10 people shot dead in Texas

weisses wrote: »

Its the use of Ritalin and not the easy access to guns that is responsible for all the school shootings

Would love to see the NRA taking on the big pharma lobby

It's not the NRA's job to take on big pharma. They are only there to look out for gun owners.

Manic Moran wrote: »

He's incorrect, it's the second-most common situation. The most common is suicide. The most common gun homicide is people with criminal records shooting other folks with criminal records. Politifact example. http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2012/mar/19/edward-flynn/85-percent-shooting-suspects-and-victims-milwaukee/

In Milwaukee ... roughly 0.1 of the US population

BattleCorp wrote: »

It's not the NRA's job to take on big pharma. They are only there to look out for gun owners.

Well if they keep spinning Ritalin is the culprit Big pharma will go after the NRA ....Believe me

Would love to see two morally corrupt entities battle this out

ThinkProgress

weisses wrote: »

Well if they keep spinning Ritalin is the culprit Big pharma will go after the NRA ....Believe me

Would love to see two morally corrupt entities battle this out

Like in a gunfight...?? or maybe big pharma would just spike their drinks instead...

steddyeddy

BattleCorp wrote: »

It's not the NRA's job to take on big pharma. They are only there to look out for gun owners.

And threaten the survivors of mass shootings.

steddyeddy wrote: »

And threaten the survivors of mass shootings.

Just because I own guns doesn't mean that I support the NRA. And forgive me because I'm not up on things, did the NRA threaten the survivors of mass shootings?

Theboinkmaster

A Pint of Goo wrote: »

If Americans need to ban guns, then perhaps Europeans should ban trucks and vans since so many Muslims have been misusing them in recent years?

Sole intention of guns is to kill. They serve no other purpose whatsoever.

Vending machines fall on people and kill them, so you'd ban them? You'd ban anything that can be used to kill.....

Theboinkmaster wrote: »

Sole intention of guns is to kill. They serve no other purpose whatsoever.

.....

The Gardaí would disagree with you. They licence guns here for target shooting.

BattleCorp wrote: »

The Gardaí would disagree with you. They licence guns here for target shooting.

....you could probably use a guillotine for chopping watermelons. Doesn't take away from the fact it's primary purpose is to kill stuff.

Or a hand grenade as a paper weight.

Suggesting that things that are designed for killing but can also be used for other legitimate purposes are the same as things that were designed for legitimate purposes but can also be used for killing is pretty far fetched really.

Hitman3000 wrote: »

Charge 10 dollars a bullet, sorted.

Indeed, I could sell my ammo stash and retire to Ireland never having to work another day in my life

wexie wrote: »

....you could probably use a guillotine for chopping watermelons. Doesn't take away from the fact it's primary purpose is to kill stuff.

should probably call the Olympic committee and let them know

https://www.olympic.org/shooting

TeaBagMania wrote: »

should probably call the Olympic committee and let them know

https://www.olympic.org/shooting

way to miss a point, well done you

TeaBagMania wrote: »

should probably call the Olympic committee and let them know

https://www.olympic.org/shooting

Aannnd you proved his point

weisses wrote: »

Aannnd you proved his point

How are olypians "killing stuff"

TeaBagMania wrote: »

How are olypians "killing stuff"

they are target shooting with a firearm.

The primary purpose for a firearm (ie. the purpose for which they were invented) is to kill stuff.

They weren't invented to start target shooting and people figured 'hey these would be dead handy for killing things'.

However many legitimate uses you think up for them will not take away the fact that that is the primary purpose for firearms in general.

Swords make great fireplace decorations, do you think that's what they were designed for?

wexie wrote: »

The primary purpose for a firearm (ie. the purpose for which they were invented) is to kill stuff.

that's an opinion not a fact

TeaBagMania wrote: »

that's an opinion not a fact

oh really?

Go on then, tell me what they were designed for?

Competing in the Olympics?

I have no idea because I wasn't in the head of the person that designed them and im not going to pretend like I know

TeaBagMania wrote: »

I have no idea because I wasn't in the head of the person that designed them and im not going to pretend like I know

but you're happy enough to claim that the primary purpose of firearms definitely isn't killing things....

right so...

not claiming anything, just pointing out that the primary purpose is open for discussion and not set in stone one way or another

TeaBagMania wrote: »

not claiming anything, just pointing out that the primary purpose is open for discussion and not set in stone one way or another

yeah okay

maybe open a history book or so.

really, any history book will do

TeaBagMania wrote: »

that's an opinion not a fact

Maybe have a look into belows link

https://www.quora.com/Why-were-guns-made

After that you can debate having a firearm is good for competing in the olympics

Guns where developed for killing stuff .... fact

still looks like opinions and a liberal got his high school paper picked up by a mickey mouse website

[Deleted User]

Just goes to show people will argue about anything.

"Guns were made to kill people." is an opinion. What.

Deleted User wrote: »

Just goes to show people will argue about anything.

"Guns were made to kill people." is an opinion. What.

Even if guns were first designed to kill people/animals, what difference does that make? Honestly, this is a genuine question.

That doesn't mean that they don't have other uses or that they can't be used safely.

Agreed, you cant just come in here and say "guns kill people" and not expect someone to argue the point

BattleCorp wrote: »

Even if guns were first designed to kill people/animals, what difference does that make? Honestly, this is a genuine question.

That doesn't mean that they don't have other uses or that they can't be used safely.

You can leave out the word even" ... If you want to be taken seriously ofcourse

TeaBagMania wrote: »

Agreed, you cant just come in here and say "guns kill people" and not expect someone to argue the point

You can argue all you want but the fact remains guns were designed to kill ...

weisses wrote: »

You can leave out the word even" ... If you want to be taken seriously ofcourse

Ok. Leave out the words 'even if' and then answer my question.