Quote:
Originally Posted by AlexB
It’s not great to have five attacks in a year, although all of them were terror attacks rather, and not one of them was a gun attack which is the topic here. So a slight false equivalence there.
Back on topic, I believe, that there were at least 11 gun attacks in schools only in January alone in the US.
Kentucky shooting is 11th U.S. school attack of new year - CBC News | The National
So in a nation where guns are generally illegal other than for hunting/clay shooting, even the really bad guys don’t use them, and if they had have had guns, the tolls would undoubtedly have been much higher given the density of the public presence.
So thanks for pointing how effective gun control can be in eliminating mass shootings, and reducing fatalities in an attack in a public place (I accept it’s a very different beats in the US, but this was such a ridiculous false equivalence it deserved a slightly ridiculous reply)
Can we refocus on the topic now? |
Opps, I took your comment on the need for armed people in schools as an attack on civil liberties. You are saying, why should there be armed people when just getting rid of guns is the solution?
If so, what I think is truly a false equivalence is saying what works in a nation of 53 million or 24 million in Australia is somehow directly related to a nation of 325 million. For example, the US has 737 people per 100,00 incarcerated, England: 148, Australia 125. So maybe there are a lot more things that need to be addressed before we can ever get to "just take the guns away and all will be good"