mass shooting = massacre

its not a massacre if its two people shooting eachother

thats just a gun fight

im not trying to say those arent bad

but its like calling any mechanical failure on a plane a crash

>it doesnt matter
it does, because what I'm trying to say is it's not a proper analogy

well do you atleast understand my point or are you just going to keep arguing over definitions when its pretty clear those are two seperate things

but tbh I'm kind of glad

jamal and tyrone shooting eachother over crack =/= sperg mcautist shooting up his school and killing a bunch of people with no proper means to defend themselves

What I'm saying is that 4 deaths is a fucking lot

panda's and mine efforts paid off

it is but if theres a fight over it its dumb to compare it to some kids getting killed

stryker went from being a dumb progun trumpist to a pathetic defensive position

what happened stryker you were so certain once

now you're only like >oh yeah ekshuli guns are bad but we cant do anything :/

also the other element of this argument is that if those shoot outs are even preventable, same thing for most homicides which are gang related. America has a lot of crime period regardless of guns, so its arguable if any gun regulation would even have a major impact on crime related stuff because most criminals use illegally aquired guns

what

im not saying guns are bad

im saying even if you wanted to you couldnt get rid of them

because you're against the odds

>oh yeh climeat change isnt really a chinese hoax but uhhh weeellll

i dont want them gone, infact i think we need more

fuck I reverted 2 years of our efforts

shouldn't have said that

but the best argument is to just show how your opponents argument is shitty and flawed

> most criminals use illegally aquired guns
well then banning them would make the access to those guns more difficult (and thus make the illegal ones more expensive)

>we need more guns

well then banning them would make the access to those guns more difficult (and thus make the illegal ones more expensive)

no it wouldnt

because there are already hundreds of millions of guns, its an uncontrollable black market like i said

dude this is the US

they have no such thing as government

not to mention we border latin america my dude

no proper law enforcement

its a wild west

if they banned guns i would just get one of pedro

off

in kangarooland it did. So much that barely anyone can afford them because they cost a fortune

they only have a government to wage wars and subsidy their corpojews

```in kangarooland it did. So much that barely anyone can afford them because they cost a fortune(edited)
``` The aussies gave them in voluntarily, which will never happen in the US for 1. Also they don't have the cartels right on their border

the gun culture in the US is entirely different to what the aussies had