Fake News

[Montegriffo]

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.''

Doing something, just for the sake of doing something, when it's counter-productive, is moronic. You aren't helping, you just think you are.

Not wanting to ban guns or free speech in the wake of a mass shooting isn't doing nothing, it's just disagreeing with your methods of "doing something", because your plan is retarded.

You are basically acting like AOC, feigning like the Green New Deal is a good idea or banning guns is good idea, or banning speech you don't like is a good idea, because "no one else has tried, so I'm the boss". Lots of people are trying you moron, you just don't like the solutions that don't involve restricting the liberty of law abiding citizens, just like AOC.

Fuck the both you, and the high horses y'all rode in on.

Hate speech is not law-abiding in my country.
Doesn't matter whether you are a Muslim hate preacher or a white supremacist calling for race war. You don't get to spew hatred without consequences.

By allowing hate speech you encourage a climate of hate leading to acts of hate like Manchester, Quebec, Paris, 9/11, Christchurch, Utøya...

[StCapps]

By allowing hate speech you encourage a climate of hate leading to acts of hate like Manchester, Quebec, Paris, 9/11, Christchurch, Utøya...

Nope, by allowing hate speech, I am encouraging people to say hateful things without legal punishment for exercising legitimate free speech. A climate of hate is not caused by allowing hate speech, the climate of hate exists regardless of whether hate speech is allowed or not, you will save no lives by not allowing hate speech. Yet you are willing to restrict people's freedom anyway because you feel safer regardless of whether or not you are safer.

[Montegriffo]

I want to restrict hate speech and I want to regulate gun ownership.
Ban is your word, not mine.
I can also make my arguments without resorting to childish name-calling.

You resort to strawmen and insults and repeating yourself over and over until people give up.

I call like I see it, you just don't like it, AOC. Restricting hate speech and federal regulation of gun ownership isn't going to make you any safer, it just makes everyone less free for no pay off.

You just hate freedom, and you aren't fooling anyone on this forum by feigning like you don't. Take your Temperance Lady solutions, and shove them up your ass.

I love freedom.
I would like people to be free to go to a pop concert in Manchester without being bombed and I would like people to be free to worship whatever God they choose without being murdered in their temples.

The UK banned handguns after the Dunblane massacre. There have been no mass shootings with handguns since. Restrictions save lives, that's why you can't drive past a school at 100mph. You are fighting for the freedom to drive as fast as you like and denying culpability when children die as a result of your freedom.

[StCapps]

The UK banned handguns after the Dunblane massacre. There have been no mass shootings with handguns since. Restrictions save lives, that's why you can't drive past a school at 100mph. You are fighting for the freedom to drive as fast as you like and denying culpability when children die as a result of your freedom.

Correlation does not equal causation, handgun restrictions saved no lives, you cannot attribute no mass shootings with handguns to handgun restrictions, you didn't have many mass shootings with handguns prior to Dunblane, and a lack of mass shootings after Dunblane with handguns is pure luck.

Hate speech being allowed does not result in anyone getting hurt, hurt feelings do not count, your analogy is thus complete trash.

[PartyOf5]

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.''

Funny you should use that quote. Countries are doing nothing about being slowly invaded and taken over by other cultures. Europe has their no-go zones already. The US has millions of illegal immigrants refusing to assimilate and our leaders bend over backwards to allow it to continue.

The NZ murderer should be put to death. Killing random people because of their race or religion is sick. He chose the worst possible way to deal with what he saw as a threat to his culture. We don't need to start randomly killing people. We need to protect our border and enforce our laws so that the existing citizens of our country, no matter what their race or religion can feel safe. If your religion includes Sharia law, then it becomes a problem, but mass murder is on a solution.

Sitting by and letting your country and culture be overrun is also not a solution.

[PartyOf5]

Monty logic:

I want to restrict hate speech and I want to regulate gun ownership.
Ban is your word, not mine.

The UK banned handguns after the Dunblane massacre. There have been no mass shootings with handguns since.

You are for banning guns. Stop lying.

[Speaker to Animals]

Monty will literally blame anything before admitting diversity is the problem. The diversity cult is going to cult. After getting wrecked here, he will just tune in to more state-run broadcasting to re-center his mind on the narrative.

[Ph64]

Simple question for Monte... Dunblane was 1996, so just over 20 years ago.
When was the prior handgun related mass shooting in the UK?
Or, how many were there, and how frequent, in say the 100 years before Dunblane?

[Montegriffo]

Simple question for Monte... Dunblane was 1996, so just over 20 years ago.
When was the prior handgun related mass shooting in the UK?
Or, how many were there, and how frequent, in say the 100 years before Dunblane?

Hungerford massacre was 1987. 16 people shot dead by Micheal Ryan using an assortment of weapons. Type 56 assault rifle, Semi-automatic rifle, M1 carbine, Beretta 92.
The Thatcher government responded with the Firearms (Amendment) Act 1988 which banned the ownership of semi-automatic centre-fire rifles and restricted the use of shotguns with a capacity of more than three cartridges (in magazine plus the breech).

[Montegriffo]

The UK banned handguns after the Dunblane massacre. There have been no mass shootings with handguns since. Restrictions save lives, that's why you can't drive past a school at 100mph. You are fighting for the freedom to drive as fast as you like and denying culpability when children die as a result of your freedom.

Correlation does not equal causation, handgun restrictions saved no lives, you cannot attribute no mass shootings with handguns to handgun restrictions, you didn't have many mass shootings with handguns prior to Dunblane, and a lack of mass shootings after Dunblane with handguns is pure luck.

Hate speech being allowed does not result in anyone getting hurt, hurt feelings do not count, your analogy is thus complete trash.

Yes, we did have handgun mass shootings before Dunblane.
Handguns were always very highly regulated though so very few people were allowed to legally possess them before the ban.
The lack of shootings, mass or otherwise, is certainly due to tight restrictions on gun ownership.