>pay for parking ticket, cinemark makes profit
>pay for movie ticket, cinemark makes profit
>pay for cola, cinemark makes profit
>pay for pop corn, cinemark makes profit
>watch loved ones get brutally murdered infront of your very eyes, get shot yourself, spend rest of life in wheelchair/going to therapy, cinemark makes profit
America in 2016 ladies and gentlemen.
but if you weren't aware, the people who are now being sued previously tried to sue the theater chain as if it was the theater's fault that some nutcase decided to barge in and shoot up the place
Shut the fuck up faggot, what do you expect? Every fucking movie theater in America to have armed guards, strip searches, metal detectors, and K9's?
It's fucking terrible what happened to the deceased, and survivors. But the movie theater is certainly not at fault for what happened.
Everyone just wants to make money now a days, and the survivors who sued are simply retarded money grabbers.
Aaaaah, murrica, it's always someones fault, except for the person who actually committed the crime.
Fucking idiots, sure, sue the venue, real smart.
Jezus christ people..jezus christ..
gun bans dont affect criminals and there are already over 300 million guns (more that arnt accounted for) in circulation in the US. most wouldnt turn theirs in, me included.
that argument is not an option, period. Even australia only had a 15% compliance with their buyback program. Amazing how their country hasnt descended into chaos even with 85% of the guns youre so afraid of still out there with no governmental supervision.
I'm Canadian and we have firearms murders all of the time even though assault rifles are banned. America has 10 times the population as Canada.
If I were to calculate guns deaths to population, I think Canada and America would be fairly close.
No, more like try to make shekels off a bullshit lawsuit (movie theaters should be designed to thwart crazed shooters by having emergency exits in every direction) have the judge call you out on your Jewish tricks and pay the other side's legal fees.
And in both countries they had less than a 20% turn in rate on guns when they were banned; so that has little to no effect on it.
Additionally; the rate of violence in both countries has gone up since they banned guns, not down.
North Korea successfully banned guns from all citizens. Only police and the military can have them.
No, they don't.
The violent crime rate in England is 20% higher than the United States, Australia's is about the same.
Your government tells you that America is super dangerous and that you're much safer to keep you complacent about the fact that they took away the people's capacity for armed rebellion against the state.
As someone who lives outside the US, this shit amuses me to no end.
In 1997 guns were banned.
There's nothing that could have been done really. Even if he didn't make it to the inside of the theater, he would have shot up the lobby. This guy went to the movies with the intent to shoot the place up.
While anons are busy playing gun debate everyone missed the point.
>don't start something you can't finish
These people were looking for an "easy win" and got dealt a shitty hand. I hope they get their wages garnished.
Dude take half a second to google before posting.
sorry dude, it's down.
nah dude she got pretty fucked up and all mcdonalds had to do to prevent teh terrible burns was decrease the temperature of their coffee by 10 degrees.
the poor old lady literally had her vulva and clitoris scorched off. it was really, really horrendous for something that took minimal effort on mcdonad's part.
In Australia they banned guns and overall violent crime did go down. Mass shootings are nonexistent. Home invasion and robberies(by criminals with guns) especially against the elderly skyrocketed because the criminals knew people were unarmed. I'm not a fighter, and I have a wife and kids to protect. If someone comes into my house to hurt my family, I'm gonna put a fucking hole in their chest, such is my right as an American. If you wanna lay there while robbers rape your wife and daughter in front of you feel free faggot.
i just don't see it, dude.
I'm the anon you quoted, I think she should have attended one of those schools for high functioning retards that taught them how to live day to day. You know, the places that teach
>hot things are hot and will burn you
Violent Crimes in UK up since gun ban js'ing.
Sure criminals still have guns, thing is it's the criminals shooting other criminals with guns, hardly ever are there cases of an innocent person being targeted by a criminal with a firearm.
Long story short, I'm an American who believes in the bill of rights and am 100% prepared for the 2nd American Revolution. I only pray it takes place during my lifetime, and would be willing to bet it is sparked by the government trying to round up our firearms. Obviously, there are many other reasons we need a revolution, I just believe that will be the last straw.
they have to pay the cost of all the court fees you mong. they sued, under that states laws if you take someone to court, but the ruling is in their favor, then you have to pay their court costs. if you didno, then anyone richer than you could bankrupt you by simply taking you to court for stupid shit 24/7.
>violent crimes go down
>robbery home invasion skyrockets
so a bunch of bullshit. just because they fuck the numbers by saying robbery and home invasion isn't a violent crime, therefore you're better off without guns.
no one is saying it didnt... that chart doesn't take home invasion into account, which he said sky rocketed.
robbery =/= home invasion. you can rob (mug) someone on the street, which is what they are most likely accounting for there.
home invasion typically either necessitates robbery or kidnapping. both are down.
i cannot find any statistics re. home invasions for australia, so violent crime stats are all we can work with.
It was at a Dark Knight movie anyway, so no one of value was lost
This just shows that liberals are more concerned with their own agenda than actually saving lives
Cinemas don't make money from ticket sales also not really profit if it's paying legal fees plus you American fags will sue anyone and everything in fact this post about a cinema a mass shooter and a lawsuit is as American as racism
who would have thought that hot coffee might cause burns?
if she'd ordered an iced coffee and it burnt the shit out of her, i might have some sympathy, but stupid is as stupid does
Since when has need ever had anything to do with it?
And who are you to decide what people can and cannot own?
Well they tried to sue the theater because they thought it was the theaters fault that the shooting happened. The cinema tries to make deal with victims thats like $30k a person, with the treat that if they don't accept they will seek to regain court fees. Victims think that s not enough money. The judge ruled in favor of the cinema. The cinema is now trying to get the $700000 of court fees it had to pay.
I see nothing wrong with this.
So I'm a taxi driver, and using your logic I'm not responsible for my customers safety, as both me and the cinema are offering a service and not goods,so I should just drive like a lunatic so I can get them out as fast as possible?
aaaaahahahaahha not in the UK buddy. We have one of the highest violent crime rates in the civilised world. Our murder rate is lower because we're all so used to getting stabbed by underage chavs without being legally able to fight back we've developed a partial immunity to them.
>Initially, plaintiffs agreed to the $150,000 settlement deal, deciding that $30,000 should go to each of the three most severely injured survivors, with the remaining $60,000 split among the 38 plaintiffs. Among them were survivors who had suffered brain damage, paralysis or the loss of children.
Are you incapable of doing a quick google search you fucking retard faggot mongloid?
How is the movie theater to blame?
Did they exhibit any kind of negligence or reckless endangerment?
The shooter got into the theater by prying open the exit door that is unlocked for the people's safety in case of fires or other emergencies, and mandated by the government and common sense. What did the theater do that makes them responsible for an attack that could have happened anywhere?
>get line of sight on them
>"I'm armed and I will shoot. Get out of my house"
If they leave, so be it. If they say "Dad it's me!" say get back to bed.
If they advance or stay, shoot them until they stop moving.
Basic gun safety is know your target and what's beyond it, which he failed to do. I think he's an idiot and an irresponsible gun owner.
for the third time, the uk is full of barbarians and is an outlier.
when the guns that aren't needed are used to kill dozens of people at a time.
not to the extent that she experienced. lowering the temperature, which they have now done, eliminates second and third degree burns, which she experienced.
pic is the burns that the woman experienced because mcdonalds refused to turn down the temperature on their coffee dispensers. spilt coffee is an inevitability. third degree burns is entirely preventable.
>when the guns that aren't needed are used to kill dozens of people at a time.
Should a gun be banned if it has this capability but is used in less than 1% of gun violence and the overwhelming majority of the population who do own them use them responsibly and follow the laws?
So guns that are used is very small amounts of crime should be banned?
Thanks for showing your agenda being more important than actually saving lives
>gun bans dont affect criminals
Yes they do. There is a reason why so few criminals in western Europe have firearms. The availability is really low and therefore prices extremely high making them unaffordable for you average street thug and punk.
Virginia Tech guy killed 30+ people using only handguns
And pic related
Handguns actually make up the majority of mass shootings (and overall gun crime). AR-15s and rifles in general are rarely used. Yes you can pop up some crazily over-sensationalized examples though.
So why did the murder rate drop after the gun ban in the long run? According to gun nuts logic it should have increased even beyond that spike?
Also is there prove that the spike and the gun ban are related?
So you're willing to ban something if it means saving a minuscule minority of the population and inconveniencing a overwhelming majority? I hope you are against the legalization of marijuana too then.
Why did it also drop in America despite having lots of guns?
So what is easier: Buying a gun and shooting up some people at the next mall or buying tons of fertilizer, racing fuel, renting a truck mixing all that shit together, building a time delayed fuse and driving that thing a few hundred miles?
mostly against criminals and gang violence, so who cares.
single instance out of many mass shootings. the only exception. pic related is a red herring since bombs are illegal and very rarely used. like five bombs in the past 25 years have killed people in the usa.
Serves them right for adding to the problem of frivolous lawsuits and I hope this completely bankrupts their greedy crippled asses. I wish more people that see dollar signs through lawsuits would get rekt like this.
ar15s are not needed to protect your home or yourself on the street. a shotgun, a five round rifle, or a revolver is more than sufficient. ar15s with high capacity mags are purely for killing large amounts of people in a short amount of time.
basically, because there is little value to them other than gun fetishism. they're german goo girls tier.
>single instance out of many mass shootings. >the only exception.
>MFW the majority of mass shootings involved hanguns
6 rounds would be great.
how are you inconvenienced? go buy a deer rifle or a shotgun or a nugget or a revolver or a lever action or a .22 or a crossbow or a sniper rifle or a hatchet or a slingshot. you dont need a gun that can hold 30 bullets.
I'm saying they didn't take at least basic precautions to prevent this atrocity, and at the end of the day, the only thing you need to stop a bad guy with a gun, is a good guy with a gun, right?
Why are they not needed? Who are you to decide what I or someone else "needs"?
>It wouldn't affect my current ownership
But it would affect mine, so you can fuck off with your little pipe dream.
yes that is what i said. and stop resorting to >mfw memes and 9/11 jokes. it looks both stupid and unamerican.
>mass majority involved handguns.
yea i already acknowledged that. and big deal. handgun deaths, mass shootings or not, are mass majority gang violence.
>6 rounds would be great
So 6 is super safe and acceptable, but 7 is super deadly and illegal?
Do you even realize how arbitrary and meaningless that is?
A magazine is literally a box with a spring in it, something that could be made easily in someone's garage with basic tools.
>you dont need a gun that can hold 30 bullets
Need has never been a factor in gun ownership, nor has hunting. You keep using that word when it has no merit.
You should maybe think about changing countries if things like that actually happen in your shithole.
So what are these basic precautions? I agree if those people were armed someone could've stopped that faggot. Do you expect the theater should've had armed guards? That would be unusual and not having them wouldn't be seen as negligence by the "reasonable man " standard used in civil suits.
>and i want them to pass a law curtailing ar15s and high capacity magazines
They did that for 10 years from 1994 to 2004 and it did nothing to lower crime rates or stop mass shootings. Columbine happened right in the heart of it.
You're probably too young to remember that.
it's not arbitary. i chose it because most revolvers hold six bullets, so it would not make revolvers illegal and would not unreasonably burden reasonable, nonfetishist gun owners.
>you dont need a gun that can hold 30 bullets.
Need is irrelevant. It is wrong to tell people they can't purchase a product because a small handful of people (out of millions) used said product irresponsibly.
>it would not make revolvers illegal and would not unreasonably burden reasonable, nonfetishist gun owners.
Yes it would. Semi auto handguns vastly outnumber revolvers in private citizens hands
high capacity mags were never flat out banned. in addition, there were exceptions to assault rifles and machineguns, etc. that were already in circulation in the general public.
>mass majority involved handguns.
yea i already acknowledged that. and big deal. handgun deaths, mass shootings or not, are mass majority gang violence.
So you don't actually give a shit about changing gun violence you just want to basically change something YOU don't like. Which is fallacious beyond all hell.
Yup, the stupid bitch was reminded that hot coffee is indeed hot. Her fault for being stupid and she should have had to pay McDonalds millions for blaming them for her stupidity.
>high capacity mags were never flat out banned
They were banned from being sold and manufactured
>there were exceptions to assault rifles and machineguns, etc. that were already in circulation in the general public
So you want to confiscate guns in private hands that you and your crony government arbitrarily deem unacceptable? I thought no one was coming for our guns, and that anyone who thought that was a paranoid lunatic?
>6 rounds would be great
>go buy a deer rifle or a nugget
Why is a 6 round Smith from the late 80's fine and a SMLE from the early 10's that can hold 10 not okay?
And yes, I need a gun that can hold 30 bullets in the rare event that some chucklefuck like you gets into power and tries to take my gun that holds 6. Eat shit, commie.
it doesn't need to be that hot.
So you don't actually give a shit about changing gun violence you just want to basically change something YOU don't like
i do not give a shit about gang violence. it is not "fallacious"
Not him but
>they were banned from being sold
No, that's just not true. All of the pre-ban mags were completely free to sell, they just costed like $90 instead of $10. Nevertheless, the AWB didn't work at all.
>So you don't actually give a shit about changing gun violence you just want to basically change something YOU don't like. Which is fallacious beyond all hell.
i do not give a shit about gang violence. it is not "fallacious"
Gun violence in america is culture and sure removing the guns would stop the GUN violence, but you still have the culture.
So it would just change to illegal gun and other weapons. I doubt it would have much effect on the actual number of killings etc
One problem with these shootings is that everyone turns into a bystander. Someone walks into a room with x amount people and opens fire everyone just panics and dies. He stops to reload people keep panicking and dieing. After 5 reloads there are only a few people dead but hes almost out of ammo so perpetrator either kills himself or just walks out.
Suing won't do anything just want to say these are a shitshow.
Mother fucking exactly
I mean, you would if you convinced yourself it was too dangerous since you are already a fucking idiot, but whatever. Why would you take my gun that takes 7? Is that really a big difference?
Why not just limit it to 2 rounds? One for the robber/deer and another in case you miss? We don't want anybody having too many bullets, right?
it does not need to sit inside the coffee dispenser at 190 degrees, which is what it was at, though. a mere 10 degree change could've prevented the entire distgusting incident while keeping the same quality of coffee. you literally cannot drink coffee at 190 degrees anyways. mcdonalds was incredibly stupid to keep the coffee that hot.
Dumb bitch didn't need to be playing with that cup of known hot coffee in the car either, but she alone made the choice to do so and disregard the fact that hot coffee is indeed hot. Her choice. Her stupidity. Her fault.
Oh yeah, individual victims paying some ridiculous compensation is a much better alternative.
This is pretty true. Our violence rates are skewed towards the high side when compared with other developed countries. Truth is guns aren't leading to the violence but they are the preferred method. Another commonly ignored statistic is that most gun deaths and injuries are suicide or operator error not violence from person to person.
Well, I don't think you have to pass a background check to buy fertilizer, fuel, or rent a truck. You just need a driver's license and a credit card. It's also probably cheaper depending on how big of a bomb you want once you factor in the cost of the gun AND the ammunition.
i would take your magazines.
>I mean, you would if you convinced yourself it was too dangerous since you are already a fucking idiot, but whatever
no i would not
>Why would you take my gun that takes 7? Is that really a big difference?
no, but i have to set the boundary at some point. and i chose six. one in the chamber. and five in teh mag.
>Why not just limit it to 2 rounds? One for the robber/deer and another in case you miss?
two rounds is not enough. if you can't hit after six rounds you shouldn't be carrying.
>We don't want anybody having too many bullets, right?
she did not choose to spill it on herself. accidents will always happen and cannot be repvented. scalding hot water is entirely preventable. we do not want to live in a society where companies can get away with hurting someone that badly and defend themselves by saying "dumb bitch deserved it." low IQ argument.
it's not ridiculous compensation.
it's the legal fees for the cinema that rightfully defended itself from this spurious lawsuit.
who should pay that? the taxpayer? or the faggots who brought the spurious lawsuit in the first place?
>most gun deaths are user error.
You know I was using a knife chopping carrots without really concerntrating the other day, I've still got the plaster to prove it, but I suppose at least I didn't blow my entire fucking head off
>i would take your magazines
Which is why I need them to stop you and your friends from oppressing me
>no i would not
How do I know that? You already did it with anything over 6
>if you can't hit after six rounds you shouldn't be carrying
What if there is more than one person?
You have no right to deny me the best and most effective tools to protect myself and my family.
Like the others have said, get fucked commie, try and take them. I welcome the ensuing civil war.
The issue was that McDonald's was AWARE of the problem. They knew that the coffee pots were making coffee unsafely hot to hand to customers. During the investigation, it was revealed they thought it would be cheaper to just pay off lawsuits for any burns than to replace all the coffee pots.
She hurt herself, she chose to play with known hot coffee while driving. She could have chose to leave it alone, but no the dumb bitch is retarded and instead chose to create a risky situation with a known hot liquid. Her choices. Her stupidity. Her fault 110%. You shouldn't need a babysitter unless you're a retard that causes problems and starts up with the frivolous lawsuits to cover up your ignorance and greed.
lowering the temperature of the coffee by ten degrees to prevent burns is also a low IQ argument.
the depth of a burn is related to the temperature of the exposure, the nature of the medium and the time of exposure.
if it soaked through her clothes and sat next to her skin for long enough to cause severe burns, ten degrees will not make a huge amount of difference.
accidents do happen. this is why the cup says 'caution: contents hot' on it, and why it should be treated with respect.
companies cannot be held responsible for what happens when you use their products irresponsibly. are you suggesting mcdonalds should have conducted an IQ test or arranged an assessment with an occupational therapist before it sold her the coffee?
>It's a failed communist state that had high taxes, big gov't, regulations, and gun control.
American idiot right here. The complex social, cultural and historical dynamics behind a civil war are too complex for rednecks so it has to be broken down to a simple formula.
Btw, if big government was the problem why aren't they thriving with no government at all?
>Somalia isn't an intentional anarchy.
Anarchy can't be intentional, you retard.
the issue is that it was not known that it was THAT hot. there is utterly no point to coffee sitting in a dispenser at a temperature that can cause the injuries in the picture.
>family member gets killed in theater
>"give me money because this guy killed my family member in your theater and this is your fault because you were supposed to do something to prevent this"
>go to court against multi million dollar company with lawyer from the mall
>"fuck off you fucking greedy lazy bastards, we are not liable"
>Prolonged court case clogs the legal system as greedy fat Americans attempt to extort donut money from movie company
>judge sides with cinemark because anyone with a brain could see they are not liable
>rightfully makes fatass dirtbag Americunt pigs pay legal fees they forced Cinemark to spend
>"waah as usual the little guy always loses welcum to AmeriKKKa"
>>You should just pack up and run away if things are bad
That is how America got 99% of it's immigrants in the last 200 years, you dip.
>Btw, if big government was the problem why aren't they thriving with no government at all?
Because no government is anarchy. Nice strawman
Conservatism has always been about little government being necessary, and individual liberty being most important.
we will not be able to sustain our way of life with the mindset. our economy will flounder as othe rnations jump ahead of us in leaps and bounds because we were not able to adapt.
>no we don't.
Most do, which we all know is a lie. There are few like you who actually come out and say it.
How do you plan on taking them? With the guns you want to ban? How ironic
The number of armed citizens vastly outnumbers the number of police and military combined, so good luck.
Getting paid back what you've already spent on legal expenses is a profit how exactly?
The cops don't have a legal duty to protect you, why the fuck would a business have a legal duty to protect you from crimes comitted by a third party? If someone steals your phone in a bar is the bar responsible? If someone punches you in a bar is the bar responsible?
Homicides didn't change when gun's were banned. Way to prove that gun bans don't affect murders.
Homicides in the US are down even though gun sales are up.
Interesting that they're so infrequently used to kill people then. Handguns kill WAY more people.
>100,000 muslim refugees
Those are really fucking dangerous aren't they? Btw, why do Americans call their shithole "home of the brave" when it's actually full of pussies scared of some poor refugees?
>it wasn't a low IQ argument since it won
yes, in new mexico, a state with the equal 45th highest average IQ (tied with alabama) out of all US states.
strangely, similar lawsuits elsewhere have been thrown out before even making it to trial. their average IQ must be even lower!
Why is 6 rounds not enough? That's one hit and 5 misses. If we are going by your shitty Darwinian standards for who deserves their right to self preservation based on missing and hitting, why can't we just have muskets and single-shot guns just to weed out all of the bad shots?
Seriously though, stop playing COD and watching shitty hollywood movies. There's a reason cops don't use revolvers anymore, their lack of capacity gets people fucking killed. If cops need 17 rounds in their handgun alone to kill one guy, I surely need more than 6 you fucking faggot.
You are a fagboy and I ask that you please stay in your predesignated containment area of Europe, Africa, and the communist oligarchies formerly known as California and New York. In addition, it is advised that you go back to /leftypol/ or reddit.
>A magazine is literally a box with a spring in it, something that could be made easily in someone's garage with basic tools.
One dude made a shotgun that fed from beer bottles just to troll Colorado's mag ban (all beer bottles now require registration but apparently no-one wants to enforce that).
Maybe the lawyers should pay when their case fails for lawsuits of this nature. They had to have known this wasn't going to work, and yet they still took the case (and the victims' money) anyway.
>Those are really fucking dangerous aren't they?
They might be, considering our piece of shit leaders have quite recently been bombing and terrorizing them which tends to turn them into people who utterly hate American people and increase Jihadist sentiments. Remember a fellow named Bin Laden? Ever heard of ISIS?
>Conservatism has always been about little government being necessary
I didn't realize Joseph McCarthy was a democrat.
America is a shithole
It is not the home of the brave
Muslims are filth
Refugees should be murdered en masse
You are a faggot
I bet you dont even own a gun like a stupid homosexual tranny and you dont want anyone else to own one either because you are a repulsive close minded neanderthal nigger with a small dick that has splits down the sides like an overcooked hotdog.
im sorry for calling you low IQ. that was uncalled for.
you're absolutely right that many don't make it through the trial. but many do. the reason why we have seatbelts, reasonably heated coffee, guards on our pill bottles, etc. are all because companies inherently put profits over safety of customers. these lawsuits overall have made the usa a better place. but i agree with you overall, fuck the frivilous lawsuits. the mcdonalds coffee accident was not one of those, though.
>who's ideology is in direct conflict with the western world and who refuse to integrate
And how exactly do you know there ideology? Breitbart or Limbough?
Of course they all run from ISIS because they agree with its radical Islamic ideals so much. No wait, they are all sleepers really...or lizard people.
>Refugees should be murdered en masse
Like ISIS does? Nice argument Ali Islam Jabahr.
Don't try to hide it behind pseudo-arguments you pulled of some right-wing blog: You're just a xenophobic cunt.
Read the fucking chart properly retard.
The overall rate for the US is the same as Argentina, Estonia, Lithuania.
Murder rate of hispanics in the US is about the same as the overall, murder rate of whites in the US is about half, murder rate of blacks in the US is 4x higher.
Incidentally, most murders in the US are totally racist and prefer to murder people of the same color.
>Remember a fellow named Bin Laden?
<---- This guy here?
Europe has black people, it doesn't have a lot of niggers.
US black people (who are mostly less than 1/2 black by the way) have become a unique race & culture that is singularly self destructive.
Fuck those retarded cunts for being overly litigious and fuck you for being retarded enough support their stupid asses like dead loved ones mean they're exempt from paying for stupid decisions. How the fuck is a movie theater gonna prevent all lunatics from hurting people? Go kill yourself.
And before you say anything retarded like "You can't relate, anon. Blah blah victim's families were compromised state of mind due to grief", Jillian Johnson of Lafayette was a personal friend.
No-one was using firearms for self defence in the UK - you got crucified for doing that. Equally, no-one was murdering anyone with legal held firearms.
So the ban had ZERO effect on the murder rate.
Same deal in Australia.
It had the total too.
The point of that was that murders of blacks (which are 90% by blacks) in the US is a huge problem.
you are more persuasive when you don't call people stupid or retarded or tell people to kill themselves, especially when you talk in your next paragraph about losing someone you know.
>probably a proud msnbc viewer
>everyone who disagrees must be a consumer of right-leaning media
>still believing in the left-right paradigm in 2016
>being this retarded
>being this embarrassing
>thinking he's funny
God, i could go on and on with such an embarrassing pile of ancient cum tissues like yourself
Why the fuck are you americans so afraid of your police force? I'm quite confident a police officer in Britain would risk their life in order to save mine, you make them sound like the gestapo.
"Crime" isn't exclusive to 'gun violence.'
youre right it's not fallacious. getting fed up with all the "oo red herring" or "straw man" cries. pointing out fallacies is for people with limited minds who are unable prove their own point
sorry to interrupt
American police exist to keep order and enforce law. They have no duty to protect people or risk their lives for you.
Americans are distrustful of the government and police because we are well aware of how corrupt it is.
>So the ban had ZERO effect on the murder rate.
Then why did it drop below pre-gun ban levels after a short spike?
Incidentally, they're not all that different.
>Murder rate in Australia plummeted
It dropped more in the years prior to the ban than it did afterwards.
The ban had ZERO effect on murders.
>psuedo arguments pulled out of right wing blog
>implying any of that was an argument
>being this retarded
>being this upset
Wow. What a dipshit. Just so full of libtard bile and rage its just like foaming at the mouth, literally begging for an outlet in the form of forum posting.
You are just pissed because you are retarded and a fat fucking crybaby, you tumblr using faggot.
>ignorant asshats try to sue theater even though it's not their fault
>dickheads running company counter sue the asshats
Seems like both sides are wrong. If I was a judge I'd line them all against a wall and run along with a hand out to slap them all in the face. Then I would order them all to shut the fuck up and go home.
and it was increasing immediately prior to the ban. the ban promulgated a change for the better, and it turned the tide against criminals and drove the rates even further down.
Christianity has undergone reforms, Islam has not. Before, Christianity was indistinguishable from Islam, as demonstrated by how Christian Americans treat non-Christians and try to use their religion to dictate legislation.
>If I was a judge I'd line them all against a wall and run along with a hand out to slap them all in the face. Then I would order them all to shut the fuck up and go home.
metaphorically, he tried to. it was a really interesting case.
Also forgot to point out how Fundamentalist Christians believe the Earth is flat (like Fundamentalist Muslims).
In 2003 there was a massive investment in the police forces in the UK. That's the reason for the downward trend. A bunch of other crimes also trended downwards from that point.
Murders with licensed firearms per year is generally about 2-5 total and these have always been mostly shotguns are they are the easiest to be licensed for and by far the most numerous type. The ban on handguns did nothing since licensed handguns weren't being used in murders or self-defence in anything other than highly exceptional circumstances.
>replying to everything even tho i havent got shit to say as a comeback
>im not retarded im not retarded im not retarded im not retarded im not retarded im not retarded im not retarded im not retarded im not retarded im not retarded PLEASE dont think im retarded
Liberals. Go figure.
But fundamentalist Christians aren't killing gay people, they're just voicing their opinions under free speech, something that most Muslim countries don't have.
In many Muslim countries being gay is punishable by death, as is not being Muslim.
>they're not killing people
They would if secularist laws (you know, those "godless, devil-worshiping, liberal-agenda" laws) didn't make murder of someone based on race, sexuality, religion, or political affiliation a crime (all of which were fine up until about the 60s).
We still get our most valuable resources from countries that still DO kill gays for pure virtue of being gay. We're just as guilty.
America isn't a 'Christian country.'
>and it was increasing immediately prior to the ban.
The homicide rate was up slightly for one year prior to the ban after falling sharply for years and the gun homicide rate was falling steadily prior to the ban.
The gun homicide rate continued to fall steadily.
Your justification for the ban and your allegation for it's impact are both completely bogus.
This is just fucking retarded, Christianity is shit but it has been reforming itself for centuries as western culture has gone through enlightenment.
>They'd be killing people if murder sentences weren't increased based on identity politics
You serious anon? I'm pretty sure that normal laws against murder plus modern mores and morals have kept most fundamentalist christians from killing people in the recent past .
apology unnecessary but accepted. no point getting butthurt on here, insinuating the other person is retarded is part of /b/'s charm.
i hate the power of big business. i hate the way that conglomerates combine economies of scale with tax breaks to make it incredibly difficult for joe shit to set up his own small, local, independent competitor. they've strangled the american dream worldwide.
however, i'm also a medfag, and therefore ambulance-chasing and frivolous lawsuits naturally repel me, as i will be targeted by that shit at some point.
Now look at those numbers and consider that black people only make up 12% of the population but commit:
49% of murders
33% of rate
55% of robbery
34% of assault
31% of burglary
In total they commit 28% of the crimes with a clear preference to violent crime.