How about that guy who fired into a crowd from the balcony of a hotel room in Vegas?
You think he'd have killed 50 people if he'd just had a knife?
Kyle Rittenhouse trial
- Thread starter mandrill
- Start date
- Status
You think he'd have killed 50 people if he'd just had a knife?
I believe capitalizing the titles of elected officials is an American orthographic convention, not an Anglo-Canadian one.
That's why no one on this board - or anywhere else up here AFAIK - does it.
Saving you some trouble here. Next thing we know, you'll be complaining about us writing "colour".
Okay, if that's what anglo-canadians do.
I just wanted to be fair since I had already asked you to capitalize Presidente.
read my post again....people who wants to kill will kill by any means....again not everyone is qualified to be a gun owner...he could've easily planted a bomb too...
I guess. But shooting people is easier and more efficient. Which is pretty much the point.
You ever rigged a bomb? You have to know how to build it and not get caught buying the components. And you have to get it to work without blowing yourself up.
A rifle.... you just slap in the mag and pull the trigger.
He is a minor. Minors aren't allowed to carry. He knew that full-well.
If somebody let's their 14 year old drive their car, and there's a fatal accident...
If somebody let's their 14 year old drive their car, and there's a fatal accident...
The fact is that a gun is specifically designed and optimized to kill. Yes, things can be misused to kill but killing with a gun is using it for its intended purpose. Yes you can use a gun for non-lethal purposes like practicing to kill things but that doesn't change what a gun was created to do.
I know that our different opinions reflect our countries but I much prefer Canada's designation of a gun being a tool that is allowed for specific purposes rather than the US view that any tool should be able to carry a killing device.
But we do have the right to promote our viewpoints and speak to the public heath risk posed by current US policy. Also Canada has its own NRA parrots pushing for the same lack of rules in Canada so it makes sense to argue our views on a Canadian discussion forum.
Right. Tools put in the hands of the people who need them and have shown they operate them safely. Canada hits a fairly rational balance IMO.
I'm glad I gave you a place to spew nonsense without even reading what you were responding to.
Thankfully Canada requires background checks, mandatory training, and puts limits on what can be used. I wouldn't be opposed to stricter limits on handguns like no home storage and even the guys I've hung around hunt camp with think semi-auto hunting rifles are for losers who can't aim but I'm not putting that at the top of my decision making for elections.
It's a domino chain. If KR has a valid self-defence for the Rosenbaum killing, then he argues that Grosskreutz and Huber couldn't arrest him and that the pattern appeared to be that others were targeting him for serious violence. The State argues that G and H had a reasonable belief that KR had shot Rosenbaum and were entitled to use force to arrest him.
It's difficult to believe that KR does not have the right to shoot someone who is pointing a Glock at him, espec as Dropkick Guy and Huber had just attacked him. There's also not a lot of evidence that DKG, H and G were actually going to arrest KR and not just beat and / or kill him.
Sounds compelling until you remember that KR was running because he already killed someone.
Do you want to compare the rate of mass killings with guns to mass killing with things not designed specifically to kill?
- Status
