Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

10 people shot dead in Texas

Options
1…78101213

Comments

  • Options
    #272
    BattleCorp
    Registered Users Posts: 11,758 ✭✭✭✭BattleCorp


    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 :D

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


  • Options
    #273
    weisses
    Registered Users Posts: 9,437 ✭✭✭weisses


    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


  • Options
    #274
    weisses
    Registered Users Posts: 9,437 ✭✭✭weisses


    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


  • Options
    #275
    ThinkProgress
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,634 ✭✭✭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... :D


  • Options
    #276
    steddyeddy
    Registered Users Posts: 27,564 ✭✭✭✭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.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #277
    BattleCorp
    Registered Users Posts: 11,758 ✭✭✭✭BattleCorp


    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?


  • Options
    #278
    Theboinkmaster
    Registered Users Posts: 3,968 ✭✭✭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.....


  • Options
    #279
    BattleCorp
    Registered Users Posts: 11,758 ✭✭✭✭BattleCorp


    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.


  • Options
    #280
    wexie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,480 ✭✭✭wexie


    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.


  • Options
    #281
    TeaBagMania
    Registered Users Posts: 1,192 ✭✭✭TeaBagMania


    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


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #282
    TeaBagMania
    Registered Users Posts: 1,192 ✭✭✭TeaBagMania


    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


  • Options
    #283
    wexie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,480 ✭✭✭wexie


    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


  • Options
    #284
    weisses
    Registered Users Posts: 9,437 ✭✭✭weisses


    TeaBagMania wrote: »
    should probably call the Olympic committee and let them know

    https://www.olympic.org/shooting

    Aannnd you proved his point


  • Options
    #285
    TeaBagMania
    Registered Users Posts: 1,192 ✭✭✭TeaBagMania


    weisses wrote: »
    Aannnd you proved his point

    How are olypians "killing stuff"


  • Options
    #286
    wexie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,480 ✭✭✭wexie


    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?


  • Options
    #287
    TeaBagMania
    Registered Users Posts: 1,192 ✭✭✭TeaBagMania


    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


  • Options
    #288
    wexie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,480 ✭✭✭wexie


    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?


  • Options
    #289
    TeaBagMania
    Registered Users Posts: 1,192 ✭✭✭TeaBagMania


    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


  • Options
    #290
    wexie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,480 ✭✭✭wexie


    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...


  • Options
    #291
    TeaBagMania
    Registered Users Posts: 1,192 ✭✭✭TeaBagMania


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


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #292
    wexie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,480 ✭✭✭wexie


    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


  • Options
    #293
    weisses
    Registered Users Posts: 9,437 ✭✭✭weisses


    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


  • Options
    #294
    TeaBagMania
    Registered Users Posts: 1,192 ✭✭✭TeaBagMania


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


  • Options
    #295
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 17,381 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Just goes to show people will argue about anything.

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


  • Options
    #296
    BattleCorp
    Registered Users Posts: 11,758 ✭✭✭✭BattleCorp


    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.


  • Options
    #297
    TeaBagMania
    Registered Users Posts: 1,192 ✭✭✭TeaBagMania


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


  • Options
    #298
    weisses
    Registered Users Posts: 9,437 ✭✭✭weisses


    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


  • Options
    #299
    weisses
    Registered Users Posts: 9,437 ✭✭✭weisses


    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 ...


  • Options
    #300
    BattleCorp
    Registered Users Posts: 11,758 ✭✭✭✭BattleCorp


    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.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #301
    BattleCorp
    Registered Users Posts: 11,758 ✭✭✭✭BattleCorp


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

    And again, what difference does that make to the safe, legal use of firearms?


Advertisement