• The upgrade to XenForo 2.3.7 has now been completed. Please report any issues to our administrators.

News reporter and photographer shot and killed on live broadcast this morning

One thing many people forget to take into account is the size of the United States. I always see someone from another country say things along the lines of - our country doesn't have near the amount of shooting as the US does - well.....they don't have near the amount of population either. The USA is approximately the size of Europe, with many countries the size of one of our states. This is no excuse for the number of shootings we have, but it should put things in another perspective.

This is true, but we can also compare ourselves with China, Russia, and Canada. I honestly don't know what kind of laws they have there with their gun control etc, but Canada seems fine for the most part.
 
How about we look at Australia. After they initiating stricter gun controls gun related crimes dropped to a record low. In fact, in every developed country it's the same story.

Or, let's look at Japan. In 2008 11 people were killed by firearms. 11 people. How many were killed by firearms in that same year in the US? 12,000.

11 people
vs
12,000

The stupidity of our countries handling of this situation is mindboggling.
 
Australia and Japan don't have an almost open border with an impoverished, crime ridden country.
 
Last edited:
How about we look at Australia. After they initiating stricter gun controls gun related crimes dropped to a record low. In fact, in every developed country it's the same story.

Or, let's look at Japan. In 2008 11 people were killed by firearms. 11 people. How many were killed by firearms in that same year in the US? 12,000.

11 people
vs
12,000

The stupidity of our countries handling of this situation is mindboggling.
You also have to look at their total population and demographics, which are nowhere near the US' in terms of numbers and diversity. Plus, their history with guns is so much different the US that I don't think they're entirely comparable.
 
Unfortunately, my country does.




:o
But how many illegal immigrants are you getting? I'd say the rate of poor, impoverished immigrants coming to Canada is whole lot less than the US. The US is acting as your buffer from being inundated with immigrants.
 
Last edited:
Again, I'm not disputing access to guns increases gun deaths - I vehemently agree with that. What I'm saying is there's a high likelihood that a combination of variables, namely: access to guns, income disparity and cultural diversity all correlate to and influence violence and murder in the USA. It's an overused example, but Switzerland has a massive number of guns around (not ammo, though, so it may be a separate thing to consider) but no gun deaths. Do they have income disparity? No, not really. Do they have cultural diversity? Almost none at all.

Interestingly, the UK doesn't have as entrenched a legacy of slavery, racism and exclusion...does it?

The point I'm making is, take cultural diversity, access to firearms, broadening income gaps, a history of unresolved racial schisms and throw them into a pot and what do you get?

Take away a couple of those variables and the picture becomes different. But the question is, which ones can and will the US government act on? None of them.

The no ammo thing is pretty huge.
 
But how many illegal immigrants are you getting? I'd say the ray of poor, impoverished immigrants coming to Canada is whole lot less than the US. The US is acting as your buffer from being inundated with immigrants.

Why are we blaming immigrants again? Most mass shootings in this country comes from a white dude. Are you talking about the problem in a bigger picture?
 
The no ammo thing is pretty huge.

Yeah, it is. An interim solution to the gun regulation need would be to limit ammunition sale and stringent requirements or permits to buy certain calibers or amounts. I don't understand the logic behind something like a dude being able to walk into any store and walk out with over 100 rounds of ammunition. Let gun ranges sell any amount for people to use on the premises, but why anyone needs more than 50 rounds of ammunition for personal defense at a time seems odd. What the **** is the average gun owner preparing to do, invade Poland?

The difficult part is anything other than absolute, 100% freedom on anything related to ordinance and ammunition will be seen by the gun crowd as some kind of Hitlerian fascist invasion of their personal liberties. The problem isn't the average gun owner, it's the vocal fanatics that think any kind of regulation is suddenly evil.

But w/e, let people keep getting murdered in cold blood I guess.
 
Interestingly, the UK doesn't have as entrenched a legacy of slavery, racism and exclusion...does it?

They've conquered entire societies, had slaves, a feudal system and an overall violent and bloody history.

That isn't to say I'm calling all the English a bunch of bastards, but their legacy is much more than tea, World Wars, and the Beatles.
 
The problem with gun control in the US is that those calling for it always end up using ban in some way and that makes the other side dig in more because they know over reach will happen if they give an inch.
Do you mean how gun advocates keep fighting to remove all restrictions on gun ownership? There's another word for you to look up: compromise.
 
They've conquered entire societies, had slaves, a feudal system and an overall violent and bloody history.

That isn't to say I'm calling all the English a bunch of bastards, but their legacy is much more than tea, World Wars, and the Beatles.

Yes, that's true, but they don't really have a massive population of a minority that they enslaved and treated like second class people for over a century. One can point at the Indian contingent, but their relationship with white England hasn't been nearly as fractured as black and white America's has. Also, England doesn't have systemically pervasive mechanisms to keep a certain contingent of their demographics from achieving economic and political mobility, the US does.

When it comes to historically recent excursions of rape and plunder the English are definitely the guiltiest bunch next to the US, as any country in the commonwealth can attest to, but suffice it to say their social abrasion hasn't been on the same level of America's by quite a stretch.
 
Last edited:
But how many illegal immigrants are you getting? I'd say the rate of poor, impoverished immigrants coming to Canada is whole lot less than the US. The US is acting as your buffer from being inundated with immigrants.

Much as we buffer Mexico from endless hordes of the deadly moose.
 
I guess "The Troubles" are far enough removed from recent history to be forgotten. But let's not quibble over ancient history that ended all the way back in the year of 1998.
 
Yes, that's true, but they don't really have a massive population of a minority that they enslaved and treated like second class people for over a century. One can point at the Indian contingent, but their relationship with white England hasn't been nearly as fractured as black and white America's has. Also, England doesn't have systemically pervasive mechanisms to keep a certain contingent of their demographics from achieving economic and political mobility, the US does.

When it comes to historically recent excursions of rape and plunder the English are definitely the guiltiest bunch next to the US, as any country in the commonwealth can attest to, but suffice it to say their social abrasion hasn't been on the same level of America's by quite a stretch.

So you're actually talking about the current situation rather than their overall historical legacy?

Then, yes, I would definitely agree with most of what you said. Though I'm a little unclear on what you said here:

Also, England doesn't have systemically pervasive mechanisms to keep a certain contingent of their demographics from achieving economic and political mobility, the US does.

Are you saying the US intentionally does things to keep the minority population down?
 
I'm sure he believes that and to an extent it is true, but it is also true that most countries do this whether they admit it or not.
 
In one of the videos it looks like he's just standing there for a minute or two before he goes to attack. You can kinda see the gun in the lower corner of the screen. Crazy how it didn't register. Video was surreal.
 
So you're actually talking about the current situation rather than their overall historical legacy?

Well, a little bit of both. I'm not sure the English ever treated their subjugated groups with as much disdain and abject inhumanity as the Americans did. I'm not sure of any Klan-like groups in England in terms of notoriety and infamy, though I may just be uninformed.

Then, yes, I would definitely agree with most of what you said. Though I'm a little unclear on what you said here:


Are you saying the US intentionally does things to keep the minority population down?

Yeah, that's exactly what I'm saying, unfortunately. I had to write a paper arguing for the legalization of marijuana not too long ago and there's a pretty illuminating study on how the law enforcement agenda pretty much sets up scores of primarily black American males to be incarcerated for possession "crimes" that don't result in similar penalties in non-impoverish neighbourhoods. I can find it for you if you'd like, I forget exactly in what folder I saved it in at the moment.

Economic and political aspiration is capped for certain demographics of the American population. Although it isn't exclusively racially motivated, there are also class and cultural undertones, the fact is that race and class can overlap quite frequently. Besides all that, there just isn't enough being done to equip various racial and class-related groups to help extricate themselves from difficult circumstances.

The USA has the money lying around in heaps, but initiatives related to education, entrepreneurship and financial literacy just aren't deemed important because quite frankly it isn't in a predatory capitalist society's interest to have everyone on the same level of lifestyle quality. But that's an infinite conversation that would lead nowhere on a forum like this.
 
I'm sure he believes that and to an extent it is true, but it is also true that most countries do this whether they admit it or not.

Few countries have the USA's history and seem to be as hellbent on maintaining the current scenario, despite many social symptoms pointing to the disparity, as the USA is.

But w/e, it ain't my country so I don't have to deal with all the crap you guys do. Whatever anyone believes is up to them, I'm pointing out a theory. All I know is, if I was part of a group that was stealthily subjugated and kept from progressing in terms of quality of life, if guns were easily accessible after a while I might be tempted to gun down some people I thought might be part of that system. It's an academic discussion to me.

It ain't my opinion that matters, ask some disabled, homosexual, black or Hispanic Americans how included and cared for they feel as people. If anyone in positions of power cares about them, I guess.
 
Australia and Japan don't have an almost open border with an impoverished, crime ridden country.

That's a good point. Didn't think about that.
 
On the subject of guns and the minority population - did you hear about the "Oath Keepers" in Ferguson, DP?

They apparently are (or were, IDK if they're still down there) advocating for the peaceful protestors to exercise their right to firearms. Your thoughts on that?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"