Mass shooting in France at magazine that published Mohammed cartoons

[Iceweasel]

The shootings in Paris do not prove that gun control does not work. Nor does it prove that more guns would prevent all shootings.

No one said it would prevent all shootings. Now you're making shit up.

 

[2aguy]

The point made was that the shootings in Paris prove that gun control doesn't work and leaves citizens vulnerable.
It proves nothing of the sort.

How do you figure? It didn't stop the shootings and no one had a chance to defend themselves. Empty rhetoric proves nothing.

It's easy to figure.
The shootings in Paris do not prove that gun control does not work.
Nor does it prove that more guns would prevent all shootings.

No one has said all shootings....except for you......

 

[idb]

[

So, it suits your purposes to suggest that a shooting incident in a state with gun control proves that gun control doesn't work however, shootings in a state with liberal ownership laws does not mean that lax gun ownership laws makes that state a more dangerous place.
Got it.

The crooks are going to do their bad things no matter what the gun laws are. No gun control law will ever be effective in disarming the bad guys. We saw that today in Paris, didn't we?

The question is do you also disarm the good guys, because at the end of the day they are the only ones that will obey the gun control laws.

Once you disarm the people that would never use a firearm for a crime then you have created potential victims and have taken away the ability of a citizen to defend themselves.

There can be high crime in an area that has lax gun control laws but that is not the norm. For instance, North Dakota with lax gun control laws has about the same population as DC with stringent gun control laws but the violent crime rate in ND is substantially less.

Gun crimes in Florida went down when the state went to a "shall issue" carry permit. Now Florida has about two million concealed weapon permit holders and has fewer gun crimes per capita than it did before the law was passed.

When you take guns away from the law abiding citizens then all you have are potential victims.

Whether a citizen choses to carry a firearm when they can is their own business. If they can and don't and become a victim then that their own fault. However, if the state prevents them from protecting themselves then the state is at fault.

The point made was that the shootings in Paris prove that gun control doesn't work and leaves citizens vulnerable.
It proves nothing of the sort.

Hmmmm...it sure left those 12 people vulnerable...as well as all the other people attacked by violent criminals on a daily basis in France....

How so?
Does everyone in the US carry a gun?
Does carrying a gun make you invulnerable to being shot?

 

[idb]

The shootings in Paris do not prove that gun control does not work. Nor does it prove that more guns would prevent all shootings.

No one said it would prevent all shootings. Now you're making shit up.

Try following the discussion.

 

[idb]

The point made was that the shootings in Paris prove that gun control doesn't work and leaves citizens vulnerable.
It proves nothing of the sort.

How do you figure? It didn't stop the shootings and no one had a chance to defend themselves. Empty rhetoric proves nothing.

It's easy to figure.
The shootings in Paris do not prove that gun control does not work.
Nor does it prove that more guns would prevent all shootings.

No one has said all shootings....except for you......

No...YOU said it.
Your point was that the Paris shootings prove that gun control doesn't work.
You are wrong...it proves nothing of the sort.

 

[2aguy]

[

So, it suits your purposes to suggest that a shooting incident in a state with gun control proves that gun control doesn't work however, shootings in a state with liberal ownership laws does not mean that lax gun ownership laws makes that state a more dangerous place.
Got it.

The crooks are going to do their bad things no matter what the gun laws are. No gun control law will ever be effective in disarming the bad guys. We saw that today in Paris, didn't we?

The question is do you also disarm the good guys, because at the end of the day they are the only ones that will obey the gun control laws.

Once you disarm the people that would never use a firearm for a crime then you have created potential victims and have taken away the ability of a citizen to defend themselves.

There can be high crime in an area that has lax gun control laws but that is not the norm. For instance, North Dakota with lax gun control laws has about the same population as DC with stringent gun control laws but the violent crime rate in ND is substantially less.

Gun crimes in Florida went down when the state went to a "shall issue" carry permit. Now Florida has about two million concealed weapon permit holders and has fewer gun crimes per capita than it did before the law was passed.

When you take guns away from the law abiding citizens then all you have are potential victims.

Whether a citizen choses to carry a firearm when they can is their own business. If they can and don't and become a victim then that their own fault. However, if the state prevents them from protecting themselves then the state is at fault.

The point made was that the shootings in Paris prove that gun control doesn't work and leaves citizens vulnerable.
It proves nothing of the sort.

Hmmmm...it sure left those 12 people vulnerable...as well as all the other people attacked by violent criminals on a daily basis in France....

How so?
Does everyone in the US carry a gun?
Does carrying a gun make you invulnerable to being shot?

No, but carrying a gun in the face of a violent criminal attack reduces your risk of physical injury....and stops the completion of the attack.....and in states that passed concealed or open carry, the crime rates went down, not up....

 

[Alex.]

And there are also countries with strict gun control.......that have far higher gun murder rates than the United States....

How do you explain that.....?

I'm not going to try...your point seems to be that gun control makes a place more dangerous.

Gun control is not the issue terrorist control is.

I agree......but why don't anti gunners see that?

. They will if they become targets of terrorism.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Re: Obama lets the military carry out missions because he has no political power to stop them

theH 10494072

Obama lets the military and other agencies carry out their missions because he doesn't have the political power to stop them

Was Obama "letting" the military "carry out missions" in the way the military wanted to "carry out missions" back in 2010.

theH 479826

No, the Hussein(ours), didn't lie to start a war, he lied to get into office is all. He used the phoney outrage of the war to get himself elected, but once he got there he hasn't pulled out like he promised. All he has managed to do is help get more Americans killed by enforcing his Islamic-friendly rules of engagement. Which is why more American troops have died in Afghanistan under a year and a half of Obama than died under 8 years of Bush.

CNSNews.com - A Majority of U.S. Combat Casualties in Nine-Year-Long Afghanistan War Have Occurred in Less Than Year-and-a-Half of Obama Presidency

You do know that Bush was losing the war in Afghanistan in 2008 until Obama came in and "let" the military carry out missions because he has had no political power to stop them. Don't you, Mr Hawk?

Why did you blame Obama for the rules of engagement in Afghanistan back in 2010 if Obama had no political power to stop them?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

And there are also countries with strict gun control.......that have far higher gun murder rates than the United States....

How do you explain that.....?

I'm not going to try...your point seems to be that gun control makes a place more dangerous.

Gun control is not the issue terrorist control is.

what do terrorists actually control except the fear instilled in far too many American right wingers?

death and destruction of innocents and their way of life.

way of life? The only people who have had their way of life changed by Islam's extremists is other Muslims. In Awe tend to throw money at security issues as we overreact. We get inconvenienced at Airports because leaders cowtowed to the mob who demand visible presence to keep us safe. Life isn't fair or safe. grow up and grow some spine

 

[2aguy]

The point made was that the shootings in Paris prove that gun control doesn't work and leaves citizens vulnerable.
It proves nothing of the sort.

How do you figure? It didn't stop the shootings and no one had a chance to defend themselves. Empty rhetoric proves nothing.

It's easy to figure.
The shootings in Paris do not prove that gun control does not work.
Nor does it prove that more guns would prevent all shootings.

No one has said all shootings....except for you......

No...YOU said it.
Your point was that the Paris shootings prove that gun control doesn't work.
You are wrong...it proves nothing of the sort.

Hmmmm...considering that 3 men on the French watch list were able to acquire military grade Russian rifles and a rocket propelled grenade....how does that not show that gun control doesn't work? These guys wanted the guns...and got the guns....just like pro 2nd Amendment people have said.....but.....had the law abiding French citizens wanted a gun for self defense....with no intent of killing innocent people.....they would not have been allowed to....

Right?

 

[2aguy]

Re: Obama lets the military carry out missions because he has no political power to stop them

theH 10494072

Obama lets the military and other agencies carry out their missions because he doesn't have the political power to stop them

Was Obama "letting" the military "carry out missions" in the way the military wanted to "carry out missions" back in 2010.

theH 479826

No, the Hussein(ours), didn't lie to start a war, he lied to get into office is all. He used the phoney outrage of the war to get himself elected, but once he got there he hasn't pulled out like he promised. All he has managed to do is help get more Americans killed by enforcing his Islamic-friendly rules of engagement. Which is why more American troops have died in Afghanistan under a year and a half of Obama than died under 8 years of Bush.

CNSNews.com - A Majority of U.S. Combat Casualties in Nine-Year-Long Afghanistan War Have Occurred in Less Than Year-and-a-Half of Obama Presidency

You do know that Bush was losing the war in Afghanistan in 2008 until Obama came in and "let" the military carry out missions because he has had no political power to stop them. Don't you, Mr Hawk?

Why did you blame Obama for the rules of engagement in Afghanistan back in 2010 if Obama had no political power to stop them?

Right? keep believing that. Iraq and Afghanistan were stable and Iraq was slowly coming together.....and how exactly does the President obama not have control of the military.....?

 

[skye]

Paris Attack Suspect Dead, Two in Custody, U.S. Officials Say



Paris Attack Suspect Dead Two in Custody U.S. Officials Say - NBC News

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Paris Attack Suspect Dead, Two in Custody, U.S. Officials Say



Paris Attack Suspect Dead Two in Custody U.S. Officials Say - NBC News

OH NO! Breaking News?

 

[ogibillm]

Presumably your point is that no one gets murdered in states will liberal gun ownership laws.

No.....my point is that France has strict gun control laws....right? They always throw Europe at us as gun control paradise....right? That tell us we don't know what we are talking about when we tell them, if you make guns illegal, the criminals will still get them when they want or need them.......and only law abiding citizens won't have guns......and then the law abiding citizens won't be able to defend themselves against criminals who get guns, knives, clubs, or attack in groups......because a gun would make it possible for the weak, the old, the injured, the out numbered, and the handicapped to actually defend themselves against those very criminals....

And here we have strictly gun controlled France..........and 3 guys on the watch list by the French authorities....not only got illegal guns....they got, apparently, illegal military grade Russian Rifles and a rocket propelled grenade.......in strictly gun controlled France....

And the law abiding French citizens....who complied with the theories of the anti gunners to a "T".......were slaughtered in under 5 minutes.........in a country with strict gun control laws.....that those 12 people were promised would make them safer.......and they willingly gave up their right to self defense.....probably happily since it was a left wing magazine....a hard core left wing magazine.....

Right?

So, it suits your purposes to suggest that a shooting incident in a state with gun control proves that gun control doesn't work however, shootings in a state with liberal ownership laws does not mean that lax gun ownership laws makes that state a more dangerous place.
Got it.

Correct....as shown by the United States...and our gun murder rates going down, not up after more Americans are owning and carrying guns....and shown in Puerto Rico...with strict gun control....and one of the highest gun murder rates in the world.....and the fact that in Canada, Australia, and now France.....three countries praised by anti gunners.....violent criminals still acquired guns and murdered people....that they do it less frequently has more to do with their people not wanting to do it, not their ability to do it.....

You're still arguing that shootings in countries with gun control laws proves that gun control laws don't work.
What do shootings in places with loose gun control laws prove?

On the other hand you dismiss the fact of there being less shootings in Canada, Australia and France as simply a cultural phenomenon.
Could it possibly be because of the gun control laws?

No....it isn't because of gun control laws....in recent weeks we have seen that when an evil person wants a gun in those countries, they can and do get them......and they have been immigrants, with looser ties to each of those countries cultures....in the case of Canada and Australia....Also...in other countries with strict gun control laws, there is horrendous gun violence....Mexico, Russia, Puerto Rico.....

Gun laws only affect law abiding citizens.....in states with strict laws and states with lax laws...the difference, in states that law abiding citizens can carry and own guns, the gun crime rate goes down....not up.....and in cities with strict gun control.....gun crime is greater......

In fact...our gun crime rate has gone down faster than Australia's and we have bought more guns, not less.....

Has nobody ever explained the danger of confusing correlation with causation?

 

[skye]

Paris Attack Suspect Dead, Two in Custody, U.S. Officials Say



Paris Attack Suspect Dead Two in Custody U.S. Officials Say - NBC News

OH NO! Braking News?

I guess so yes!

 

[idb]

The point made was that the shootings in Paris prove that gun control doesn't work and leaves citizens vulnerable.
It proves nothing of the sort.

How do you figure? It didn't stop the shootings and no one had a chance to defend themselves. Empty rhetoric proves nothing.

It's easy to figure.
The shootings in Paris do not prove that gun control does not work.
Nor does it prove that more guns would prevent all shootings.

No one has said all shootings....except for you......

No...YOU said it.
Your point was that the Paris shootings prove that gun control doesn't work.
You are wrong...it proves nothing of the sort.

Hmmmm...considering that 3 men on the French watch list were able to acquire military grade Russian rifles and a rocket propelled grenade....how does that not show that gun control doesn't work? These guys wanted the guns...and got the guns....just like pro 2nd Amendment people have said.....but.....had the law abiding French citizens wanted a gun for self defense....with no intent of killing innocent people.....they would not have been allowed to....

Right?

And to continue your point...those poor people wouldn't be dead now.
Am I right?

 

[idb]

No.....my point is that France has strict gun control laws....right? They always throw Europe at us as gun control paradise....right? That tell us we don't know what we are talking about when we tell them, if you make guns illegal, the criminals will still get them when they want or need them.......and only law abiding citizens won't have guns......and then the law abiding citizens won't be able to defend themselves against criminals who get guns, knives, clubs, or attack in groups......because a gun would make it possible for the weak, the old, the injured, the out numbered, and the handicapped to actually defend themselves against those very criminals....

And here we have strictly gun controlled France..........and 3 guys on the watch list by the French authorities....not only got illegal guns....they got, apparently, illegal military grade Russian Rifles and a rocket propelled grenade.......in strictly gun controlled France....

And the law abiding French citizens....who complied with the theories of the anti gunners to a "T".......were slaughtered in under 5 minutes.........in a country with strict gun control laws.....that those 12 people were promised would make them safer.......and they willingly gave up their right to self defense.....probably happily since it was a left wing magazine....a hard core left wing magazine.....

Right?

So, it suits your purposes to suggest that a shooting incident in a state with gun control proves that gun control doesn't work however, shootings in a state with liberal ownership laws does not mean that lax gun ownership laws makes that state a more dangerous place.
Got it.

Correct....as shown by the United States...and our gun murder rates going down, not up after more Americans are owning and carrying guns....and shown in Puerto Rico...with strict gun control....and one of the highest gun murder rates in the world.....and the fact that in Canada, Australia, and now France.....three countries praised by anti gunners.....violent criminals still acquired guns and murdered people....that they do it less frequently has more to do with their people not wanting to do it, not their ability to do it.....

You're still arguing that shootings in countries with gun control laws proves that gun control laws don't work.
What do shootings in places with loose gun control laws prove?

On the other hand you dismiss the fact of there being less shootings in Canada, Australia and France as simply a cultural phenomenon.
Could it possibly be because of the gun control laws?

No....it isn't because of gun control laws....in recent weeks we have seen that when an evil person wants a gun in those countries, they can and do get them......and they have been immigrants, with looser ties to each of those countries cultures....in the case of Canada and Australia....Also...in other countries with strict gun control laws, there is horrendous gun violence....Mexico, Russia, Puerto Rico.....

Gun laws only affect law abiding citizens.....in states with strict laws and states with lax laws...the difference, in states that law abiding citizens can carry and own guns, the gun crime rate goes down....not up.....and in cities with strict gun control.....gun crime is greater......

In fact...our gun crime rate has gone down faster than Australia's and we have bought more guns, not less.....

Has nobody ever explained the danger of confusing correlation with causation?

I don't think he understands that at all.

 

[2aguy]

No.....my point is that France has strict gun control laws....right? They always throw Europe at us as gun control paradise....right? That tell us we don't know what we are talking about when we tell them, if you make guns illegal, the criminals will still get them when they want or need them.......and only law abiding citizens won't have guns......and then the law abiding citizens won't be able to defend themselves against criminals who get guns, knives, clubs, or attack in groups......because a gun would make it possible for the weak, the old, the injured, the out numbered, and the handicapped to actually defend themselves against those very criminals....

And here we have strictly gun controlled France..........and 3 guys on the watch list by the French authorities....not only got illegal guns....they got, apparently, illegal military grade Russian Rifles and a rocket propelled grenade.......in strictly gun controlled France....

And the law abiding French citizens....who complied with the theories of the anti gunners to a "T".......were slaughtered in under 5 minutes.........in a country with strict gun control laws.....that those 12 people were promised would make them safer.......and they willingly gave up their right to self defense.....probably happily since it was a left wing magazine....a hard core left wing magazine.....

Right?

So, it suits your purposes to suggest that a shooting incident in a state with gun control proves that gun control doesn't work however, shootings in a state with liberal ownership laws does not mean that lax gun ownership laws makes that state a more dangerous place.
Got it.

Correct....as shown by the United States...and our gun murder rates going down, not up after more Americans are owning and carrying guns....and shown in Puerto Rico...with strict gun control....and one of the highest gun murder rates in the world.....and the fact that in Canada, Australia, and now France.....three countries praised by anti gunners.....violent criminals still acquired guns and murdered people....that they do it less frequently has more to do with their people not wanting to do it, not their ability to do it.....

You're still arguing that shootings in countries with gun control laws proves that gun control laws don't work.
What do shootings in places with loose gun control laws prove?

On the other hand you dismiss the fact of there being less shootings in Canada, Australia and France as simply a cultural phenomenon.
Could it possibly be because of the gun control laws?

No....it isn't because of gun control laws....in recent weeks we have seen that when an evil person wants a gun in those countries, they can and do get them......and they have been immigrants, with looser ties to each of those countries cultures....in the case of Canada and Australia....Also...in other countries with strict gun control laws, there is horrendous gun violence....Mexico, Russia, Puerto Rico.....

Gun laws only affect law abiding citizens.....in states with strict laws and states with lax laws...the difference, in states that law abiding citizens can carry and own guns, the gun crime rate goes down....not up.....and in cities with strict gun control.....gun crime is greater......

In fact...our gun crime rate has gone down faster than Australia's and we have bought more guns, not less.....

Has nobody ever explained the danger of confusing correlation with causation?

yeah, the only problem on the anti gun side......people carrying guns for protection may be one part of a many part solution...hence it can't receive all of the credit....

however....the fact remains that more people own and carry guns, law abiding people, and the gun violence rate is going down, not up...

so the biggest claim by ant gunners is not true, that more guns will lead to more gun violence......since, again, more people are owning and carrying guns and the gun violence and gun accident rate are going down...not up.....

 

[2aguy]

perhaps our culture is becoming less violent...perhaps longer jail sentences are creating less violence, perhaps better policing techniques are working.

But, allowing people to own and carry guns in these state where gun violence is going down is also a factor....

And it isn't increasing gun violence....as sad as that may be for anti gunners....

 

[ogibillm]

perhaps our culture is becoming less violent...perhaps longer jail sentences are creating less violence, perhaps better policing techniques are working.

But, allowing people to own and carry guns in these state where gun violence is going down is also a factor....

And it isn't increasing gun violence....as sad as that may be for anti gunners....

And your evidence for that is what, exactly?