• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Debating mental illness and gun violence

Kangaroo Feathers

Kangaroo Feathers

Yea, it is written in the Book of Cyril...
sandy whitelinger said:
Massacre: noun 1. an indiscriminate and brutal slaughter of people.

Now, you can get hung up on the title or you can grasp that gun control didn't stop the slaughter of people.
Click to expand...
A. Not all "massacres" are equal. I suggest you look at the actual numbers of people.
B. Gun control certainly stopped "the slaughter" of people with guns.

Don't be disingenuous.
 
sandy whitelinger

sandy whitelinger

Veteran Member
Armoured said:
B. Gun control certainly stopped "the slaughter" of people with guns.

Don't be disingenuous.
Click to expand...
73 dead in the 20 years after Port Arthur,
81 before.
A difference of 8.
Spectacular results. Next ban fire, knives and automobiles. Then everyone can just die of cancer.
 
Last edited:
lewisnotmiller

lewisnotmiller

Grand Hat
Staff member
Premium Member
suncowiam said:
I found it too. It's just a very loose definition of massacre.

I would assume if the same definition applied to the US, then the difference between US and Australia would be even more astounding when normalized.
Click to expand...

Normally the definition is 5 dead, although I've seen 4 used once or twice.
 
lewisnotmiller

lewisnotmiller

Grand Hat
Staff member
Premium Member
sandy whitelinger said:
And your right, burning to death beats a gunshot to the head any day of the week.
Click to expand...

There is one of the most ridiculous, half-arsed, 'let-me-put-words-in-your-mouth' posts I've seen.
Congrats.

The differences are as follows;

1) All buildings here are subject to fire regulations and inspections. A lot. I'm not asking for a gun ban, merely pointing out we have regulation of guns.
2) When I point a gun at someone and pull the trigger, there is a direct connection between intent-action-consequence. That is not necessarily the case with arson, and is commonly not the case.
3) Deliberately lit fires have killed a lot of people here. It's a major issue. That page includes a single instance, because...well...it's a wiki page. There doesn't need to be any science behind what's included, does there? Like including a shooting where 2 people died, which you conveniently ignored from my post.
 
sandy whitelinger

sandy whitelinger

Veteran Member
lewisnotmiller said:
There is one of the most ridiculous, half-arsed, 'let-me-put-words-in-your-mouth' posts I've seen.
Congrats.

The differences are as follows;

1) All buildings here are subject to fire regulations and inspections. A lot. I'm not asking for a gun ban, merely pointing out we have regulation of guns.
2) When I point a gun at someone and pull the trigger, there is a direct connection between intent-action-consequence. That is not necessarily the case with arson, and is commonly not the case.
3) Deliberately lit fires have killed a lot of people here. It's a major issue. That page includes a single instance, because...well...it's a wiki page. There doesn't need to be any science behind what's included, does there? Like including a shooting where 2 people died, which you conveniently ignored from my post.
Click to expand...
Ask the dead people if they cared how they died.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top