And another one

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/stabbing-deaths-by-country

I don’t think getting rid of schools is going to work, that’s the critical variable right? Only thing that makes sense really 

You may want to actually read the study that's linked, lol

From this link:

The United Nations' 2017 report also noted that as a rule, countries that had higher homicide rates were usually those in which firearms were more prevalent. By comparison, in countries with lower homicide rates, sharp objects/knives and "other mechanisms" tended to be the predominant methods.

[image: preview.redd.it]

Because it would be foolish to deny it, and im no fool unlike you who claims the UK has a "bombings" problem which makes you pretty foolish. 

Load image

You don't know that bombings happen in the uk? Weird

Saying homicide rates are higher in nations with guns is just obvious because they are more proficient. That's why when hunters go for deer they don't drop from a tree with a knife in their mouth like Rambo. But that doesn't reflect that their still isn't plenty of attempts in nations where the people are controlled. It's still a cultural and social problem. Cars aren't bad because people die in wrecks or when some people intentionally drive them into crowds like I believe happened in Germany a few years ago? Taking guns away keeps them away from good people, the criminals will still obtain them. They could ban guns today and I could go downtown and buy one tomorrow illegally.

Also

Cars aren’t for killing, guns are for killing. Guns are better at killing because guns are for killing. Making something for killing widely accessible means everyone gets them but mostly the bad are going to use them because killing is bad and that is what guns are designed for.

If you buy a banned gun that would make you a criminal, are you a criminal? A father won’t gift his son a gun that he would later use to kill his classmates. The little shit would actually have to work to acquire a gun and that added effort will make it less likely for him to go through with it.

Making guns which are for killing widely accessible means more people are able to get it and use it for what it’s intended for, which is for killing. 

When that criminal does in fact buy that banned gun. Decides to break into your home come after you, your wife and children. What are you? A "good boy" yet a helpless victim at best? Maybe you will be able to explain to said wife and children why protecting them isn't as important as fearmongering for political purposes.

If the Economy did collapse and society and there isn't food on the shelves at Walmart prepackaged or canned, what are you going to do let them starve to death? I'm sure they will understand your politics on that.

What if a government or group comes to your nation, and your military and police force are not able to stop them. Are you going to try and tell them how nice and accepting of a person you are politically and hope they spare your life? They most likely hate you.

Is your gun on your nightstand with one in the chamber ready to go in case someone breaks in?  Statistically  if you have a gun in your home it's most likely to be used on someone who lives in the house, not on an intruder.

If a criminal has to buy guns on the black market then those weapons are going to be significantly more expensive, so there will be fewer criminals capable of getting them.

What if a government or group comes to your nation, and your military and police force are not able to stop them. 

I'm American.  We have the most heavily armed army and heavily armed police force in the country.  What is this circle jerk of Red Dawn fantasies?

By the by, all of these arguments are the same ones people have made for the past decade.  Jim Jefferies has a whole comedy sequence from 10 years ago that references every inane argument here.

YouTube video 0rR9IaXH1M0

YouTube video a9UFyNy-rw4

Don't put too much faith in our military without assistance. We couldn't win against Vietnam. China and Russia would devastate us, especially with their allies.

Your not making good points, maybe a drunk couple shooting the other? They will spend a little more. But more will be brought in to be sold illegally, just as drugs and human trafficking is brought it.

Blanket statistics like that aren't a good argument. 

Jim may make you giggle but he won't keep you or your family alive

The only thing I take away from this and other topic-related threads is that no one cares when kids are killed with things other than guns, even if those killings are intentional. If "one is too many", as was pointed out in a related thread, AND the answer to that is to rid society of the weaponized implement, then we absolutely should be banning objects left and right. For the sake of the children.

Either that, or "save the kids" is nothing except disingenuous.

[image: i.imgflip.com]

Russia is losing a war against a smaller country being sent our surplus equipment. I get the sense you don't have a firm grasp on relative military power, especially if you think your ass holding an AR-15 will do anything in the situation where someone defeated the US army.

As for your other argument. Are you in favor of legalizing all drugs? After all, they just get brought in to the country.

Oh wow. What a sharp retort...that in no way justifies your claim that one implement of death is somehow special compared to others.

If you accept the idea that it's okay for some kids to be knifed down instead of shot, then you are implicitly accepting the conclusion that there is, in fact, an "acceptable number of children murders", greater than 1, for any given instrument of death before we consider banning that instrument.  And we can actually have a constructive conversation about what that number is, believe it or not.  But we can't have a constructive conversation if you refuse to acknowledge that such is your position.

Spare me.

Of course people care about other risks, like knives. You aren't allowed to bring knives to school, generally, to deter such things. You have extra slow speed limits near school zones to try to minimize kids being hit by cars. We are always constantly trying to find a balance in safety and practicality.

But when it comes to a practical way to avoid firearm deaths, you throw the bodies of other dead kids up as a shield "we can't do anything about guns until we prevent all other causes of death."