-
Montegriffo
- Posts: 18718
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 7:14 am
Post
by Montegriffo » Tue Jul 30, 2019 12:04 pm
The Conservative wrote: ↑Tue Jul 30, 2019 11:48 am
Montegriffo wrote: ↑Tue Jul 30, 2019 9:05 am
PartyOf5 wrote: ↑Tue Jul 30, 2019 8:50 am
They really aren't. Posting a saw and saying walls don't work is just saying that if someone really wants to break the law, they will find a way to do so. Just like someone who wants to go on a killing spree is going to ignore your stupid "gun free zone" signs. Yet you will never make the argument that gun free zones are a waste of time. You also intentionally (and dishonestly) fail to acknowledge that the wall is just a piece of the whole solution to reducing illegal immigration.
Going back to the beginning, your post with the saw is a dishonest hack bitch move and you know it.
If a gun-free zone is just ''a stupid gun-free zone sign'' it is a total waste of time. If it had been enforced at the entrance to this garlic festival then the shooter would have been detained before he could shoot anyone.
"Hey you have a gun, stop. If you don't I'll say stop again!" Says no one... seriously, if anyone stopped him before he got in, he would have probably killed the people trying to stop him.
Well, fuck it then if it's too difficult.
Just have to accept the risk of getting shot every time you go to a public event.
For legal reasons, we are not threatening to destroy U.S. government property with our glorious medieval siege engine. But if we wanted to, we could. But we won’t. But we could.
-
PartyOf5
- Posts: 3657
- Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2016 11:15 am
Post
by PartyOf5 » Tue Jul 30, 2019 12:18 pm
What, someone from a poor, shithole country that can't afford a phone is going to spend $1500 on a concrete saw and cut a hole in the wall to sneak in. Well, fuck this is too difficult. Let's just let them all run across as they please.
-
Montegriffo
- Posts: 18718
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 7:14 am
Post
by Montegriffo » Tue Jul 30, 2019 12:23 pm
£200 for the one I posted.
That's a great investment for a people smuggler charging good money to get migrants through the wall.
For legal reasons, we are not threatening to destroy U.S. government property with our glorious medieval siege engine. But if we wanted to, we could. But we won’t. But we could.
-
PartyOf5
- Posts: 3657
- Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2016 11:15 am
Post
by PartyOf5 » Tue Jul 30, 2019 1:08 pm
Well, fuck. Now it's even more difficult. Let's give up guys and just let them all in. Then we can use the expired visa system to get them. What? They don't have visas? Damn. Well, we'll just crack down on the people employing them. What? Sanctuary cities? Free healthcare? Free schooling? They either don't work or have under the table jobs in sanctuary cities? But, but, but, Monty said this would solve the problem. WAH!
-
The Conservative
- Posts: 14790
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 9:43 am
Post
by The Conservative » Tue Jul 30, 2019 1:37 pm
Montegriffo wrote: ↑Tue Jul 30, 2019 12:04 pm
The Conservative wrote: ↑Tue Jul 30, 2019 11:48 am
Montegriffo wrote: ↑Tue Jul 30, 2019 9:05 am
If a gun-free zone is just ''a stupid gun-free zone sign'' it is a total waste of time. If it had been enforced at the entrance to this garlic festival then the shooter would have been detained before he could shoot anyone.
"Hey you have a gun, stop. If you don't I'll say stop again!" Says no one... seriously, if anyone stopped him before he got in, he would have probably killed the people trying to stop him.
Well, fuck it then if it's too difficult.
Just have to accept the risk of getting shot every time you go to a public event.
You take a risk every time you walk out your door, your logic is faulty as always.
#NotOneRedCent
-
Speaker to Animals
- Posts: 38685
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 5:59 pm
Post
by Speaker to Animals » Tue Jul 30, 2019 1:39 pm
Montegriffo wrote: ↑Tue Jul 30, 2019 12:04 pm
The Conservative wrote: ↑Tue Jul 30, 2019 11:48 am
Montegriffo wrote: ↑Tue Jul 30, 2019 9:05 am
If a gun-free zone is just ''a stupid gun-free zone sign'' it is a total waste of time. If it had been enforced at the entrance to this garlic festival then the shooter would have been detained before he could shoot anyone.
"Hey you have a gun, stop. If you don't I'll say stop again!" Says no one... seriously, if anyone stopped him before he got in, he would have probably killed the people trying to stop him.
Well, fuck it then if it's too difficult.
Just have to accept the risk of getting shot every time you go to a public event.
Well, fuck it then if it's too difficult.
Just have to accept the risk of getting blown up by yet another Muslim "refugee" every time you go to a public event.
I can play this game too!
-
Montegriffo
- Posts: 18718
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 7:14 am
Post
by Montegriffo » Tue Jul 30, 2019 1:51 pm
Speaker to Animals wrote: ↑Tue Jul 30, 2019 1:39 pm
Montegriffo wrote: ↑Tue Jul 30, 2019 12:04 pm
The Conservative wrote: ↑Tue Jul 30, 2019 11:48 am
"Hey you have a gun, stop. If you don't I'll say stop again!" Says no one... seriously, if anyone stopped him before he got in, he would have probably killed the people trying to stop him.
Well, fuck it then if it's too difficult.
Just have to accept the risk of getting shot every time you go to a public event.
Well, fuck it then if it's too difficult.
Just have to accept the risk of getting blown up by yet another Muslim "refugee" every time you go to a public event.
I can play this game too!
Much smaller risk so much easier to accept.
Also, very few Islamic terrorists are refugees. Most are born in and are full citizens of the countries they attack, much like mass shooters only less white.
For legal reasons, we are not threatening to destroy U.S. government property with our glorious medieval siege engine. But if we wanted to, we could. But we won’t. But we could.
-
Speaker to Animals
- Posts: 38685
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 5:59 pm
Post
by Speaker to Animals » Tue Jul 30, 2019 2:25 pm
It actually is not. Normalize UK terror attacks committed by the religion of peace according to your total population and compare that to mass shootings.
You have a ton of terror attacks from random Muslims relative to your population.
In any case, your defense on the basis of relative risk, though I suspect very flawed, demolishes your argument's objective of disarming people. If it's only a matter of risk mitigation, then total banning should no more suffice your case than total banning of Muslim immigrants.
You done smashed your own shit there, Monty. That's a great big hole in your Motte.
-
Montegriffo
- Posts: 18718
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 7:14 am
Post
by Montegriffo » Tue Jul 30, 2019 2:33 pm
Not even close. Fewer than 100 deaths in a decade in the UK.
Fewer than one guy in a Las Vegas hotel.
For legal reasons, we are not threatening to destroy U.S. government property with our glorious medieval siege engine. But if we wanted to, we could. But we won’t. But we could.
-
Speaker to Animals
- Posts: 38685
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 5:59 pm
Post
by Speaker to Animals » Tue Jul 30, 2019 2:34 pm
Montegriffo wrote: ↑Tue Jul 30, 2019 2:33 pm
Not even close. Fewer than 100 deaths in a decade in the UK.
Fewer than one guy in a Las Vegas hotel.
You do not understand statistics, then. Look up normalization.