Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Dude wiki is a user editable source and thus unreliable.France's Strict Gun Laws Did NOTHING to Stop Jihadist Terrorist Attacks
In spite of the LIES spewed by Obama and the left more people in France were killed or injured just in 2015 in mass shootings than were killed or injured in the USA in the last 7 years combined. Of the 4 worst K-12 school shootings ever 3 were in Europe.
Could you please give some evidence to back your two claims there...
Beacuse by Wiki your second is complete horshit...
School shooting - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
List of school shootings in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The funny thing is that US needs its own wiki page for their list... RWers here will try and defend the indefensible...
RWers want to arm:
That is what everyone got this week... RWers by there actions or neglect want Terrorists to be armed.
- Mentally Ill
- Felons
- Terrorists
bama The facts shoot holes in Obama's claim that US is only host to mass killings | Fox News
neither did californias strict gun laws stop the attack
it was even an illegal transfer of firearms
neither did californias strict gun laws stop the attack
it was even an illegal transfer of firearms
So why have any laws against anything?
Dude wiki is a user editable source and thus unreliable.France's Strict Gun Laws Did NOTHING to Stop Jihadist Terrorist Attacks
In spite of the LIES spewed by Obama and the left more people in France were killed or injured just in 2015 in mass shootings than were killed or injured in the USA in the last 7 years combined. Of the 4 worst K-12 school shootings ever 3 were in Europe.
Could you please give some evidence to back your two claims there...
Beacuse by Wiki your second is complete horshit...
School shooting - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
List of school shootings in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The funny thing is that US needs its own wiki page for their list... RWers here will try and defend the indefensible...
RWers want to arm:
That is what everyone got this week... RWers by there actions or neglect want Terrorists to be armed.
- Mentally Ill
- Felons
- Terrorists
So you're saying that Obama isn't retarded?It is by my understanding. You lose.That is a lie....a complete lie....shooting tracker...the gun grabber site that made that lie...includes eveything as a mass shooting...check out their list.......in one case gang members were giving a party for one of their thugs going to jail....they got drunk, high and started shooting each other over a dice game....that is not a mass shooting as people know it...I have been posting about this lie all week.....
Yes, we know, you nuts jiggered the incident count around until you got the numbers you wanted.
Nope.....gang bangers at a party shooting each other is not a mass shooting by anyone's understanding of a mass shooting.....and that is most of that list at shooting tracker...
That is why we don't trust anti gunners.....they lie all the time and they lie without hesitation and they do it proudly.....
Yes, but you're retarded. We don't allow the retarded to define out terms in this society, the last time I checked.
So...
Unless gun laws can stop 100% of all shootings, we shouldn't have any gun laws
Maybe we should apply the same standard to all of our laws
Wow...that's a good oneSo...
Unless gun laws can stop 100% of all shootings, we shouldn't have any gun laws
Maybe we should apply the same standard to all of our laws
What is it with liberals framing the choice as being between the liberal view and some far out stupid fantasy nonsense scenario they fabricated? I'm still waiting to see one liberal make a rational honest argument about anything, I don't know maybe its a pipe dream.
Wow...that's a good oneSo...
Unless gun laws can stop 100% of all shootings, we shouldn't have any gun laws
Maybe we should apply the same standard to all of our laws
What is it with liberals framing the choice as being between the liberal view and some far out stupid fantasy nonsense scenario they fabricated? I'm still waiting to see one liberal make a rational honest argument about anything, I don't know maybe its a pipe dream.
The old Librals r Stoopid argument......works so well
neither did californias strict gun laws stop the attack
it was even an illegal transfer of firearms
So why have any laws against anything?
neither did californias strict gun laws stop the attack
it was even an illegal transfer of firearms
So why have any laws against anything?
Because it makes you far left drones feel like good to have laws passed that do nothing!
If France had 300 million guns like we do, would they have stopped the attacks?
doesn't seem to work for us
Got no real comeback? Figures.The US has had over 350 mass shootings THIS YEAR!!! France, two, maybe 3?
Proving once again that real gun laws work.
HUH????????????????????????????????
Earth. We're talking about Earth. Not your parallel universe.
Sheesh. Who ARE you people?
Yeah, I have "no real comeback" to your laughable definition of "mass shooting" and then your comparison of that to the San Bernardino jihadist terrorist attack that killed 14 people.
How many of those other "mass shootings" involved jihadists who were in contact with foreign jihadists? How many of those other "mass shootings" involved people who pledged allegiance to a worldwide radical Muslim movement that is avowedly trying to kill non-Muslims and moderate Muslims, that controls a huge area of land in the Middle East, that opposes girls going to school, that has been beheading people, and that is imposing Sharia law wherever it can?
The US has had over 350 mass shootings THIS YEAR!!! France, two, maybe 3?
Proving once again that real gun laws work.Got no real comeback? Figures.The US has had over 350 mass shootings THIS YEAR!!! France, two, maybe 3?
Proving once again that real gun laws work.
HUH????????????????????????????????
Earth. We're talking about Earth. Not your parallel universe.
Sheesh. Who ARE you people?
Leave it to a LWNJ to just make up facts and figures out of thin air with no links or evidence, then smugly declare victory.
Of course, Zander... you are correct.
"More than 40 percent of all 2015’s mass shootings didn’t kill anybody. Another 104, just under 30 percent, had a single fatality, which means more than two-thirds of all “mass shootings” aren’t even multi-homicide events.
Of the 355 “mass shootings” noted by the Post, only 40 of them (about 11 percent) meet the threshold of a “mass murder” as defined by the FBI, meaning there were at least four fatalities. But even these weren’t all mass shootings in the conventional sense. As pointed out by the Washington Free Beacon, many of them were insteadgrisly murder-suicides, gangland massacres, or robberies, eliminating at least 15 more “mass shootings” from the list."
355?! Why This Number Is Meaningless When It Comes To Mass Shootings
One of our resident liberals here is saying that to combat terrorism they would institute universal background checks, limit magazine capacities, and ban assault weapons. Well, folks, we just had two horrible jihadist terrorist attacks with automatic weapons in a country where the gun laws are much tougher than that: France.
All automatic weapons are illegal in France, with no exceptions. Ownership of semi-auto weapons is heavily restricted, requiring, among other things, a background check and a license. Handguns are virtually impossible to own. Ammo is heavily regulated, and gun owners are only allowed to possess a small number of bullets. To buy a gun, you must apply for a permit and must provide a valid reason for wanting to own a gun. In fact, France has no personal right to own firearms in its constitution. (And, FYI, France has for years been run by politicians who would be viewed as liberal or very liberal by American standards.)
What are the liberal "solutions" for preventing jihadist terrorism? Let's see:
* Severely restrict (if not end) our 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms, even though such an approach just failed miserably in France. The jihadists' weapons included AK-47 rifles, which can fire in both semi-automatic and automatic mode--in other words, with one flick of the selector switch, the AK-47 becomes a machine gun.
* Allow into the country 10,000 more people from the one and only demographic group that has provided all the recruits for jihadist terrorism (that would be Muslims), even though it's now painfully obvious that our supposedly "extensive and comprehensive" vetting system is badly flawed, and even though several intelligence officials have now said that we cannot properly screen the Syrian refugees.
* Refuse to take any responsibility for the disastrous, tragically misguided decision of Farook's neighbors who had suspicions about him and his wife but who decided not to report their suspicions to authorities for fear of engaging in "racial profiling" or "discrimination."
You would think that after San Bernardino, liberals would say, "Obviously, from now on, if you see Muslims, or people who you think are Muslims, doing things that strike you as suspicious or that just seem odd for your neighborhood or area, err on the side of caution and say something to authorities."
* Oppose efforts to seal the border or to substantially improve border security (just look at the debates and votes in Congress on border security issues, or visit liberal websites that discuss immigration policy), even though we have had a rash of cases of Muslims trying to enter the country with fake passports.
* Support sanctuary cities, where officials purposely refuse to cooperate with law enforcement officials who are trying to enforce our immigration laws.
* Refuse to even support laws that say that you will be deported if you're in the country illegally and you commit a violent crime. (No kidding. Democrats recently blocked Kate's Law in the Senate, which would have required the deportation of any illegal alien who committed a violent crime.)
* Refuse to even call Islamic terrorism Islamic terrorism and engage in ridiculous comparisons to nominally "Christian" lone-nut gunmen as a way to avoid admitting the self-evident fact that the more Muslims a country has, the greater its chances of being attacked. The simple fact of the matter is that there is no worldwide Christian terrorist movement that is trying to overthrow democratic governments, that is beheading people, that is using drug money to help fund its operations, that is imposing Sharia law, that is preventing girls from attending school, that blows up schools if girls don't stop attending them, that is engaging in the wide-scale trafficking of women, that denies the Holocaust, that vows to destroy Israel, and that has killed thousand of Americans.
Mon Dieu! A Review of French Gun Laws - The Truth About Guns
Paris attacks: How were Isis terrorists able to obtain Kalashnikov AK-47 assault rifles?
Guns in France — Firearms, gun law and gun control
Blog: American left demands strict gun control laws (like France!) in the wake of San Bernardino shootings
Did France's Strict Gun Control Contribute to the Paris Bloodbath?
Do strict gun laws have to stop every shooting or just most of them?
Seems France STILL has a murder rate that is one quarter of our own
Mass shooting: what the US has had over 350 of this year alone.The US has had over 350 mass shootings THIS YEAR!!! France, two, maybe 3?
Proving once again that real gun laws work.
That is a lie....a complete lie....shooting tracker...the gun grabber site that made that lie...includes eveything as a mass shooting...check out their list.......in one case gang members were giving a party for one of their thugs going to jail....they got drunk, high and started shooting each other over a dice game....that is not a mass shooting as people know it...I have been posting about this lie all week.....
Yes, we know, you nuts jiggered the incident count around until you got the numbers you wanted.
Nope.....gang bangers at a party shooting each other is not a mass shooting by anyone's understanding of a mass shooting.....and that is most of that list at shooting tracker...
That is why we don't trust anti gunners.....they lie all the time and they lie without hesitation and they do it proudly.....
Define a 'mass shooting' and then prove that it's the universally accepted, official definition.
The US has way more gun deaths than France, proving that proper gun laws DO work. Look it up, then go change your diaper.Pointing out the fact that you're a lying hosebag is "crying?" I think libs have a grab bag of stock answers and they just pick one at random, whether it has anything to do with the subject under discussion or not.You don't have to like it, but you could try to suck it up, crybaby.The US has had over 350 mass shootings THIS YEAR!!! France, two, maybe 3?
Proving once again that real gun laws work.
That figure is pure propaganda. I've already posted the evidence in other threads.
The Media’s Inflated ‘Mass Shootings’ Count Is Wildly Misleading , by Ian Tuttle, National Review
One of our resident liberals here is saying that to combat terrorism they would institute universal background checks, limit magazine capacities, and ban assault weapons. Well, folks, we just had two horrible jihadist terrorist attacks with automatic weapons in a country where the gun laws are much tougher than that: France.
All automatic weapons are illegal in France, with no exceptions. Ownership of semi-auto weapons is heavily restricted, requiring, among other things, a background check and a license. Handguns are virtually impossible to own. Ammo is heavily regulated, and gun owners are only allowed to possess a small number of bullets. To buy a gun, you must apply for a permit and must provide a valid reason for wanting to own a gun. In fact, France has no personal right to own firearms in its constitution. (And, FYI, France has for years been run by politicians who would be viewed as liberal or very liberal by American standards.)
What are the liberal "solutions" for preventing jihadist terrorism? Let's see:
* Severely restrict (if not end) our 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms, even though such an approach just failed miserably in France. The jihadists' weapons included AK-47 rifles, which can fire in both semi-automatic and automatic mode--in other words, with one flick of the selector switch, the AK-47 becomes a machine gun.
* Allow into the country 10,000 more people from the one and only demographic group that has provided all the recruits for jihadist terrorism (that would be Muslims), even though it's now painfully obvious that our supposedly "extensive and comprehensive" vetting system is badly flawed, and even though several intelligence officials have now said that we cannot properly screen the Syrian refugees.
* Refuse to take any responsibility for the disastrous, tragically misguided decision of Farook's neighbors who had suspicions about him and his wife but who decided not to report their suspicions to authorities for fear of engaging in "racial profiling" or "discrimination."
You would think that after San Bernardino, liberals would say, "Obviously, from now on, if you see Muslims, or people who you think are Muslims, doing things that strike you as suspicious or that just seem odd for your neighborhood or area, err on the side of caution and say something to authorities."
* Oppose efforts to seal the border or to substantially improve border security (just look at the debates and votes in Congress on border security issues, or visit liberal websites that discuss immigration policy), even though we have had a rash of cases of Muslims trying to enter the country with fake passports.
* Support sanctuary cities, where officials purposely refuse to cooperate with law enforcement officials who are trying to enforce our immigration laws.
* Refuse to even support laws that say that you will be deported if you're in the country illegally and you commit a violent crime. (No kidding. Democrats recently blocked Kate's Law in the Senate, which would have required the deportation of any illegal alien who committed a violent crime.)
* Refuse to even call Islamic terrorism Islamic terrorism and engage in ridiculous comparisons to nominally "Christian" lone-nut gunmen as a way to avoid admitting the self-evident fact that the more Muslims a country has, the greater its chances of being attacked. The simple fact of the matter is that there is no worldwide Christian terrorist movement that is trying to overthrow democratic governments, that is beheading people, that is using drug money to help fund its operations, that is imposing Sharia law, that is preventing girls from attending school, that blows up schools if girls don't stop attending them, that is engaging in the wide-scale trafficking of women, that denies the Holocaust, that vows to destroy Israel, and that has killed thousand of Americans.
Mon Dieu! A Review of French Gun Laws - The Truth About Guns
Paris attacks: How were Isis terrorists able to obtain Kalashnikov AK-47 assault rifles?
Guns in France — Firearms, gun law and gun control
Blog: American left demands strict gun control laws (like France!) in the wake of San Bernardino shootings
Did France's Strict Gun Control Contribute to the Paris Bloodbath?
When did anyone express the opinion that laws prevent crime?
Because laws cannot prevent crime, should a civilized nation repeal all law?
IMO, the premise of this OP and its author is based on a closed mind, framed by partisanship and an echo of RW propaganda.
When did anyone express the opinion that laws prevent crime?
