I see that now! I need to stop being so combative online, reddit has trained me to take every reply as a criticism and it's such a bad habit.
Either way if it's wrong I don't wanna be right!
Well yeah I agree we should all be as honest as possible, but there's nice way and a shitty way to say things. I'm just saying try to err on the side of the nice way as that's all you can do in terms of being inoffensive. We're basically saying the same thing tbh, which is don't worry too much about word choice, just do your best.
That's why I said to just try and pick the least offensive word and not worry. If someone gets offended then that's on them. People will ALWAYS be offended, so all you can really do is try your best and be confident you weren't trying to be offensive. No point in worrying about an issue that will never be resolved.
Disabled, handicapped, paralyzed, special needs, and some others I'm forgetting. I say just call people what you think is the least offensive. You can't avoid offending people sometimes and so long as you aren't being malicious it's just a word at the end of the day.
First of all: I am speaking of mass shootings, not terrorism, but whatever potayto-potahtoh.
Second: I'm claiming that gun laws seem to be very ineffective at deterring attacks. Whether there are guns or aren't, there doesn't seem to be much of a difference.
So, with that out of the way, you're still incorrect. If anything, terrorism is on the RISE within the U.S. Europe had a rough time pre-2000's, but since the new millenia they've been a surprisingly safe area of the world with very few, if any, terrorist attacks besides that spike in 2015 due to the Paris attacks.
So, again, ARGUING ABOUT GUN LAWS SOLVES NOTHING. THE PRESENCE OR ABSENCE OF GUNS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH MASS SHOOTINGS OR TERRORIST ATTACKS. THAT IS THE POINT I'M TRYING TO MAKE:
Western Europe:
https://www.datagraver.com/case/people-killed-by-terrorism-per-year-in-western-europe-1970-2015
USA:
https://www.start.umd.edu/pubs/START_AmericanTerrorismDeaths_FactSheet_Nov2017.pdf
/u/JasonCarswell is an enigma I think we can all find a place in our hearts for. Love you bro!
I like /u/Jesus tbh. He's been one of the ONLY conspiracy heads to actually try to listen to me when I speak with him. I don't agree with anything he says, but I respect him taking the time to listen.
It's kinda hard to take something out of context when the context is literally right there. I put the sentence in its entirety for you to read and everything.
I've literally said MULTIPLE TIMES that I don't agree that gun laws should be changed. How the fuck does that make me anti-2nd amendment?
Just because I don't support cramming 100's of guns inside of thousands of schools I'm suddenly an SJW who wants to take everyone's rights away? Get the fuck out of here with that; I am not advocating to make them illegal or to seize them.
It's so funny how I'm both an SJW (according to you) while also being a racist trump supporter (according to the liberal retards on reddit). So which is it guys? Am I an SJW soy-boy or am I misogynistic nazi? It's almost like you and others just use ad-hominem attacks to cover up the fact you aren't intelligent enough to actually argue the point I'm making.
Also, just so you know the "downvote" button is actually an upvote on this site. I know it's you trying to "downvote" me, but in reality you're just giving me more visibility by doing that, so thanks for the upvotes! Next time actually learn how the site works.
training is neither costly or time consuming, its about the family. if the family they come from is experienced and supports guns, that experience is passed to the next generation.
So we should only employ teachers that have generations of gun owners that have taught/trained them? You know that's completely unrealistic and asinine right?
If you look at the reality, there are FAR more teachers that don't use guns than do, I'd say probably millions. So you need to train MILLIONS of teachers, distribute (meaning PAY FOR) millions of guns, and then take the TIME to train those teachers... It will cost time and money.
being able to protect ourselves is not the bandiad, the constitutional violations they call gun laws are the real bandaids, lol.
I'm saying you SHOULDN'T HAVE TO PROTECT YOURSELF. Again, you aren't solving the issue of mass shootings at all. You aren't looking for a way to stop mass shootings, you are looking for protection for when they happen.
I'm claiming guns won't solve the issue as in my example there are plenty of countries with stricter gun laws yet less mass shootings which kinda contradicts that point. If guns deterred violence then you'd expect the places with the most guns would be the least violent, but there are countries that have much stricter guns laws that have either zero or very few mass shootings.
Yeah not like reddit in that way, but a popular hub for discussion (like reddit is).
my entire post is on how gun free zones are prime targets of mass shooting ops.
I feel we should stop the threat of massing shootings entirely, rather than mitigate the damage from it happening. You're suggesting a band-aid for an infection while I'm suggesting antibiotics, do you get it now?
you say teachers should try to protect the kids at school, but you dont want them to have the tool they can use to properly protect them?
Because I feel that housing 100+ guns within a school with thousands of kids knowing there is a gun within every 10 ft will just lead to more shootings rather than less. I don't trust kids or teachers to handle them properly without training which is both costly and time consuming. I think it's a completely nonsensical idea from a logistical standpoint and a I think it doesn't solve the ACTUAL problem.
You are extremely condescending, yet you have no clue of what you're talking about.
I'm all for the 2nd amendment, but I'm just using a real world example of the contrary being proven. I'm talking about other countries, not the US. Gun free zones don't really stop shootings, if someone wants to shoot people they can do it pretty easily with how many guns are out there on the street. I'm suggesting that gun laws are FINE as they are and that we should be concentrating on solving the actual problem. I'm saying arguing over it is a waste of time as the issue isn't about guns at all, so please reread my post because you've missed a lot of what I was saying. I support the gun industry, I just don't think they're the solution to this problem because they are a part of the problem. They aren't the problem.
Then you'd better keep armed police on site 24/7, because waiting for them to arrive costs lives.
I completely agree and I personally grew up with an armed officer at my school throughout every year. My main issue with arming teachers is that teaching is their job, not protection (though they should try to protect the kids if they can). I'd feel better with someone who's trained and professional being in charge of protecting our kids rather than Ms. Brown who's never held a damn gun in her life.
fuck them
I mean, it kinda directly contradicts the idea you're supposing, which is that more gun prevalence would bring about less gun violence... but yeah just ignore that part and carry on I guess.
I think moral authoritarians who want to micromanage the affairs of others are the biggest cause of violence in our time.
Yes, that is a very huge issue as well and I agree with you on this. I don't think denying teachers the right to bring a loaded firearm to school is being authoritarian, though.
You can't have that because the mainstream media insists on framing it as a Second Amendment issue. Gee, wonder why they'd do that?
Cause that's what gets people angry and tuned in. Who wants that boring old "No more dead children" stuff when we can keep that juicy news flowing! Just think about how much money you can make off of exploiting dead children, man! You don't wanna give all that up do you?
Watch that housing market. It's already taking a huge hit.
Making progress baby! Next stop the cover of Time. Great to see the site get a mention, even if it's a relatively small one. We have the potential to be just like reddit one day. Hopefully I'll be able to see that happen!
Except you can't use a fire extinguisher to start a fire. I agree that guns are necessary for protection in certain situations, but we shouldn't be loading up our teachers with guns; I think that's just a recipe for disaster.
There's also the fact that there are plenty of other countries with much less guns while also having much less mass shootings (or none at all) so I don't think the issue has much to do with guns. I think mass shootings are a very complex issue and I think guns are just a single piece that enables them to happen. If guns weren't here there'd be mass stabbings instead, or bombings, or some other horrible thing to fill that gap.
All in all, less guns probably won't solve the issue just like how more guns won't solve the issue. Actually understanding the root cause of the issue will solve it. Arguing over gun laws and distribution just stalls the progress being made.
Toilet thoughts are less epiphanies and more musings IMO. I think a shower thought is more of a "mind-blown" type of deal whereas a toilet thought would be some interesting idea you might have.
Example:
Archimedes discovering displacement of water after taking a bath would be a shower thought.
That famous Albert Einstein quote about how insanity is doing the same thing over and over expecting different results would be a toilet thought.
You can keep saying that, it doesn't mean it's any less bullshit to act as if magnora has any say in/control over what goes on on reddit which is a site he doesn't own (therefore he has no power within it). I figured you knew that, but I'm explaining it anyways because the more we speak the less confident I am in your ability to grasp basic concepts/answer basic questions correctly. What they do has nothing to do with us and vice versa.
I'm too stupid to know if you're bullshitting or not.
I already posted one link with plenty of examples.
Of reddit users, not saidit users lol. Again, it's very odd how you can't answer a very straightforward question correctly.
I think it's a safe way to ensure situations like this don't crop up again. That way idiots like /u/Troll can't pop in and whine about it with any legitimacy. When the evidence isn't shown you open yourself up to more suspicion than anything, you know?
I totally agree that proof should be provided for those that haven't seen it. I've seen the posts/memes magnora7 is referring to, so I don't really need it, but I do think it would be nice to have some in the future.
Does Magnora have any proof of the banned subreddits here doing that, too?
I, personally, don't need any as I've seen the memes/posts he's referring to on those subs, but I'm sure if you really wanted proof he would be able to find evidence. Since they're banned I can't go look. Nice job avoiding the question, btw. Here it is again: Do you have any proof that left leaning subs on saidit are making calls for violence yet still aren't banned?
Such a simple question that you've repeatedly failed to answer. So weird how your giant galaxy brain can't answer it.
You're a limp-wristed faggot leftist. I bet you're not even 18 year thinking you know it all, too. If you're over 18 then I'd be ashamed for your sake.
Considering you're literally named "Troll" I just find the irony of this comment so goddamn sweet. Thank you so much for this lmfao!
