Yeah thats not even remotely close.http://www.vpc.org/studies/justifiable.pdf

Is it safe to say here that if you are anti-gun, you are a giant phucking possay?

No, but it's safe to say that you expect an easy solution to a complex problem.

Just airdropping this off

https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/pr...rkland-florida

February 16, 2018
FBI Statement on the Shooting in Parkland, Florida
On January 5, 2018, a person close to Nikolas Cruz contacted the FBI’s Public Access Line (PAL) tipline to report concerns about him. The caller provided information about Cruz’s gun ownership, desire to kill people, erratic behavior, and disturbing social media posts, as well as the potential of him conducting a school shooting.

Under established protocols, the information provided by the caller should have been assessed as a potential threat to life. The information then should have been forwarded to the FBI Miami Field Office, where appropriate investigative steps would have been taken.

We have determined that these protocols were not followed for the information received by the PAL on January 5. The information was not provided to the Miami Field Office, and no further investigation was conducted at that time.

FBI Director Christopher Wray said:

“We are still investigating the facts. I am committed to getting to the bottom of what happened in this particular matter, as well as reviewing our processes for responding to information that we receive from the public. It’s up to all Americans to be vigilant, and when members of the public contact us with concerns, we must act properly and quickly.

“We have spoken with victims and families, and deeply regret the additional pain this causes all those affected by this horrific tragedy. All of the men and women of the FBI are dedicated to keeping the American people safe, and are relentlessly committed to improving all that we do and how we do it.”

Do you spend your free time standing outside of gun stores with a tape measure and clip board measuring men's dicks?
Because I've never seen anyone conducting this study.

Yes it is the FBI's fault, not the relaxed gun laws this country has where a deranged 19 year old can legally obtain firearms.

Did I miss where you showed when he was officially declared "deranged", and who made that decision? Aware me on this

You dont always use a gun to kill the bad guy you know right? 99.999999% of the time brandishing is enough. Majority of the time they dont get reported either

Anti-Some-Guns is a thing now?

In the majority of defensive gun uses, no shots are fired.

Often shots are fired and nobody is hit.

80% of people shot by handguns survive.

As you can see, in thevastmajority of defensive gun uses, nobody dies.

What do you think the word "threatened" means?

What gun law would have stopped him?

Interesting, so in the last 30 years dicks have been getting smaller and smaller? Maybe its the same chemicals that make the frogs gay.

Stricter background checks.

According to your graph a firearm was used approximately 300k times over a 4 year period = 75k a year

Right no where close to what i said

"Did I miss where you showed when he was officially declared "deranged", and who made that decision? Aware me on this"


What about his background should have shown up on a background check??

What more background would they have done? He passed a background check so it doesnt do much good when you say "stricter" what could they extra check? Is the doj supposed to start going door to door in your area and ask people if they think its okay for someone to buy a firearm? Start doing lie detector tests? What?

LOL this.

Stricter how? Scour thier social media? interview family and friends before purchase? More intensive also means more time consuming and expensive. So who's paying? Seriously, it’s so easy to spout off nice three word solutions, but the idea itself is never the issue, implementation is.

Looks like FBI ignored a second tip about this guy. This is in addition to the youtube thing.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nati...icle-1.3825007

LOL @ Stricter Background checks.

LOL @ Making guns more expensive.

Get a grip!

Israel figured it out and they're under constant attack

How about the 50+ police reports on him?

Edit:”sheriff’s deputies responded to his home 36 times in just six years.”

What did Israel figure out?

You're going to have to be more specific, and not "answer" a question with a question.

Did I miss where you showed when he was officially declared "deranged", and who made that decision? Aware me on this

What about his background should have shown up on a background check??

Read the edit.

That's not specific. What are you implying but unwilling to say, that if LE responds to your home X number of times in Y period, you are banned from buying guns and put on a national no-guns list?

He's 19, and this list of visits goes back 6 years? What was he doing when he was 13 that you think should have him on this list?

I think it’s fairly obvious that something like that should be on a background check. And if it’s not a standard background check they need to be more in-depth.

Which would = stricter background checks

What needs to show up on a background check?

Be specific

effective screening methods. stop with the 100,000 posts of nothing but non sequitors