"He Never Went In": Officer On Duty Filmed "Doing Nothing" During Florida Shooting

NeoTrader said:
Well, if even you don't know the answer to that, how come you're using other countries as an example of something that you advocate and you don't even know about how or when it was inacted?

Again, you don't have any logic, much less facts backing your proposition, but you still want it to become law. That is my point. You yourself said: "There are a lot of variables to consider before we make sweeping statements."

The only problem is that, to people like you, the "lot of variables" must not include anything that is logic and goes against your argument. And despite admitting that "there isn't necessarily a causality" and not addressing the logical points I made AGAIN, like the obvious fact that laws only are effective to people that respect law, which obviously doesn't include a murderer, you still want to not only "sweep statements", but also you want to make it a law.

That's contradictory.
More...

What’s the single factor that is alike in every mass shooting?
 
UsualName said:
What’s the single factor that is alike in every mass shooting?
More...
A maniac and a gun(even though, if they don't have guns, they use bombs, cars, etc), but since we're talking about shootings, a maniac and a gun.

There's also a single factor that is alike in all drownings: water and a person who drowns.(You think banning swimming pools or even water is the way to prevent drownings, because the "guilty" is the water?)

There's another single factor common to motorvehicle accidents: motorvehicles. You think it is a good idea to ban cars, because it is the cars's fault?
 
NeoTrader said:
A maniac and a gun(even though, if they don't have guns, they use bombs, cars, etc), but since we're talking about shootings, a maniac and a gun.

There's also a single factor that is alike in all drownings: water and a person who drowns.(You think banning swimming pools or even water is the way to prevent drownings, because the "guilty" is the water?)

There's another single factor common to motorvehicle accidents: motorvehicles. You think it is a good idea to ban cars, because it is the cars's fault?
More...

I have not said we should ban guns. The contingencies associated with the right and appropriate regulations are another story. But, guns are here and here to stay. It’s up to republicans to figure out how to live with them safely.

Rick Scott is a Republican and he just proposed a bunch of laws that limit people’s ability to get guns. That’s great. Is he banning guns?

Now to swimming pools and automobiles bs guns. What happened when Tylenol had a scare in the 1970s and killed some people? We got laws that said bottles must be tamper proof. What about when people were flying out of windshields in the 1960s and car accident fatalities were higher than ever? We got safety standards.

Water is an interesting one because there is not an epidemic of drownings I know of. What’s the ratio of pools to drownings, or daily swimmers in any body of water to drownings?
 
UsualName said:
I have not said we should ban guns. The contingencies associated with the right and appropriate regulations are another story. But, guns are here and here to stay. It’s up to republicans to figure out how to live with them safely.

Rick Scott is a Republican and he just proposed a bunch of laws that limit people’s ability to get guns. That’s great. Is he banning guns?

Now to swimming pools and automobiles bs guns. What happened when Tylenol had a scare in the 1970s and killed some people? We got laws that said bottles must be tamper proof. What about when people were flying out of windshields in the 1960s and car accident fatalities were higher than ever? We got safety standards.

Water is an interesting one because there is not an epidemic of drownings I know of. What’s the ratio of pools to drownings, or daily swimmers in any body of water to drownings?
More...
Regulations and limits on gun ownership and commerce have been increased over the years, and these shootings still happend. The same thing with the countries that have banned guns. Here in Brazil it is virtually impossible to get a permit to carry a gun, but people die being shot by criminals with all types of "banned guns" every single day. Even democrats admit that no law or regulation would have prevented these shootings. And Europe have been dying like sheep in each of the attacks that they had, despite all their regulations.
So we're back to the same thing: banning guns don't work, because absolutely nothing, much less some law, stops maniacs from doing what maniacs do. Not only that, it makes it worse, because people who respect the law are defenseless and the maniacs know that and take advantadge of it.

Tampered proof bottles have no evidence of being effective. I'm not saying they aren't, but "some people killed" is not enough to pass regulations. If you provide me evidence that there was a significant number of people that died taking their medicine specifically because of tampering of bottles and then show me that after the regulation the numbers of deaths by this very cause has significantly reduced, then I'll believe you. But I doubt that you have that study, since most stupid regulations such as these just come out of nowhere imposing costs in business without actually having any benefit, simply as a result of some dumb sensationalist media crusade. From what I read, 7 people died. Tylenol took a big hit because of this, so to save it's skin, it would have taken measures to garanty the safety to it's consumers in order to stop losing money, as it did. Otherwise it would go broke because other companies would do this and draw the costumers away from the original tylenol.

Finally I'm pretty sure the "tylenol deaths" weren't an epidemie too, but you still defend regulation over it. By the same token, why should drownings only be regulated if they are at epidemic levels? The mere fact that people die from it should be enough, as was the case with tylenol. You lack consistency in your arguments.
 
Last edited:
NeoTrader said:
Regulations and limits on gun ownership and commerce have been increased over the years, and these shootings still happend. The same thing with the countries that have banned guns. Here in Brazil it is virtually impossible to get a permit to carry a gun, but people die being shot by criminals with all types of "banned guns" every single day. Even democrats admit that no law or regulation would have prevented these shootings. And Europe have been dying like sheep in each of the attacks that they had, despite all their regulations.
So we're back to the same thing: banning guns don't work, because absolutely nothing, much less some law, stops maniacs from doing what maniacs do. Not only that, it makes it worse, because people who respect the law are defenseless and the maniacs know that and take advantadge of it.

Tampered proof bottles have no evidence of being effective. I'm not saying they aren't, but "some people killed" is not enough to pass regulations. If you provide me evidence that there was a significant number of people that died taking their medicine specifically because of tampering of bottles and then show me that after the regulation the numbers of deaths by this very cause has significantly reduced, then I'll believe you. But I doubt that you have that study, since most stupid regulations such as these just come out of nowhere imposing costs in business without actually having any benefit, simply as a result of some dumb sensationalist media crusade. Fro what I read, 7 people died. The fact is simply that the people who did this were arrested and that is why this stopped. In addition, an most important of all, Tylenol took a big hit because of this, so to save it's skin, it would have taken measures to garanty the safety to it's consumers in order to stop losing money, as it did. Otherwise it would go broke because other companies would do this and draw the costumers away from the original tylenol.

Finally I'm pretty sure the "tylenol deaths" weren't an epidemie too, but you still defend regulation over it. By the same token, why should drownings only be regulated if they are at epidemic levels? The mere fact that people die from it should be enough, as was the case with tylenol. You lack consistency in your arguments.
More...

The Tylenol murders is a good example of recognizing a dangerous liability and taking effective steps to ensure public safety.

https://www.snopes.com/horrors/poison/tylenol.asp
 
UsualName said:
The Tylenol murders is a good example of recognizing a dangerous liability and taking effective steps to ensure public safety.

https://www.snopes.com/horrors/poison/tylenol.asp
More...
The public safety is guaranteed by the companies own interest of not having it's clients die from it's products, because if it keeps happening the company goes broke.

But most important:

Why do you keep ignoring everything you can't argue against and stop trying to deviate from the subject?
Oh wait... I just answered my own question: Because you can't argue against it.:D
 
NeoTrader said:
A maniac and a gun(even though, if they don't have guns, they use bombs, cars, etc), but since we're talking about shootings, a maniac and a gun.

There's also a single factor that is alike in all drownings: water and a person who drowns.(You think banning swimming pools or even water is the way to prevent drownings, because the "guilty" is the water?)

There's another single factor common to motorvehicle accidents: motorvehicles. You think it is a good idea to ban cars, because it is the cars's fault?
More...
And in school shootings (and others) you have a single factor common and that is a "gun free" zone.
 
Banjo said:
"Video evidence reveals that an armed Broward County resource deputy stationed at Stoneman Douglas High School during the Valentine's day massacre did "nothing" during the shooting - instead waiting outside as a gunman opened fire on students and teachers, killing 17."

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-02-22/he-never-went-officer-duty-filmed-doing-nothing-during-florida-shooting?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+zerohedge/feed+(zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline,+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero)
More...
I guess everyone is a big talker until shit gets real.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top