent times.

    Of the 13 you speak of in Australia, most would not have been stopped under the bans you propose.
    Entirely possible. So, the Port Arthur attack was launched using a Colt AR15 and 35 people were murdered. Before that? The highest body count in those 13 was the Queen Street massacre, where 8 people were killed. It the average was closer to 5. Or, you could fit over half of those 13 into the once incident in terms of fatalities.

    It only took one of those for people to realize that certain weapons, now numerous and cheaply purchased, were a greater danger to the general public.

    Only evidence you make up or refuse to present.
    The first part is, ironically, made up. The latter part is simply peculiar.
    You aren't what you eat, but you're always what you swallow.

    Pro-Life







  9. #156
    Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle Stripe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Taipei, Taiwan
    Posts
    18,156
    Thanks
    401
    Thanked 11,771 Times in 8,422 Posts

    Blog Entries
    2
    Mentioned
    35 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147838
    Quote Originally Posted by Town Heretic View Post
    As stop gaps go it's not a bad idea.


    My agenda is a safer world.
    Those who sacrifice liberty for safety will end up with neither.

    You can't move in New Zealand without breaking a law. All we've done is made lawlessness more necessary and inviting.

    Conflating isn't applicable or demonstrated in what follows by you.
    So which is it? Are the 13 incidents before Port Arthur part of your evidence or not?

    If they aren't, retract your assertion. If they are, list the incidents after 1996 that are similar in nature to the ones prior.

    It only took one of those.
    Nope.
    Where is the evidence for a global flood?
    E≈mc2
    When the world is a monster
    Bad to swallow you whole
    Kick the clay that holds the teeth in
    Throw your trolls out the door

    "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
    -Bob B.

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to Stripe For Your Post:

    JudgeRightly (Yesterday)

  11. #157
    Out of Order Town Heretic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Within a whisper of rivers...
    Posts
    20,528
    Thanks
    3,671
    Thanked 7,977 Times in 4,642 Posts

    Blog Entries
    15
    Mentioned
    46 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147830
    Quote Originally Posted by Stripe View Post
    But that's just awful as stop gaps go for reason.

    Those who sacrifice liberty for safety will end up with neither.
    Those who sacrifice safety without good reason frequently confuse misunderstood quotes for arguments.

    You can't move in New Zealand without breaking a law.
    Must really make tourism problematic.

    And driving, of course.

    All we've done is made lawlessness more necessary and inviting.
    It isn't necessary to have a semi or fully automatic weapon to protect yourself. And if anyone finds criminal behavior inviting, let alone more inviting, they have other issues to deal with that I'm not professionally trained in helping them with, but there are any number of people in the mental health field and/or law enforcement that can assist them.

    So which is it? Are the 13 incidents before Port Arthur part of your evidence or not?
    See, you didn't actually make the case that noting 13 mass murders prior to changing the law and zero since is anything other than a pertinent illustration of efficacy relating to tightening gun laws. The other and prior variety were had in multiples.

    Nope.
    One was sufficient, literally, to get public opinion and legislators moving.
    You aren't what you eat, but you're always what you swallow.

    Pro-Life







  12. #158
    Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle Stripe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Taipei, Taiwan
    Posts
    18,156
    Thanks
    401
    Thanked 11,771 Times in 8,422 Posts

    Blog Entries
    2
    Mentioned
    35 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147838
    Quote Originally Posted by Town Heretic View Post
    It isn't necessary to have a semi or fully automatic weapon to protect yourself.
    Do you have a point hiding somewhere in there?

    It isn't necessary to have a Subaru WRX Sti.

    And if anyone finds criminal behavior inviting, let alone more inviting, they have other issues to deal with that I'm not professionally trained in helping them with, but there are any number of people in the mental health field and/or law enforcement that can assist them.
    Had just one man ignored the regulations, dozens might have been saved.

    But thanks for turning a serious point into silliness.

    See, you didn't actually make the case that noting 13 mass murders prior to changing the law and zero since is anything other than a pertinent illustration of efficacy relating to tightening gun laws. The other and prior variety were had in multiples.




    Are you holding onto your assertion and ignoring the post-Port Arthur incidents?

    One was sufficient, literally, to get public opinion and legislators moving.
    1. There wasn't just one.
    2. They never let a tragedy go to waste.

    The law change will achieve nothing.
    Last edited by Stripe; Today at 09:20 AM.
    Where is the evidence for a global flood?
    E≈mc2
    When the world is a monster
    Bad to swallow you whole
    Kick the clay that holds the teeth in
    Throw your trolls out the door

    "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
    -Bob B.

  13. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Stripe For Your Post:

    JudgeRightly (Yesterday),ok doser (Today)

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About us
Since 1997 TheologyOnline (TOL) has been one of the most popular theology forums on the internet. On TOL we encourage spirited conversation about religion, politics, and just about everything else.

follow us