American Gun Activist Shot by Own 4 Year Old Child

Originally posted by Wajoma

We cut you a lot of slack with your comprehension skills since English is a second language for you, it would be easy to make some disparaging remarks.

I wouldn't trust you to comprehend the back of a box of cornflakes.

i think we drifted away from the subject into general gun control debate. we already went there and it got us nowhere.


let's get back to the original post, this moronic activist.
here are the facts: she left a loaded gun in the back of her car, in full reach of her child. it is LUCKY she got shot and not the child.
can we agree (people on both sides of the debate) that this is at the very least gross negligence?
can we agree that child protective services should look into this matter?
can we agree that she should for example be banned from owning a gun for X months/years?

one can lose his driving license if he drives recklessly. one can lose his liquor license. one can have his restaurant shut down if one doesn't adhere to a number of safety rules and for good reason. why can't we take away this idiot's guns? we can shut down a restaurant for improperly storing perishables and exposing customers to salmonela, why can't we shut down this idiot for improperly storing her gun and exposing her child to a freakin loaded gun?

Originally posted by wolfgang59
I wouldn't trust you to comprehend the back of a box of cornflakes.

Statistics must be different in your first language also.

Try this.

Number of weapons used in mass shootings divided by number of legal weapons in the US. Now this is where it gets tricky, you multiply this number by 100 to get the percentage. A little test for you, try to solve it all by yourself before using Google.

Maybe that number looks a bit small, I reckon it will be less than .01% You might get a more alarming percentage by the following:

Mass shootings divided by legal gun owners. Now don't forget to multiply by 100 we wouldn't want you exaggerating your findings by a factor of 100.

Originally posted by Zahlanzi

can we agree (people on both sides of the debate) that this is at the very least gross negligence

This would be equivalent to the child being left in a running vehicle, the child has bumped the vehicle into drive and run the guy over.

Provided you're advocating the same treatment in both cases we can at least confirm you are consistent.

Originally posted by Wajoma
This would be equivalent to the child being left in a running vehicle, the child has bumped the vehicle into drive and run the guy over.

Provided you're advocating the same treatment in both cases we can at least confirm you are consistent.

the gun situation is worse, but of course there is gross negligence in both situation.

Originally posted by Wajoma
Statistics must be different in your first language also.

Try this.

Number of weapons used in mass shootings divided by number of legal weapons in the US. Now this is where it gets tricky, you multiply this number by 100 to get the percentage. A little test for you, try to solve it all by yourself before using Google.

Maybe that number looks a bit sm ...[text shortened]... 't forget to multiply by 100 we wouldn't want you exaggerating your findings by a factor of 100.

you really like making numbers dance for you. because a number (mass shootings) is small compared to another big number, it is acceptable? the number of mass shootings should be 0, you blithering idiot. no amount of mass shootings is acceptable. this is something that many countries have realized and enacted strict gun control to achieve it. some have even managed.

and when sadly a mass shooting occurs, despite one doing everything possible to prevent it, you can say "oops". not before like the americans do. every gun nut in america says that mass shootings are inevitable.



and to address your idiocy with those statistics, the number of mass shootings is "low" if you compare the number of gun owners with the number of mass shootings. of course it's bloody low. it's also low when compared with the number of stars in the galaxy or any other big number that has nothing to do with mass shootings.

when you compare it 0 (acceptable number of mass shootings) or with the number of mass shootings in other civilized countries (australia for example) it is very high.

also, 82% of the mass shooters, ie people who were predisposed to commit mass murders, were people who obtained guns legally, which means their gun control laws do jack to prevent mass shootings. how stupid can you be to not get that? don't answer that, it's rhetorical, i know you are plenty stupid.

Originally posted by wolfgang59
I wouldn't trust you to comprehend the back of a box of cornflakes.

Not much there to comprehend. Perhaps that's why you like contemplating it.

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
you really like making numbers dance for you. because a number (mass shootings) is small compared to another big number, it is acceptable? the number of mass shootings should be 0, you blithering idiot. no amount of mass shootings is acceptable. this is something that many countries have realized and enacted strict gun control to achieve it. some have even ...[text shortened]... id can you be to not get that? don't answer that, it's rhetorical, i know you are plenty stupid.

When will you get that America isn't Australia, nor do most Americans wish we were more like Australia? Is Eastern Europe, your place of origin, much like Australia, or moving in that direction?

The other thing that you just don't get, is that some things are just American. We like it that way, even if it is occasionally painful.

Originally posted by normbenign
Not much there to comprehend.

Sharp as a rubber blade.

Originally posted by normbenign
When will you get that America isn't Australia, .

More profound insight.

Ever compared the performance of two cars?
Only for the other guy to say
"Hey that's not fair they're different cars"
🙄

Originally posted by wolfgang59
More profound insight.

Ever compared the performance of two cars?
Only for the other guy to say
"Hey that's not fair they're different cars"
🙄

Sure. They are different. Same point as I was making.
I drive a Toyota SUV. It isn't remotely like the racing machines Toyota puts on the track.

Originally posted by normbenign
When will you get that America isn't Australia, nor do most Americans wish we were more like Australia? Is Eastern Europe, your place of origin, much like Australia, or moving in that direction?

The other thing that you just don't get, is that some things are just American. We like it that way, even if it is occasionally painful.

"When will you get that America isn't Australia"
painfully obvious.

"nor do most Americans wish we were more like Australia"
at least regarding gun control, most americans wish indeed the US were more like Australia, as in having it.

"Is Eastern Europe, your place of origin, much like Australia, or moving in that direction"
i bloody hope so.

"The other thing that you just don't get, is that some things are just American."
mass shootings are american? sadly, this too is painfully obvious.

"We like it that way, even if it is occasionally painful."
i strongly believe the majority of americans are not so retarded.

Originally posted by normbenign
Sure. They are different. Same point as I was making.
I drive a Toyota SUV. It isn't remotely like the racing machines Toyota puts on the track.

Sure. They are different.
yes. australia is better in at least gun control.

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
Sure. They are different.
yes. australia is better in at least gun control.

That's your opinion, and if Australia will take you, I see no reason for you to stay here.

Originally posted by normbenign
That's your opinion, and if Australia will take you, I see no reason for you to stay here.

He's not here...