The Religion of Peace Strikes Again-Australian Ediition

[Reality 3,127]

This is fake news, not possible, guns are illegal in Australia.

Try again repubtards.

[5-Points 3,838]

49 minutes ago, dogcows said:

Only 50 mass shootings over 5 years would be a huge and very welcome reduction in the U.S.

Guns aren't the problem and this country isn't prepared to do the heavy lifting it would take to combat the actual problem. 

Stop drugging your kids. Lock up violent criminals until they're too old to commit more violent crimes. Allow people to actually exercise their 2A right to "keep and bear arms." Stop importing violent, 3rd world, dooshbags who prey on innocent Americans. 

 

[seafoam1 3,492]

1 hour ago, dogcows said:

Only 50 mass shootings over 5 years would be a huge and very welcome reduction in the U.S.

You forget that in your earlier comment that you and mdpee are currently not counting the mass shootings that daily happen in democrat run cities. 

Stop your BS ponyboy. 

[MDC 8,048]

Australia’s rate of homicide by firearm per 100k is 0.1.

The United States is 4.  

[seafoam1 3,492]

42 minutes ago, MDC said:

US population is around 13 times larger than Australia. We’ve had 390 mass shootings in 2025 vs. TWO in Australia.

Do the math, virgin.

Virgin mdpee thinks he knows what he's talking about. He counts based on liberal narrative numbers. Which is all mathematically wrong.

No wonder why peeboy here has been doomed to live in filth ridden philthadelphia. 

You deserve it peeboy. 

[Reality 3,127]

Reportedly a piece of shlt from Pakistan, no big surprise. Definitely let these people into your country.

[seafoam1 3,492]

12 minutes ago, MDC said:

Australia’s rate of homicide by firearm per 100k is 0.1.

The United States is 4.  

What does that have to do with mass shootings and 13% of the population here committing 58% of the violent crimes peeboy?

[The Real timschochet 7,515]

8 minutes ago, Reality said:

Reportedly a piece of shlt from Pakistan, no big surprise. Definitely let these people into your country.

What to do with such bigotry? Ignoring the fact that it was a Muslim who stopped him (confirmed by, of all people, Benjamin Netanyahu). But that shouldn’t matter anyhow. The point is that you, like President Trump, condemn a large group of people for the actions of a few or one. Please refer to the other thread I posted in as to how this sort of attitude  is currently affecting people I know. 
 

You, like me, like all Americans were taught to treat everyone as an individual. This is at our core, what defines us as Americans. what makes us great. Let’s get back to that. 

[Voltaire 5,518]

Mamdani will have to find creative ways to globalize the intifada if Trump won't allow in any more jihadist-inclined Columbia University students.

[seafoam1 3,492]

Just now, The Real timschochet said:

What to do with such bigotry?

It's truth. You liberal idiots call saying the truth is "bigotry". 

Go eat another bag of Cheetos big boy. Buy the wife a beer for me and tell her I said hi. 

[Reality 3,127]

4 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

What to do with such bigotry? Ignoring the fact that it was a Muslim who stopped him (confirmed by, of all people, Benjamin Netanyahu). But that shouldn’t matter anyhow. The point is that you, like President Trump, condemn a large group of people for the actions of a few or one. Please refer to the other thread I posted in as to how this sort of attitude  is currently affecting people I know. 
 

You, like me, like all Americans were taught to treat everyone as an individual. This is at our core, what defines us as Americans. what makes us great. Let’s get back to that. 

No, fock you, when it comes to keeping my family safe, I don't give fock about your feelings.

[The Real timschochet 7,515]

6 minutes ago, Reality said:

No, fock you, when it comes to keeping my family safe, I don't give fock about your feelings.

You shouldn’t. But I believe that, in the long run, your views on this subject actually make you and your family less safe, not more. And THAT you should at least consider. 

[seafoam1 3,492]

3 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

You shouldn’t. But I believe that, in the long run, your views on this subject actually make you and your family less safe, not more. And THAT you should at least consider. 

Liberals are so stupid. 

[Reality 3,127]

7 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

You shouldn’t. But I believe that, in the long run, your views on this subject actually make you and your family less safe, not more. And THAT you should at least consider. 

I doubt even your fellow comrades can respond to a response this stupid, congratz.

[Mark Davis 433]

5 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

What to do with such bigotry? Ignoring the fact that it was a Muslim who stopped him (confirmed by, of all people, Benjamin Netanyahu). But that shouldn’t matter anyhow. The point is that you, like President Trump, condemn a large group of people for the actions of a few or one. Please refer to the other thread I posted in as to how this sort of attitude  is currently affecting people I know. 
 

You, like me, like all Americans were taught to treat everyone as an individual. This is at our core, what defines us as Americans. what makes us great. Let’s get back to that. 

Statistically these areas produce large numbers of violent radicals.  We either cannot vet or do a poor job of vetting these folks as has been demonstrated time and time again.  We are bringing in threats to our country by doing so and it's unfortunate for those who may be denied who don't fall in to the bad group so to speak.  But we have no way of knowing who these people are and we are sacrificing the lives of Americans for this ideology. 

By all accounts, the hero of the day was a Muslim man.  We should all be thankful and grateful to him.  But this goes back to the statistical reality of the situation.  Had the bad actor not been allowed in, there would have been no tragedy.  So it comes down to what is an acceptable fail rate on migrants from these areas where fail rate is defined as radicals or those who embrace that ideology.  To me the question is are you ok with this level of radical Islamic violence within the West?  If you are, then you can support these policies as you bring more in, by statistical definition these incidents will increase.  I think the fail rate is too high and we should stop bringing in people from these areas that we can't possibly vet.

I'm all for treating all Americans as individuals, but I'm also all for protecting those same Americans of all backgrounds from these populations with large subsets of radicalism and an unwillingness to assimilate or be here for the right reasons.  The problem with your friend has multiple layers, including that we should have never tried to occupy or make Afghanistan into a western thinking country.  We made it far worse within our shores by bringing in folks we had no idea who they are.  Even if the primary person in the family is good that we dealt with, we have no idea who the other people are they are bringing with them.  This is a way different scenario from the disagreements we may have at the border with Mexico where yes there are criminals, but most of those are economic migrants.  We need not keep closing our eyes and hoping this problem goes away, we can stop escalating it by importing more people from these parts of the world, we just haven't had the will. 

[MDC 8,048]

27 minutes ago, Voltaire said:

Mamdani will have to find creative ways to globalize the intifada if Trump won't allow in any more jihadist-inclined Columbia University students.

Trump’s new bitcoin partner CZ probably has some ideas, seeing as how his company laundered $ for Al Qaida, Isis, and Hamas.  

[The Real timschochet 7,515]

2 minutes ago, Mark Davis said:

Statistically these areas produce large numbers of violent radicals.  We either cannot vet or do a poor job of vetting these folks as has been demonstrated time and time again.  We are bringing in threats to our country by doing so and it's unfortunate for those who may be denied who don't fall in to the bad group so to speak.  But we have no way of knowing who these people are and we are sacrificing the lives of Americans for this ideology. 

By all accounts, the hero of the day was a Muslim man.  We should all be thankful and grateful to him.  But this goes back to the statistical reality of the situation.  Had the bad actor not been allowed in, there would have been no tragedy.  So it comes down to what is an acceptable fail rate on migrants from these areas where fail rate is defined as radicals or those who embrace that ideology.  To me the question is are you ok with this level of radical Islamic violence within the West?  If you are, then you can support these policies as you bring more in, by statistical definition these incidents will increase.  I think the fail rate is too high and we should stop bringing in people from these areas that we can't possibly vet.

I'm all for treating all Americans as individuals, but I'm also all for protecting those same Americans of all backgrounds from these populations with large subsets of radicalism and an unwillingness to assimilate or be here for the right reasons.  The problem with your friend has multiple layers, including that we should have never tried to occupy or make Afghanistan into a western thinking country.  We made it far worse within our shores by bringing in folks we had no idea who they are.  Even if the primary person in the family is good that we dealt with, we have no idea who the other people are they are bringing with them.  This is a way different scenario from the disagreements we may have at the border with Mexico where yes there are criminals, but most of those are economic migrants.  We need not keep closing our eyes and hoping this problem goes away, we can stop escalating it by importing more people from these parts of the world, we just haven't had the will. 

You make reasonable points and I am all for looking at these people very carefully. But I am not for excluding them altogether, that’s the bigoted part. 
 

It took the family from Afghanistan I worked with over a year of extensive vetting before they were allowed to come to the USA. Perhaps if they had been Christians coming from Denmark they would have received less vetting. And that’s fine; I’m OK with that difference. I agree that Muslims from a certain part of the world should be looked at more carefully because as you wrote, the numbers don’t lie. But when we attempt to paint a broad brush and exclude them completely, based on their religion or ethnicity, I’ve got a big problem with that and I would hope that you would too. 

[dogcows 1,185]

1 hour ago, 5-Points said:

Guns aren't the problem and this country isn't prepared to do the heavy lifting it would take to combat the actual problem. 

Stop drugging your kids. Lock up violent criminals until they're too old to commit more violent crimes. Allow people to actually exercise their 2A right to "keep and bear arms." Stop importing violent, 3rd world, dooshbags who prey on innocent Americans. 

 

Every other country has similar or worse crime problems. And yet only in America do those problems end up with daily mass shootings. We have more guns than people but ideologues refuse to see what is right in front of them. White people with gun hoards do most of the mass shootings. But angry fat old white MAGA men pretend it’s the fault of immigrants. Lame and stupid. And our kids die because of the stupidity and bigotry. 

[Mark Davis 433]

17 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

You make reasonable points and I am all for looking at these people very carefully. But I am not for excluding them altogether, that’s the bigoted part. 
 

It took the family from Afghanistan I worked with over a year of extensive vetting before they were allowed to come to the USA. Perhaps if they had been Christians coming from Denmark they would have received less vetting. And that’s fine; I’m OK with that difference. I agree that Muslims from a certain part of the world should be looked at more carefully because as you wrote, the numbers don’t lie. But when we attempt to paint a broad brush and exclude them completely, based on their religion or ethnicity, I’ve got a big problem with that and I would hope that you would too. 

The agreement we have is that individuals from those places can be peaceful, good people.  We also appear to agree that we cannot or do not know how to vet people from those areas and populations.

The disagreement is that the risk of bringing people from those areas into our country is worth it because some of those people we would be bringing in are good.  In cold reality, it's that acceptable error rate question. How many incidents, how many hot pockets of Islamic radicalism within the US is ok for allowing others to be here? 

I don't pretend to know that fail rate, but it's not near zero and by your statement it is higher in this subset of people than by your example Christians from Denmark.  I have the belief that if you bring in too many people who are radicalized or accept that ideology even tacitly, then you are allowing a growth of that cancer within your own borders.  If I took 100 people from Afghanistan who wanted to come here, even with some level of vetting, neither of us could assure the other how many of those people believe in radical Islam or anti-Western ideologies.  It's not that I don't recognize there are good people in those populations, it's that we can't blindly bring in cancers to our society along with those who may want to come for the right reasons. 

I wish we could vet them, I'm sure you do too.  But it's quite evident that we can't.  So, the disagreement becomes is allowing those who want to come for the right reasons a path to get here worth the accompanying acts of radical Islamic violence we will face both today and down the road as we allow that ideology into our borders and give it quarter?  Because if we are being fair based on what even you and I mutually agree on, we are admitting both groups or we would have to admit neither.

[seafoam1 3,492]

8 minutes ago, dogcows said:

Every other country has similar or worse crime problems. 

And you accept it as normal and welcome it dogcrap. You are sick. 

[The Real timschochet 7,515]

3 minutes ago, Mark Davis said:

The agreement we have is that individuals from those places can be peaceful, good people.  We also appear to agree that we cannot or do not know how to vet people from those areas and populations.

The disagreement is that the risk of bringing people from those areas into our country is worth it because some of those people we would be bringing in are good.  In cold reality, it's that acceptable error rate question. How many incidents, how many hot pockets of Islamic radicalism within the US is ok for allowing others to be here? 

I don't pretend to know that fail rate, but it's not near zero and by your statement it is higher in this subset of people than by your example Christians from Denmark.  I have the belief that if you bring in too many people who are radicalized or accept that ideology even tacitly, then you are allowing a growth of that cancer within your own borders.  If I took 100 people from Afghanistan who wanted to come here, even with some level of vetting, neither of us could assure the other how many of those people believe in radical Islam or anti-Western ideologies.  It's not that I don't recognize there are good people in those populations, it's that we can't blindly bring in cancers to our society along with those who may want to come for the right reasons. 

I wish we could vet them, I'm sure you do too.  But it's quite evident that we can't.  So, the disagreement becomes is allowing those who want to come for the right reasons a path to get here worth the accompanying acts of radical Islamic violence we will face both today and down the road as we allow that ideology into our borders and give it quarter?  Because if we are being fair, we are admitting both groups or we would have to admit neither.

I don’t agree that we can’t vet them. Perhaps in some instances we need to be more careful. But I will never accept exclusion. To me that goes against the core principle of who we are as Americans. And as I attempted to point out to @Reality, giving up our ideals actually makes us far less safe IMO. 

[5-Points 3,838]

3 minutes ago, dogcows said:

Every other country has similar or worse crime problems. And yet only in America do those problems end up with daily mass shootings. We have more guns than people but ideologues refuse to see what is right in front of them. White people with gun hoards do most of the mass shootings. But angry fat old white MAGA men pretend it’s the fault of immigrants. Lame and stupid. And our kids die because of the stupidity and bigotry. 

Speaking of stupidity. 

You're right, there are more guns than people in this country. So CLEARLY, guns aren't the problem. 

White guys with gun collections do not commit mass shootings, ya dope. 

You know who does? Drugged up kids who shoot up schools.  Why are they drugged up? Because they have sh!tty parents. 

You know who else does? Gangbangers who, more often than not, are not using legally owned firearms to commit their violent crime. Many of whom are illegal themselves. 

Please don’t think for one second that you are taking the rational, informed position on this matter. You're hysterical and grossly ill-informed. Not to mention hilarious.

 

[dogcows 1,185]

7 minutes ago, 5-Points said:

Speaking of stupidity. 

You're right, there are more guns than people in this country. So CLEARLY, guns aren't the problem. 

White guys with gun collections do not commit mass shootings, ya dope. 

You know who does? Drugged up kids who shoot up schools.  Why are they drugged up? Because they have sh!tty parents. 

You know who else does? Gangbangers who, more often than not, are not using legally owned firearms to commit their violent crime. Many of whom are illegal themselves. 

Please don’t think for one second that you are taking the rational, informed position on this matter. You're hysterical and grossly ill-informed. Not to mention hilarious.

 

You know what kids with shitty parents do in other countries? NOT commit mass shootings. Your arguments are absolutely braindead. America has more guns per capita than any other developed country by far. And the mass shootings correlate with that. It’s something you can only dismiss if you intentionally lie to yourself.

A majority of mass shooters are white. 95% are male, and the average age is 35. So there goes your “‘it’s teenagers”‘ argument.

[Ron_Artest 2,397]

1 hour ago, 5-Points said:

Guns aren't the problem and this country isn't prepared to do the heavy lifting it would take to combat the actual problem. 

Stop drugging your kids. Lock up violent criminals until they're too old to commit more violent crimes. Allow people to actually exercise their 2A right to "keep and bear arms." Stop importing violent, 3rd world, dooshbags who prey on innocent Americans. 

 

We are the only modern country that has this problem, but it's the rest of the world coming here?

It's the guns, stupid.

[Mark Davis 433]

28 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

I don’t agree that we can’t vet them. Perhaps in some instances we need to be more careful. But I will never accept exclusion. To me that goes against the core principle of who we are as Americans. And as I attempted to point out to @Reality, giving up our ideals actually makes us far less safe IMO. 

I would say that when you bring up who we are as Americans, the last time we were attacked at home prior to radical Islamists was by the Japanese.  I'd submit to you that those Japanese citizens who were good people and died from atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki paid a far worse price than simply being denied admittance into the U.S.  As someone whose father would have been in the invasion force for mainland Japan, I'm thankful for those decisions.  I can still feel empathy for those who lost their lives and had little to no say in what had led to that war. 

Who we have been in the past is a country who worried about its own survival first, and from that strong base then helping others.  We for sure have our warts, but by in large we have been good.  But as Americans, I'd be leery of saying we treat people as individuals at our core when it comes to conflicts and threats to our security.

[5-Points 3,838]

2 minutes ago, dogcows said:

You know what kids with shitty parents do in other countries? NOT commit mass shootings. Your arguments are absolutely braindead. America has more guns per capita than any other developed country by far. And the mass shootings correlate with that. It’s something you can only dismiss if you intentionally lie to yourself.

A majority of mass shooters are white. 95% are male, and the average age is 35. So there goes your “‘it’s teenagers”‘ argument.

You know what those sh!tty parents in other countries don't do? Load their kids up with SSRI's. 

Correlation is not causation. Guns don't cause the problem and if they all magically disappeared tomorrow, the root cause of the problem would still exist. But you want to bury your head in the sand and blame an inanimate object for the actions of a relatively few bad people. 

You are beyond reason and logic with regards to this topic. You have it stuck in your head that guns are the problem and you refuse to acknowledge any actual important causational factors. Its simply easier for your brain to blame the gun and be done with it. 

How do you explain the lack of mass shootings from the mid 80's back? We had the most guns per capita back then too. What changed? It wasn't the guns. 

 

 

[seafoam1 3,492]

Just now, Ron_Artest said:

We are the only modern country that has this problem, but it's the rest of the world coming here.

It's the guns, stupid.

Liberal idiot says "we". 

[5-Points 3,838]

1 minute ago, Ron_Artest said:

We are the only modern country that has this problem, but it's the rest of the world coming here?

It's the guns, stupid.

500 million guns in private hands screams otherwise, dummy. 

[The Real timschochet 7,515]

1 minute ago, Mark Davis said:

I would say that when you bring up who we are as Americans, the last time we were attacked at home prior to radical Islamists was by the Japanese.  I'd submit to you that those Japanese citizens who were good people and died from atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki paid a far worse price than simply being denied admittance into the U.S.  As someone whose father would have been in the invasion force for mainland Japan, I'm thankful for those decisions.  I can still feel empathy for those who lost their lives and had little to no say in what had led to that war. 

Who we have been in the past is a country who worried about its own survival first, and from that strong base then helping others.  We for sure have our warts, but by and large we have been good.  But as Americans, I'd be leery of saying we treat people as individuals at our core when it comes to conflicts and threats to our security.

I think that the terrible way we treated Japanese Americans should inform our current behavior. 

[Ron_Artest 2,397]

5 minutes ago, 5-Points said:

500 million guns in private hands screams otherwise, dummy. 

Self own

[5-Points 3,838]

1 minute ago, Ron_Artest said:

Self own

Yeah, you owned yourself. 

You clearly can't fathom what 500 million guns in private hands would do to this country if guns were the problem. 

It's not a gun problem, dumb dumb, it's a people problem. 

[seafoam1 3,492]

Trump is kicking ass. 

[dogcows 1,185]

42 minutes ago, 5-Points said:

You know what those sh!tty parents in other countries don't do? Load their kids up with SSRI's. 

Correlation is not causation. Guns don't cause the problem and if they all magically disappeared tomorrow, the root cause of the problem would still exist. But you want to bury your head in the sand and blame an inanimate object for the actions of a relatively few bad people. 

You are beyond reason and logic with regards to this topic. You have it stuck in your head that guns are the problem and you refuse to acknowledge any actual important causational factors. Its simply easier for your brain to blame the gun and be done with it. 

How do you explain the lack of mass shootings from the mid 80's back? We had the most guns per capita back then too. What changed? It wasn't the guns. 

Your response is far more emotional than any other I’m seeing here.

I still think it’s hilarious that many Americans think we are the only country with antidepressants or mental health issues or crime.

Many other countries have similar levels of all these things. And not even 10% of the mass shootings we have. Because they have common sense gun restrictions. If the problem is a few bad people… imagine how much we could protect kids by making sure those few bad people have a harder time getting their hands on guns.

[Ron_Artest 2,397]

43 minutes ago, 5-Points said:

Yeah, you owned yourself. 

You clearly can't fathom what 500 million guns in private hands would do to this country if guns were the problem. 

It's not a gun problem, dumb dumb, it's a people problem. 

We're seeing it, every day.

[Maximum Overkill 2,592]

15 minutes ago, Ron_Artest said:

We're seeing it, every day.

England has a knife problem. 

You don't say 

[seafoam1 3,492]

3 minutes ago, Maximum Overkill said:

England has a knife problem. 

You don't say 

You are talking to an idiot. Gutterboy is a clown. 

[Maximum Overkill 2,592]

Just now, seafoam1 said:

You are talking to an idiot. Gutterboy is a clown. 

@Ron_Artest

Is a blithering idiot, he believes that guns kill people, and that people don't kill people. 

[5-Points 3,838]

25 minutes ago, dogcows said:

Your response is far more emotional than any other I’m seeing here.

I still think it’s hilarious that many Americans think we are the only country with antidepressants or mental health issues or crime.

Many other countries have similar levels of all these things. And not even 10% of the mass shootings we have. Because they have common sense gun restrictions. If the problem is a few bad people… imagine how much we could protect kids by making sure those few bad people have a harder time getting their hands on guns.

We have "common sense" gun restrictions in this country. 

They don't keep the wrong people from getting their hands on guns. It's a pipedream. 

The sky is blue, water is wet, bad people do bad things. 

 

[MDC 8,048]

People kill people. Guns is the preferred method.

[5-Points 3,838]

24 minutes ago, Ron_Artest said:

We're seeing it, every day.

If 500 million firearms were turned lose to wreak havoc tomorrow, we would be a country of about 50 million overnight. 

You're seeing what you want to see.