This (Virginia) is the 150th mass shooting in the US so far in 2019

[backinbusiness]

Breivik’s high kill count vs Norway’s small population skews the numbers for sure. I don’t agree with gun prohibition in the US at all but Misc sure does love to use misleading statistics to further their point. Exclude Breivik and Norway falls out of the list


But not all mass shootings are created equal, gangs shooting at rival gangs =/= innocent people getting mowed down by a mass murderer. There were not 150 incidents like what happened in Virginia

We can play that game too - remove all Gang related shootings and USA falls off the list.

[Foxmulder0]

ITs always Cray hard core gun nuts who would say this is the cost of freedom

Yeah go tell the families or some kids fuking mom who was working this is the cost of freedom

Fuking joke

Own a handgun and that’s it. Shouldn’t be scared to head to a concert without getting mowed down

[Antonio519]

what are u talking about? 14.4% of the U.S. population are immigrants. in Norway 14,1%

Technically like 98.4% of the US population are immigrants or descendants of immigrants

The Native American population is only 1.6%

[Dasser]

People always go for the banning of guns. Meanwhile bigPharma is laughing their asses off over no one even mentioning the fact that every mass shooter is on psychiatric medications.

[MotorCityCobra]

this chart is utter BS, the guy who posted it still has not provided a source. as usual some braindead miscers believe anything that fits their ideas and skewed agendas. I DONT CARE IF YOU NEG ME IDIOTS. Norway is in fact among the safest country in the world. we had a terror attack in 2012 were a white nationalist killed about 100 people. this is why Norway is high on this idiotic chart. remove this and Norway is nowhere to be found.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/m...-in-the-world/
https://www.tnp.no/norway/panorama/n...y-in-the-world

[Vhagar]

this chart is utter BS, the guy who posted it still has not provided a source. as usual some braindead miscers believe anything that fits their ideas and skewed agendas. I DONT CARE IF YOU NEG ME IDIOTS. Norway is in fact among the safest country in the world. we had a terror attack in 2012 were a white nationalist killed about 100 people. this is why Norway is high on this idiotic chart. remove this and Norway is nowhere to be found.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/m...-in-the-world/
https://www.tnp.no/norway/panorama/n...y-in-the-world

LMFAO at your full on meltdown over this.

I bet you’re pacing around your mon’s basement wringing your hands over this stat.

fuking lol

[superiorlogic]

Absolutely sickening. I am very grateful that weapons in general are hard to come by in my country. You very rarely hear about shooting episodes, let alone those including fatalities. But how to solve this issue in the US? RIP

https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/r.../mass-shooting
https://www.massshootingtracker.org/data (according to this there are 172 mass shootings this year)
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-48481814

OK, so that makes the total number of mass shooting victims around 1,150 or so in the past 60 years

[Ikeman83]

I had a mass shooting at my gun range Wednesday. Bout 200 shots fired...

[primetime32]

ITs always Cray hard core gun nuts who would say this is the cost of freedom

Yeah go tell the families or some kids fuking mom who was working this is the cost of freedom

Fuking joke

Own a handgun and that’s it. Shouldn’t be scared to head to a concert without getting mowed down

Genius, the shooter yesterday used a handgun.

[MotorCityCobra]

LMFAO at your full on meltdown over this.

I bet you’re pacing around your mon’s basement wringing your hands over this stat.

fuking lol

im not trust me, but since so many idiots believe this lying chart i had to put things right. also the poster still has not provided a source. LMAO at how people believe in utter nonsense these days, without even checking for a source

[lightsarefallin]

I'm from Canada so I wasn't raised in a 'gun culture.' It seems that gun ownership, for a lot of Americans, is something woven into the fabric of their culture. So whenever I hear about these gun debates, I try to take a third party approach, remain transparent and listen to arguments from both sides, and I always come to the same conclusion. I don't think it's a good idea to be radically black or white on any issue as there's always such a vast grey area that people don't want to look at because it's easier to take a hard side, something that doesn't require as much critical thinking.

As for the whole 'let's ban all guns because countries that have banned guns have no murders' debate, I can't believe some people think that taking away all the guns from legal owners in the USA would somehow solve the problem. Drugs are 'illegal,' people still use them.

The way I think about it is, if someone wants to kill a lot of people, that person will do it. They won't be deterred by the fact that guns are no longer legal. You can buy a gun illegally, probably quite easily in fact. A lot of shootings happen with handguns as well.

What people should be focusing on is the why perspective of the incident, why did this person do it, and now how they did it, because they could have used any weapon to inflect their terror on other people. Because really, that's what mass shooters want to do, they want to go out in a blaze of glory and become notorious, and they will use any means necessary.

Why is it that there are so many people that are pushed to commit such savage acts of violence in the USA? People should stop being so obsessed with the fact that he used a gun and more focused on the precipitating factors that led to the act. Too bad people are so emotionally volatile and refuse to think critically. Every time some mass shooting happens you have all these late night show hosts and 'celebrities' espousing the same old 'we need stricter gun laws!' and leaving it at that, offering no follow-up to the essentially braindead, same old platitude that just rolled out of the their mouths like verbal diarrhea. What moral people they are. Good job, champ! You've offered precisely 0 solutions, just virtue signalling what a great person you are.

[RonaldMcflurry]

The price of freedom is paved in blood bro. Once you start trading freedoms for comfortable security, you open the door to lose everything. Guns are the only defense against the tyranny of the state. If that means mass shootings, so be it. These shootings tend to happen in places where the majority of people are unarmed. If we went back to the old way, and you were allowed to carry a sidearm in your daily business, you'd see people like this get maybe 2-3 people tops before they'd get killed. The world is a violent and cruel place, and anyone interested in mass murder can use botulism, pipe bombs, toxic gas, fire, vehicles, etc to carry out their attacks. You can ban everything and trust the state to protect you or you can trust yourself and the weapons you have. I will remind you that the police practically never stop murders. They usually are there to help solve the murder after the fact. So, unless you want to be the dead body getting investigated, it's always in your interest to arm yourself and be ready so you at least have a fighting chance. Finally, you can assume a mass murderer will find a way to obtain a weapon for his attacks. Banning guns only reduces the ability for noncriminals to defend themselves. It may reduce the incidence of suicides. I can buy that. That's honestly the best argument against firearm ownership imo. But that is a separate debate over whether people ought to wield power over their own lives.

This. Plus mass shootings are actually rare as fk in the US. More people die in the inner city in a year in Chicago from gun violence than in mass shootings over the last 20 years. You think Chicago gangbangers own and obtain guns legally? It's a hot topic issue boosted up by the media and the government to keep people scared so that they will give up their rights.

this is utter BS, give me a source. tell me why is that we literally NEVER hear of death from mass public shootings here in Norway? because there are none, compared to the US where this is a daily thing. if the numbers are correct its because we had a terror attack here in 2012 from a white nationalist which killed about 100 people

You never hear about it because you are uninformed and ignorant, obviously.

[VoxExMachina]

Any foreigner who comments on what laws we make or how Americans vote to run their country should STFU.

In any event, you should be thankful for American guns. It's the only reason Norway is still a sovereign country.

[MattyMiscer]

This. Plus mass shootings are actually rare as fk in the US. More people die in the inner city in a year in Chicago from gun violence than in mass shootings over the last 20 years. You think Chicago gangbangers own and obtain guns legally? It's a hot topic issue boosted up by the media and the government to keep people scared so that they will give up their rights.













You never hear about it because you are uninformed and ignorant, obviously.

Repped


My wife actually has to be at court at that building next week for the trial of some ******* drunk driver who hit her. Hopefully the case doesn’t get pushed back

tell me why is that we literally NEVER hear of death from mass public shootings here in Norway?

[messomi]

ITs always Cray hard core gun nuts who would say this is the cost of freedom

Yeah go tell the families or some kids fuking mom who was working this is the cost of freedom

Fuking joke

Own a handgun and that’s it. Shouldn’t be scared to head to a concert without getting mowed down

I need 5 rocket launchers and 7 concealed ak 47's just to shop for some groceries.

[RonaldMcflurry]

It's crazy how every other country rides the US's dik so hard. Worry about your own sht, and let us worry about ours.

[isingmodel]

I'm a leftie but most of the anti gun talking points are pretty poorly thought out and researched.

OP, the "mass shootings" in these counters aren't usually mass shootings by the official definition (4 people killed in a single incident). They significantly broaden the definition to pump up the numbers.

They also are misleading in that they certainly don't represent what is generally associated with mass shootings - which is large scale lone wolf massacre type incidents (school shootings etc). These are mostly inner city gang shootings where more than one person was hit (though not necessarily killed) by gunfire.

These hugely dishonest figures would make it seem like schools full of children are getting massacred every day, but that isn't the case.

Overall gun violence and violence in general has been trending down in the US. While I don't agree with everything the hardcore NRA types preach, I think liberals needs to re-evaluate the evidence.

[VoxExMachina]

Own a handgun and that’s it. Shouldn’t be scared to head to a concert without getting mowed down

A. Far more people are killed with knives and blunt objects than with rifles. https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s...-data-table-11

B. This guy used a handgun.

C. Negged

[Brozart]

It's crazy how every other country rides the US's dik so hard. Worry about your own sht, and let us worry about ours.

Perhaps it's related to the fact that the US government (or certain powerful elements of it, at least), thinks that "everyone else's chit" is their chit.

When a particular country (or agencies and agents of that country) has a penchant for going to other countries and running secret wars, toppling legitimate governments, kidnapping citizens, starting officially-sanctioned wars for illegitimate reasons, for endlessly using other countries for their own proxy wars with no regard for those who live there... perhaps a certain level of concern regarding "the US's dick" is reasonable.

Yes, agents of other countries are also involved in actions that are in direct contradiction to the rights or well-being of others, but there is no one who does it to a level anywhere near that of the US, and there is no one who does it so "well".

[VoxExMachina]

Perhaps it's related to the fact that the US government (or certain powerful elements of it, at least), thinks that "everyone else's chit" is their chit.

When a particular country (or agencies and agents of that country) has a penchant for going to other countries and running secret wars, toppling legitimate governments, kidnapping citizens, starting officially-sanctioned wars for illegitimate reasons, for endlessly using other countries for their own proxy wars with no regard for those who live there... perhaps a certain level of concern regarding "the US's dick" is reasonable.

Yes, agents of other countries are also involved in actions that are in direct contradiction to the rights or well-being of others, but there is no one who does it to a level anywhere near that of the US, and there is no one who does it so "well".

Maybe because over the course of the last century, a good portion of the world has proven that they start world wars and commit mass genocide if left unsupervised?

I'm just busting balls, but it's true. The result of two world wars, where America had to eventually step in and pay a huge price in both money and lives, is naturally going to result in some "policeman" diplomacy. Furthermore, since the end of those wars, the vast burden of protecting NATO countries also fell on the US. Before those wars, the U.S. had a very isolationist policy and minded it's own business.

So I guess if everyone wants us to stay out of their business, maybe don't create giant fukups and pay to protect your own borders without big daddy holding your hand.

[Frank Drebin]

Daily reminder that the homicide rate in the US is nearing an ALL TIME low. MSM is very powerful.

[MiscInformed]

this is utter BS, give me a source. tell me why is that we literally NEVER hear of death from mass public shootings here in Norway? because there are none, compared to the US where this is a daily thing. if the numbers are correct its because we had a terror attack here in 2012 from a white nationalist which killed about 100 people

IIRC, he wasn't a white nationalist, he was an anti-communist who went on a shooting spree on a private island where communist parents were sending their kids to communist summer camp.

[messomi]

IIRC, he wasn't a white nationalist, he was an anti-communist who went on a shooting spree on a private island where communist parents were sending their kids to communist summer camp.

you have absolutely no ****ing idea what you are talking about lmao.

[Brozart]

Maybe because over the course of the last century, a good portion of the world has proven that they start world wars and commit mass genocide if left unsupervised?

I'm just busting balls, but it's true. The result of two world wars, where America had to eventually step in and pay a huge price in both money and lives, is naturally going to result in some "policeman" diplomacy. Furthermore, since the end of those wars, the vast burden of protecting NATO countries also fell on the US. Before those wars, the U.S. had a very isolationist policy and minded it's own business.

So I guess if everyone wants us to stay out of their business, maybe don't create giant fukups and pay to protect your own borders without big daddy holding your hand.

Yes, things are more complicated than "good guy/bad guy", but the assertion that the US has the best interests of others in mind is absolutely inconsistent with their endeavors.

The US does not operate with the goal of achieving stability or protecting other countries, it operates entirely in its own interests and does so with complete disregard for the interests of other nations - the benefits other nations gain from alliances with the US are lucky byproducts, and the US "displaying concern" for others is simply because it's easier to use a carrot than a stick, where possible.

The US doing so is not unreasonable - of course any country should act in its own interests. Of course humans in general prioritise their own interests over those of others. But a "policeman" analogy is a mistake, unless that policeman is terribly corrupt. The US overstepping any reasonable boundaries is the rule rather than the exception.

Sure, the US is the "big daddy" of the world, for now, but it's the big daddy who feels that because it's "his house" he can treat everyone in it as he sees fit, violating any semblance of respect or decency and, when the time comes, you'd better hope he feels it's in his interests to help you, because you sure as hell can't trust him.

[ohiostate124]

I don’t think OP understands how manipulated gun statistics are.

[VoxExMachina]

Yes, things are more complicated than "good guy/bad guy", but the assertion that the US has the best interests of others in mind is absolutely inconsistent with their endeavors.

The US does not operate with the goal of achieving stability or protecting other countries, it operates entirely in its own interests and does so with complete disregard for the interests of other nations - the benefits other nations gain from alliances with the US are lucky byproducts, and the US "displaying concern" for others is simply because it's easier to use a carrot than a stick, where possible.

The US doing so is not unreasonable - of course any country should act in its own interests. Of course humans in general prioritise their own interests over those of others. But a "policeman" analogy is a mistake, unless that policeman is terribly corrupt. The US overstepping any reasonable boundaries is the rule rather than the exception.

Sure, the US is the "big daddy" of the world, for now, but it's the big daddy who feels that because it's "his house" he can treat everyone in it as he sees fit, violating any semblance of respect or decency and, when the time comes, you'd better hope he feels it's in his interests to help you, because you sure as hell can't trust him.

I don't necessarily disagree in many regards, though I think the view is different depending on where you stand. Personally, I think the US should stay out of most of these foreign conflicts and let Europe or China or whoever deal with people like North Korea or even the Middle East. The money we spend "protecting and policing" - regardless of the reasons - could be spent on health care or tax cuts.

But don't kid yourself either. The second another nation is seriously threatened you know very well who they're going to scream for help from. Most countries have very little ability to defend themselves if push really came to shove. Australia included.

[IAMBEE]

- it's mental illness but who cares about dealing with the deep-rooted issues that we have with our prioritisation of corporate interests over those of the population, who cares about the progressive de-regulation of industries, who cares about the fact that our government is the most heavily militarised in the world and one of the motivational factors for this is the fact that we the people have guns and, of course, they have plans for taking us out if needs be, who cares that the population is so apathetic that at the point when an armed revolt became necessary it would fizzle out, I don't care about that chit, just don't take my guns.

Really, guns themselves aren't the real problem, but ignoring the context and refusing to effectively address the situation while simultaneously saying "don't care, all gun control is violation of our rights" is insane.

Sounds like a bunch of liberal ******* talking points. The lack of caring for human life is directly related to liberal policies that have destroyed the moral compass of our people. When you teach a person that you can kill an unborn child, promote sexual degeneracy, and attacking religion there is little reason to care about others.

Also note that there is no greater example of why the 2nd amendment is so important than the 2016 election. You have a govt trying to passively throw out the fairly elected president of the United States, the only reason its a passive coup is because of the 2nd amendment.

[N0rds]

Honestly the OP is a real nutcase.
-Apparently an asylum seeker from the Middle East living in Norway
-Thinks women and men are equal under Islam
-****s girls for fun and posts photos of them (is your religion okay with this? lol), yet is upset and thinks they sloots, will only marry a virgin
-Now posting about the US fixing its problems, won't even say where he is originally from (I'm sure it all rainbows and sunshine there)

Used to think he was a troll, now I seriously think he is just a brainwashed idiot

Oppie absolut er en hestkuk.

[wincel]

Maybe because over the course of the last century, a good portion of the world has proven that they start world wars and commit mass genocide if left unsupervised?

I'm just busting balls, but it's true. The result of two world wars, where America had to eventually step in and pay a huge price in both money and lives, is naturally going to result in some "policeman" diplomacy. Furthermore, since the end of those wars, the vast burden of protecting NATO countries also fell on the US. Before those wars, the U.S. had a very isolationist policy and minded it's own business.

So I guess if everyone wants us to stay out of their business, maybe don't create giant fukups and pay to protect your own borders without big daddy holding your hand.

yo brah it's not like America never started wars or committed genocide tho

[IAMBEE]

yo brah it's not like America never started wars or committed genocide tho

We've started wars, but what genocide?