Anonymous #1 20h

Pen cause then the pressure on

1

Anonymous #2 20h

Idk I don't make these memes but I prefer when its facebook boomer coded instead of generative AI too

-1

Anonymous #2 20h

Just running low on those ones

0

Anonymous OP 20h

Pencil erase marks are ugly compared to the clean pen strike-through

11

Anonymous #5 20h

Mostly just to piss you guys off, lemme ask though do you actually believe in animism?

1

Anonymous #6 20h

Being fat and misspelling words both also affect other people

1

Anonymous #6 20h

But you're missing the point if you think it's meant to compare gun deaths to drunk drivers and fat people and misspelled words

1

Anonymous OP 20h

Does it… does it affect other people to the same degree as guns and drunk drivers?💀

0

Anonymous #6 20h

It can

1

Anonymous #6 20h

Drunk drivers and people that cant spell both piss me off

10

Anonymous OP 20h

I’m not even anti-gun but that might be one of the most absurdly dumb things I’ve ever read on this app😂

-3

Anonymous #7 20h

People who misspell don’t, at the very least directly, kill their people as a result of their negligence… Can’t say the same for guns and driving. Also no one cares about your feelings :(

0

Anonymous #6 20h

How come when a misspelling happens the person is to blame but when a gun death does the gun is?

1

Anonymous OP 20h

A gun is a tool, as is a pencil. Can a carpenter build a house without their tools, simply with their hands? No. Can an active shooter kill people shoot people without a gun? No. Some people shouldn’t have guns, and that’s ok.

-1

Anonymous #6 20h

I care about my feelings and im not a nobody

3

Anonymous #6 20h

An active shooter can certainly kill people without a gun, not sure what your argument is there. We can even see in other countries that don't have guns what people replace them with, it's typically cars, bombs, knives, and acid.

0

Anonymous #7 20h

Oh boy!

-1

Anonymous #6 20h

But the same person could kill with a knife, do we ban those next. What about the hammer that the builder uses

3

Anonymous OP 20h

If all of those are easier to use to kill massive amounts of people, then why are guns used more?

0

Anonymous #7 20h

A lot harder to create a mass casualty event with a knife or hammer

1

Anonymous #7 20h

I literally never argued for banning guns.

-1

Anonymous #1 20h

Still happens a ton regardless of it being harder

1

Anonymous OP 20h

Oh? What’s the data on the ratio of knife murder vs gun murder?

1

Anonymous #6 20h

In what country lol

1

Anonymous #6 20h

Also car attacks are about as prevalent as mass shootings, exceedingly rare.

1

Anonymous OP 20h

In the US. Of course knife attacks are more common in countries that banned guns…

1

Anonymous OP 20h

Can you provide a source for that?

1

Anonymous #1 20h

Its easier to create a mass casualty event with a truck than a pistol. If someone drives into a parade is it the fault of the driver or truck

3

Anonymous #6 20h

No? We haven't banned firearms so why would we be a good source for what people will use next?

1

Anonymous #7 20h

The driver, but what would happen if they didn’t have access to a truck?😂

-1

Anonymous #6 20h

Probably blow someone up, stab a bunch of people, etc etc

1

Anonymous OP 20h

You asserted it as fact that they are “about as prevalent” so it’s on you to prove that…

1

Anonymous #6 20h

They could rent one for $20, or get a car

1

Anonymous OP 20h

When is the last time a random dude successfully detonated a bomb causing a mass casualty event as a lone wolf?😂

1

Anonymous #6 20h

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8900474/

1

Anonymous #6 20h

https://nij.ojp.gov/topics/articles/public-mass-shootings-database-amasses-details-half-century-us-mass-shootings

1

Anonymous #7 19h

You need a license… my point isn’t that they just don’t have a car, I’m arguing that they don’t have access to a car. You have to provide a valid DL in order to rent a car.

1

Anonymous #6 19h

If you read through there you will find that vehicle rammings over the last decade have occurred at roughly the same or a higher rate than mass public shootings from 1966 to 2019

1

Anonymous OP 19h

Just give me the name of the study, I’m not typing in that URL

1

Anonymous #6 19h

Public Mass Shootings: Database Amasses Details of a Half Century of U.S. Mass Shootings with Firearms, Generating Psychosocial Histories

1

Anonymous #6 19h

Ramming attacks, pedestrians, and the securitization of streets and urban public space

1

Anonymous #6 19h

Most people have a drivers license, so for most people it would be easier to access a rental than to buy a legal firearm

1

Anonymous #7 19h

Then why don’t they do that instead of using a gun?

1

Anonymous #6 19h

They don't in places where they don't have gun rights

1

Anonymous #6 19h

Doesn't make it any better

1

Anonymous OP 19h

Also, lol, key findings: “regulating firearms”

1

Anonymous #6 19h

Yeah I'm looking at the study for their numerical data not their personal biases

1

Anonymous OP 19h

“Personal biases” lmfao

1

Anonymous #6 19h

Im not a killer I couldn't answer that, you're trying to inject logic into the plan of a mass shooter

1

Anonymous #6 19h

Call it what you want, conjecture, personal bias, etc

1

Anonymous OP 19h

Also, it’s funny how the “numerical data” contradicts your idea supposedly supported by the data that vehicle rankings and shootings are just as prominent when the two references both contradict your idea. I’ll elaborate.

1

Anonymous #6 19h

62 attacks over a decade is actually double the rate of 172 attacks over 53 years but I get it if that math is troublesome

1

Anonymous #6 19h

Hence roughly the same or a higher rate

1

Anonymous OP 19h

They are both also still exceedingly rare which was my entire point

1

Anonymous OP 19h

More than half of 172, so at least 50% occurred after 2000 so at least 87 happened after (likely more) with a third happening after 2010, meanwhile there were a total of at least 62 “in the last decade” so at least from 2012-2022.

1

Anonymous OP 19h

Both prescribe systemic change to prevent further events from happening. I’m also not against regulatory efforts to prevent vehicles from being used to kill people, fun fact.😂

1

Anonymous #6 19h

Last decade would be 2009-2019 but other than that correct

1

Anonymous #6 19h

What regulatory effort in relation to vehicles?

4

Anonymous #6 19h

Anything other than blaming the guy behind the wheel 🤦

1

Anonymous OP 19h

You can do both, you can blame the person and recognize that they probably aren’t the only person on the planet, in the country, or even likely in the city, wishing to cause mass murder.

1

Anonymous #6 19h

That doesn't do anything to restrict the means

1

Anonymous #6 19h

Yeah but your recognition of his fault does nothing if your actions reflect the car being at fault

1

Anonymous #7 19h

What, taking active steps to prevent it from happening or the step before that which is to recognize that we live in a world with evil people?

0

Anonymous OP 19h

No one is saying a gun or a car is at fault. You fail to recognize that it isn’t an attack on guns or cars, it’s the recognition that people will use tools to commit murder and taking steps to prevent people from A, gaining access to those tools and B, taking steps towards making those tools less effective to save lives…

1

Anonymous #6 19h

Making guns less effective and removing peoples access will also inevitably lead to death in its own right from the lack of defensive gun use. Even the lowest estimates possible figure that guns are used defensively more than guns cause death, but the majority put the number above criminal use of guns in general.

1

Anonymous #6 19h

Plus that takes away from every other part of lawful gun use as well, target shooting and hunting both require highly effective weapons.

1

Anonymous OP 19h

I wasn’t really talking about making guns less effective through regulating the mechanical design of firearms. I was referencing cars with that.

1

Anonymous OP 19h

Also, lol

1

Anonymous OP 19h

You don’t have to spam anti-gun control stuff. We’ve long gotten your point

1

Anonymous #6 19h

Ok I'm not taking someone seriously who fucking spams everytown as an actual source to be taken seriously

1

Anonymous #6 19h

Take Bloomberg and his propaganda orgs back to Israel where they came from

1

Anonymous OP 19h

Comparative study :)

1

Anonymous #6 19h

NCVS total is more faulty than the Kleck study for a number of reasons, but I still already mentioned it. Jfc try a little harder next time

1

Anonymous OP 19h

Everytown literally states their sources… including CDC. You just don’t like the data. :)

1

Anonymous #6 19h

CDC has cited the Kleck study before and even said it lined up with their own DGU numbers

1

Anonymous OP 19h

Can you find anyone or anything to refutes every town’s data or no?

1

Anonymous #6 19h

NCVS is faulty due to respondent mistrust of government, lack of direct prompting, and exclusion of fatalities. Kleck study suffers mainly from lack of external validation and sampling bias.

1

Anonymous #6 19h

I'd draw more from CDC estimates or the 2025 NIH study than NCVS or Kleck, and both of the former find a range with at least higher prevalence than gun crime.

1

Anonymous OP 19h

What are their biases?

1

Anonymous #6 19h

Well since Kleck found the highest estimate ever and NCVS found the lowest estimate ever, people tend to guess that Kleck is pro-gun and NCVS is anti-gun

1

Anonymous OP 18h

You said CDC has used Kleck, but then said you draw more from the CDC. I’m trying to figure out what you prefer and what they list their own biases to be?

1

Anonymous #6 18h

I'm going for the most unbiased answer I can find, when I say the CDC I'm talking about their own numbers from 2014 not the Kleck study analysis

1

Anonymous #6 18h

The NIH I believe is self report

1

Anonymous #8 17h

They're also just fun to shoot

10

Anonymous #7 17h

Yes that’s why I also said destroy

-1

Anonymous #8 17h

Not if you just shoot into a field

3

Anonymous #7 17h

Why kinda simple minded loser just shoots into an empty field 😭

-1

Anonymous #8 17h

“The only purpose is to kill or destroy” okie dokie, sounds dope

0

Anonymous #8 17h

Because it's cool? Because it's fun? What are you the dopamine dictator

10

Anonymous #8 15h

Just was out shooting into an empty field, didn't "destroy or kill" anything unless you count putting holes in a piece of paper

5