Mass stabbing in Florida - it's time to implement knife control.

[Thinker101]

Maybe next time you could let the blood on the knife dry before you use the tragedy for winning points on a political forum.

Just a thought

How convenient. How long do you need to mourn before we can talk about the failures of liberalism?

Based on past incidents, it seems to be about 30 seconds...sometimes less.

I would challenge you to find a single post from me using a tragedy to score political points on this forum...even one.

You are such a dishonest coward with your stupid drive by postings.

Yep, and next you'll say "I never said I was trying to score political points", you friggen loons. Certainly wouldn't say you're transparent, but you've pulled the same BS over and over and over, it's just predictable.

 

[Leo123]

If the perp had a gun, those folks would be effectively disarmed and soft targets.

Good thing he didn't have one. Somebody probably would have died.

Yes, because those folks were kept unarmed. Right?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Yep, and next you'll say "I never said I was trying to score political points", you friggen loons. Certainly wouldn't say you're transparent, but you've pulled the same BS over and over and over, it's just predictable.

Thank you for proving me correct.

 

[Leo123]

They will find ways to kill people. Knives, cars, bombs etc. It's not the weapon. It's PERSON!

Except this guy wasn't able to kill anyone. Because he didn't have a gun.

No, because those folks had weapons equal to his.

 

[XponentialChaos]

If the perp had a gun, those folks would be effectively disarmed and soft targets.

Good thing he didn't have one. Somebody probably would have died.

Yes, because those folks were kept unarmed. Right?

I didn't read that they were kept unarmed.

 

[Leo123]

"Before the stabbing, city officials were grappling with a rash of shootings over the weekend that left two dead and one injured."

Oh. So the guy trying to stab people was not effective in killing people. But the previous shootings resulted in casualties.

So shocking.

The shooter's victims were not similarly armed. The folks at Dyke had weaponry from their office that was equal to the guy with a knife.

 

[Leo123]

If the perp had a gun, those folks would be effectively disarmed and soft targets.

Good thing he didn't have one. Somebody probably would have died.

Yes, because those folks were kept unarmed. Right?

I didn't read that they were kept unarmed.

Neither did I but I bet they were OR have been brainwashed by anti-gun activists, some of who are are Democrat representatives. In any case, what difference does it make to my point? The guy was stopped by equal resistance.

 

[XponentialChaos]

They will find ways to kill people. Knives, cars, bombs etc. It's not the weapon. It's PERSON!

Except this guy wasn't able to kill anyone. Because he didn't have a gun.

No, because those folks had weapons equal to his.

What exactly do you mean by an "equal" weapon?

Here's the quote from the article: "He said co-workers fought off the knife-wielding attacker with objects in the office."

I figure they could have fought him off with a chair or something. That couldn't have happened if the guy had a semi-automatic rifle.

 

[XponentialChaos]

If the perp had a gun, those folks would be effectively disarmed and soft targets.

Good thing he didn't have one. Somebody probably would have died.

Yes, because those folks were kept unarmed. Right?

I didn't read that they were kept unarmed.

Neither did I...

Stopped reading right there. So you're just making shit up. Got it.

 

[XponentialChaos]

"Before the stabbing, city officials were grappling with a rash of shootings over the weekend that left two dead and one injured."

Oh. So the guy trying to stab people was not effective in killing people. But the previous shootings resulted in casualties.

So shocking.

The shooter's victims were not similarly armed. The folks at Dyke had weaponry from their office that was equal to the guy with a knife.

Right. They defended themselves with "objects in the office".

They would not have been able to defend themselves with said objects if the guy came in with a semi-automatic rifle. It's a good thing he didn't have a semi-automatic rifle, huh?

Thanks for confirming what I said.

 

[Leo123]

They will find ways to kill people. Knives, cars, bombs etc. It's not the weapon. It's PERSON!

Except this guy wasn't able to kill anyone. Because he didn't have a gun.

No, because those folks had weapons equal to his.

What exactly do you mean by an "equal" weapon?

Here's the quote from the article: "He said co-workers fought off the knife-wielding attacker with objects in the office."

I figure they could have fought him off with a chair or something. That couldn't have happened if the guy had a semi-automatic rifle.

The problem is being able to prohibit a crazy person from doing this shit. You can't. There is evil in the world, pretending it does not exist is a recipe for extinction. Disarming yourself is just suicidal.

 

[XponentialChaos]

OK then, why would that not have happened if the perp had a semi-automatic rifle? Here is a hint for you......A guy comes at you with a knife. You have a chair. The chair can defeat the knife AND can be used to smash the perp into submission.

NOW.....Stay with me.....You have a chair, the perp has a semi-auto. You have been constantly told that guns are evil so you choose to be unarmed. OR, the establishment you are in, or work for, prohibits firearms. There you are holding a chair (if you are brave) or you are hiding under your chair (if you are a coward). In any case the crazy perp ventilates you with his AR-15. Where was YOUR AR-15? His was stolen. You were told AR-15's were too 'scary' to have and were probably prohibited from even showing one to anyone much less have it at where you work.

Yet, there you are....laying on the floor in a pool of blood.

So we can agree that an AR-15 is more lethal than a knife. Awesome.

It sure is a good thing this lunatic didn't have access to a more lethal weapon. The situation could have been so much worse.

Maybe now you will see why knives (a less lethal weapon) doesn't require much government oversight but an AR-15 (a more lethal weapon) does, which is contrary to what the OP stated.

 

[XponentialChaos]

The problem is being able to prohibit a crazy person from doing this shit. You can't. There is evil in the world, pretending it does not exist is a recipe for extinction. Disarming yourself is just suicidal.

I don't know why, but this crazy guy didn't have a semi-automatic rifle. And I think that's a good thing.

 

[Leo123]

If the perp had a gun, those folks would be effectively disarmed and soft targets.

Good thing he didn't have one. Somebody probably would have died.

Yes, because those folks were kept unarmed. Right?

I didn't read that they were kept unarmed.

Neither did I...

Stopped reading right there. So you're just making shit up. Got it.

Making what up? That our society hasn't been inundated with leftist, Democrat cries to ban guns? Do you live under a rock? You cut off the rest of my post.

 

[Leo123]

The problem is being able to prohibit a crazy person from doing this shit. You can't. There is evil in the world, pretending it does not exist is a recipe for extinction. Disarming yourself is just suicidal.

I don't know why, but this crazy guy didn't have a semi-automatic rifle. And I think that's a good thing.

Yes, because those folks were not similarly armed.

 

[XponentialChaos]

Good thing he didn't have one. Somebody probably would have died.

Yes, because those folks were kept unarmed. Right?

I didn't read that they were kept unarmed.

Neither did I...

Stopped reading right there. So you're just making shit up. Got it.

Making what up?

Post #102.

 

[XponentialChaos]

The problem is being able to prohibit a crazy person from doing this shit. You can't. There is evil in the world, pretending it does not exist is a recipe for extinction. Disarming yourself is just suicidal.

I don't know why, but this crazy guy didn't have a semi-automatic rifle. And I think that's a good thing.

Yes, because those folks were not similarly armed.

Yup, agreed. If this crazy guy had a bigger arsenal, this would be a tragedy.

Good thing he didn't.

 

[Leo123]

OK then, why would that not have happened if the perp had a semi-automatic rifle? Here is a hint for you......A guy comes at you with a knife. You have a chair. The chair can defeat the knife AND can be used to smash the perp into submission.

NOW.....Stay with me.....You have a chair, the perp has a semi-auto. You have been constantly told that guns are evil so you choose to be unarmed. OR, the establishment you are in, or work for, prohibits firearms. There you are holding a chair (if you are brave) or you are hiding under your chair (if you are a coward). In any case the crazy perp ventilates you with his AR-15. Where was YOUR AR-15? His was stolen. You were told AR-15's were too 'scary' to have and were probably prohibited from even showing one to anyone much less have it at where you work.

Yet, there you are....laying on the floor in a pool of blood.

So we can agree that an AR-15 is more lethal than a knife. Awesome.

It sure is a good thing this lunatic didn't have access to a more lethal weapon. The situation could have been so much worse.

Maybe now you will see why knives (a less lethal weapon) doesn't require much government oversight but an AR-15 (a more lethal weapon) does, which is contrary to what the OP stated.

Most of what you say is true, an AR-15 is much more lethal than a knife however, that is beside the point IMO. AR-15's and many other guns exist and will exist no matter whether the AR-15 is made illegal or not. If you are confronted with a perp holding a gun, it is your RIGHT to be carrying a firearm. That right is being stripped away because of a political faction (Democrats) that have chosen to make disarming law-abiding Americans of their 2nd amendment rights because (again IMO) they require a voting block of constant victims that will rely on political causes to cure the fake problems Democrats create.

 

[Leo123]

The problem is being able to prohibit a crazy person from doing this shit. You can't. There is evil in the world, pretending it does not exist is a recipe for extinction. Disarming yourself is just suicidal.

I don't know why, but this crazy guy didn't have a semi-automatic rifle. And I think that's a good thing.

Yes, because those folks were not similarly armed.

Yup, agreed. If this crazy guy had a bigger arsenal, this would be a tragedy.

Good thing he didn't.

You forgot the part about the victims being unarmed. Does that not bother you?

 

[Leo123]

Yes, because those folks were kept unarmed. Right?

I didn't read that they were kept unarmed.

Neither did I...

Stopped reading right there. So you're just making shit up. Got it.

Making what up?

Post #102.

Who had a gun?