image stats
rating
2.42
votes
7
views
284
uploader
Anonymous
comments
19
date added
2019-12-01
category
None Yet
previous votes
Loading..
log in
Username:

Password


indent register
indent recover

Not shot, he's in the burns unit

1 star2 stars3 stars4 stars5 stars
Not shot, he's in the burns unit

Comments for: Not shot, he's in the burns unit
jgoins Report This Comment
Date: December 01, 2019 08:32AM

Well we don't have terrorists running knifing people. You cannot legislate away violence at all, you can only legislate away self protection. All the gun laws do is change the weapon people use to kill other people. Smart people understand that the police can't be everywhere all the time and it is up to us to protect ourselves.
pulse Report This Comment
Date: December 01, 2019 09:07AM

If guns were easy to get, the terrorist would likely have had them too and the damage would've been considerably higher.
quasi Report This Comment
Date: December 01, 2019 08:23PM

Right, American terrorists use guns like real men so the body count is usually higher. They're also almost always white guys with shit attitudes, but lets be afraid of Muslims.
pulse Report This Comment
Date: December 01, 2019 08:54PM

Don't forget high school students
quasi Report This Comment
Date: December 01, 2019 09:47PM

The high school students are proving their manhood. It's an up and coming new ritual.
Loner Report This Comment
Date: December 04, 2019 08:19PM

...Not if the terrorist had had a real bomb vest.
jgoins Report This Comment
Date: December 05, 2019 08:38AM

My point was, violence is violence and it doesn't matter what tool they use. it is impossible to legislate away violence no matter what you try. Maybe governments should ban everything and send us beck to the stone age it would help(sarcasm). Blaming the tool used is easier than trying to change people's nature.
Loner Report This Comment
Date: December 05, 2019 11:20AM

I was actually responding to Pulse. I agree with JGoins.
God bless the banquet hall staff and attendees who stepped in.
[www.bbc.com]

By the way, knife beats gun up close. I'm not saying 100%. But knife has the edge. (<--that's for everyone).
jgoins Report This Comment
Date: December 06, 2019 08:37AM

My comment was directed to Pulse and anyone who blames the guns people use to cause harm to other people instead of blaming the person who did the attacking. Maybe London should ban and remove all knives in the country. While they are at it they should ban and remove all motor vehicles as well. Maybe governments should allow people to protect themselves with whatever they need to do that while they await the police.
Loner Report This Comment
Date: December 06, 2019 03:04PM

Funny you should mention that JGoins:
[www.usatoday.com]
It's kind of funny, because 3 inches is plenty. Hell, even a box cutter is deadly. And a folding knife snaps out just as quick with a wrist flick. It's kind of like the ignorant rhetoric about "assault weapons".
jgoins Report This Comment
Date: December 07, 2019 08:42AM

How many more things are going to get banned before governments finally understand that bans and laws only apply to law abiding citizens and have no effect on criminals. People who intend to commit a crime do not care about the law and will carry out their desired action regardless of the law which applies. People who carry guns legally do not commit the crimes but they are the ones who are affected by the laws.
GAK67 Report This Comment
Date: December 08, 2019 02:21AM

It amazes me just how myopic many of you are when it comes to gun control.

"All the gun laws do is change the weapon people use to kill other people". That is total crap!. I'm not saying that gun control laws won't lead to a change of weapon people use to kill other people, but that's not all it will do. If the London Bridge attacker had a gun the death toll would have been higher, so gun control laws also reduced the death toll.

"you can only legislate away self protection". More crap! The public stepped in with fire extinguishers and a narwhal tusk. Gun control laws did not take away their self protection, although I truly believe that those that stepped in were trying to protect others, rather than themselves.

"While they are at it they should ban and remove all motor vehicles as well". I believe America, like most other countries, already has vehicle control laws. There are minimum maintenance requirements, you have to show you are competent to use them, there are rules you need to follow when you use them, and if you mis-use them you can have your right to use them removed. Surely something that is designed to kill as it's primary purpose (guns), should have much stricter control!
jgoins Report This Comment
Date: December 08, 2019 08:27AM

Yes if he had a gun the death toll could have been higher but if others had been armed he might have chosen a softer target where others are not armed or he might have been dealt with after the first shot.

The people did indeed step in and prevent the guy guy from taking more lives but it doesn't always turn out like this. Attackers usually choose places where nobody would be armed and he thinks he can do his deed without fear of being stopped.

About the comment about motor vehicles, I was talking bout England trying to ban knives now and how ridiculous it is. If the attacker had used a car or a truck to kill people would they chose to ban them, no, it would be too difficult but a knife they can ban because nobody will object much and it will look like the government is trying to protect them. Again blaming the weapon instead of the person using it. Governments can't take on the big job of dealing with violence itself.
GAK67 Report This Comment
Date: December 08, 2019 01:46PM

"but if others had been armed he might have chosen a softer target where others are not armed" - so you're admitting that having 'law abiding' citizens armed would do nothing but push the violence to other areas, not stop the violence or prevent further killing. At least we can agree on that.
Loner Report This Comment
Date: December 08, 2019 03:19PM

Gun vs. no gun. In this case that's an interesting proposition that we will never know. And no one really wants to find out.
The banquet hall was hosting the 5th anniversary of Learning Together, that brings together criminal offenders with others involved in higher education:
[www.bbc.com]
So attending the conference were ex-criminals, corrections officers, banquet hall staff, and (I'll just call them) graduate students. If the attendees were only graduate students (there for a different purpose) the Polish national Lukasz would have had a harder time of it or maybe have been killed. The graduate students most likely would have just pooped their drawers and died. But the ex-criminals, and to some lesser extent the corrections officers, surely know shit when they see it. Add in some of the staff to fill in the gaps (and that is only because of the presence of a couple bad ass guys) and they have their defense. Gun or no gun the criminal knows when he is fucked and isn't going to be too happy about the situation. I think that it's safe to say that if Khan had a gun there would have been a higher death toll and Khan probably would have escaped (if he wanted to) only to be apprehended later. But because of the people that were present at the conference some immediate response to the attack was a certainty. Khan actually chose the wrong target.
GAK67, I don't know where you are from. But in the USA we have a 2nd amendment and we are keeping it. And all the whining around the world (and inside our comfy USA bubble for that matter) won't change that.
Oh I need to add that (Khan)gun or no gun, if someone attending had been armed with a gun Khan is dead on the spot.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/12/2019 03:25PM by Loner.
pro_junior Report This Comment
Date: December 08, 2019 11:06PM

but what if he had a hammer? have Any of you even thought about that???
Loner Report This Comment
Date: December 09, 2019 12:15AM

If he had a hammer
He'd hammer in the morning
He'd hammer in the evening
All over Britannia
He'd hammer out danger
He'd hammer out a warning
He'd hammer out love between
His brothers and his sisters
All over Britannia
jgoins Report This Comment
Date: December 10, 2019 08:58AM

I guess what I am saying is, if law abiding citizens carry guns it does not mean violence would ensue. Violence only happens when criminals carry guns and no amount of laws will ever stop that violence, criminals do not obey the laws.
pulse Report This Comment
Date: December 10, 2019 10:21PM

And the good thing is under no circumstances can a law abiding person crack and go nuts with that gun. Everyone's a winner.