Current Events > what the fuck is trump even saying with his last tweet

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/871331574649901056

like no shit
is he trying to say that the attacker should have used a gun because it would have been more effective?
---

That banning guns won't end killing sprees

Bluster posted...

is he trying to say that the attacker should have used a gun because it would have been more effective?

Jesus Christ. CE needs to go back to 2nd grade reading.
---

I think his point is that banning guns is ineffective in preventing people from killing a massive amount of people.

Typically when a mass killing happens it is with a gun, and people come out screaming "ban guns!" This is a response to past arguments and an illustration that a gun ban is ineffective in stopping someone that wants to kill people.
---

Baneposting posted...

That banning guns won't end killing sprees

that's not at all what he's saying though
and nobody insinuated that they would end, it would just make terrorists way more impotent in attacks like this, which is true.
---

Bluster posted...

that's not at all what he's saying though

So you knew what he was saying but made the topic anyway?

Okay. Please try not to let the board know you're trolling so fast. Thanks

Nowadays I don't even read his tweets I just scroll down to see the salt spam
---

Baneposting posted...

So you knew what he was saying but made the topic anyway?

"I don't know what he's saying, he's clearly not saying that though"
"oh, so you know what he's saying?"


jfc ce
---

TC is in the 97th percentile.

Bluster posted...

"I don't know what he's saying,"

/topic

Dumb liberals.

Baneposting posted...

Bluster posted...

"I don't know what he's saying,"

/topic

you enter a topic asking what trump means with his tweet
you give the dumbest shit interpretation, and then accuse the person who's asking what he means of trolling because he doesn't know what he means... in the topic where he asked what he means
fuck it you're just getting ignored good riddance.
---

Nomadic View posted...

I think his point is that banning guns is ineffective in preventing people from killing a massive amount of people.

Typically when a mass killing happens it is with a gun, and people come out screaming "ban guns!" This is a response to past arguments and an illustration that a gun ban is ineffective in stopping someone that wants to kill people.

Well you cant ban guns when theres more guns than people. In saying that Im curious about how many mass rampage killers have been taken down by a civilian with a gun.
---

What attack happened in America with a knife and truck? What did I miss? I wonder if it would have been much worse if the killer DID have a gun?
---

Bluster posted...

you enter a topic asking what trump means with his tweet

Yes.

Bluster posted...

you give the dumbest shit interpretation

No, I gave the correct one.

Bluster posted...

then accuse the person who's asking what he means of trolling because he doesn't know what he means... in the topic where he asked what he means

No, I pointed out you're trolling - I didn't accuse you. You are already trolling. We both know this. Let's not pretend otherwise.

Bluster posted...

fuck it you're just getting ignored good riddance.

Typical troll tactic. Oh well, at least you'll be banned soon enough.

JlM posted...

What attack happened in America with a knife and truck? What did I miss?

UK, not the US. There was a terrorist attack yesterday that started with a truck hit and run and then the guy got out and started stabbing people, 7 people died. Would have been way worse if there WERE guns, there is absolutely no doubt about that, and it behooves Trump to not bring people's attention to that fact by mentioning gun policy.
---

JlM posted...

What attack happened in America with a knife and truck? What did I miss? I wonder if it would have been much worse if the killer DID have a gun?

The attack is being used as an argument against gun control, like its still an issue.
---

ReignFury posted...

Well you cant ban guns when theres more guns than people. In saying that Im curious about how many mass rampage killers have been taken down by a civilian with a gun.

http://www.naturalnews.com/047378_murder_sprees_armed_citizens_FBI_report.html

Also, it is hard to be a "mass rampage killer" if someone shoots you after you only shoot one or two people.
---

yemmy posted...

ReignFury posted...

Well you cant ban guns when theres more guns than people. In saying that Im curious about how many mass rampage killers have been taken down by a civilian with a gun.

http://www.naturalnews.com/047378_murder_sprees_armed_citizens_FBI_report.html

Also, it is hard to be a "mass rampage killer" if someone shoots you after you only shoot one or two people.

Yeah, that's why there are no shooting sprees in the US while the rest of the world is absolutely RAVAGED by them. Oh fucking wait.
---

ReignFury posted...

The attack is being used as an argument against gun control, like its still an issue.

Pretty big issue when a good portion of Europe has laxer gun laws than the US, even the UK isn't as strict.
---

it's a moronic tweet but he's just posting what he hears on fox + friends

http://www.mediaite.com/online/president-trumps-post-london-attack-tweets-completely-in-synch-with-fox-friends-commentary/
---

Seems pretty self explanatory.
If a gun had been used, people would be "debating" about gun laws. Kind of a smug way of saying "no matter what you want to ban, people will find a way to kill other people"
---

Anime_Killer17 posted...

If a gun had been used, people would be "debating" about gun laws. Kind of a smug way of saying "no matter what you want to ban, people will find a way to kill other people"

But the second sentence doesn't follow the first.
Yes, I get the first sentence, that's almost word for word what he wrote. But how does that lead to the second sentence?
---

Why are people still responding to trolls

Anime_Killer17 posted...

Seems pretty self explanatory.
If a gun had been used, people would be "debating" about gun laws. Kind of a smug way of saying "no matter what you want to ban, people will find a way to kill other people"

Including Muslims, like Trump wants to ban. For the record, I don't support banning guns OR Muslims

Keep in mind I don't own a gun, nor want one tbh, but theoretically if every citizen in the country was properly trained and trained to be skilled in the use of a firearm and it was mandated to carry one, we wouldn't have nearly as many incidents and not nearly as many fatalities if someone were to try a mass shooting or mass stabbing; they would literally be outnumbered every time and taken out quickly.


Not that its even remotely possible since it would first require reworking american culture from the ground up from a idiotic and degenerate culture into one of intelligence, mindfulness and discipline, to even be remotely feasible.

And our govt (and honestly any first world govt) doesn't care to put that kind of effort into safeguarding the public, since the public is seen as serfs to be taxed and fleeced, and mouthservice and fearmongering is alot cheaper than putting real money and effort into cultural change.
---

Like, it's not even a good argument against gun control. The death toll would have skyrocketed were he to have had even a shotgun, even if there was a concealed carry 'hero' on the scene (I notice, by the way, I've heard of very few would-be terrorists taken down before or at the start of any terrorist attacks by civilians in the US).

Furthermore, there is no "knife" or "truck" debate going on right now. Why? Because knives and trucks have a purpose beyond killing. You know what doesn't have any purpose besides ending human life?
---

God he is such a jackass.
Hey this terrorist attack happened. Better take the opportunity to tweet "told you so LOL"

Bluster posted...

You know what doesn't have any purpose besides ending human life?

So, so obvious.

People will still take the bait

It's all the same mindset. Mentioning that knives and a truck were used is just saying "these common things that nobody gives a fuck about can be used in an attack too"

Now, first grade math. Add the two together and you get "Even if we ban guns, there are still plenty of ways people create attacks."
---

GAMER_X_REVIVAL posted...

Keep in mind I don't own a gun, nor want one tbh, but theoretically if every citizen in the country was properly trained and trained to be skilled in the use of a firearm and it was mandated to carry one, we wouldn't have nearly as many incidents and not nearly as many fatalities if someone were to try a mass shooting or mass stabbing; they would literally be outnumbered every time and taken out quickly.

It's true, if firearm licenses were given the same treatment as vehicle licenses (ie encouraged and widespread acceptance to be trained and carry) we'd probably be a lot safer on the whole.

Bluster posted...

Like, it's not even a good argument against gun control. The death toll would have skyrocketed were he to have had even a shotgun, even if there was a concealed carry 'hero' on the scene (I notice, by the way, I've heard of very few would-be terrorists taken down before or at the start of any terrorist attacks by civilians in the US).

You mean all those terrorist attacks that happened in areas with almost no ability to conceal carry, those?
---

Baneposting posted...

That banning guns won't end killing sprees

Of course it won't yet neither does more guns.
---

Anime_Killer17 posted...

It's all the same mindset. Mentioning that knives and a truck were used is just saying "these common things that nobody gives a fuck about can be used in an attack too"

Now, first grade math. Add the two together and you get "Even if we ban guns, there are still plenty of ways people create attacks."

Too bad this guy is an idiot and doesn't have a plan for integrating immigrants into the US in order to help prevent such attacks.
All this message serves to do is agitate the US liberal population and gain favor with the conservative population by exploiting a terrorist attack that happened not even 12 hours prior. It's the kind of crap you expect from people on Stormfront message boards, not the US president.

Anime_Killer17 posted...

It's all the same mindset. Mentioning that knives and a truck were used is just saying "these common things that nobody gives a fuck about can be used in an attack too"

Now, first grade math. Add the two together and you get "Even if we ban guns, there are still plenty of ways people create attacks."

That's really not at all what he said, reread the tweet.
---

Basically drumming up more pointless controversy for the sake of drumming up pointless controversy and distracting people from deeper issues in US politics and detracting from the significance of an attack in the UK.

creativerealms posted...

Baneposting posted...

That banning guns won't end killing sprees

Of course it won't yet neither does more guns.

Arguably, more guns would. With proper training, of course. Imagine for a second how much different many of our past shootings would have turned out if gun ownership were as widespread as car ownership.

Random douchebag pulls out an assault rifle, suddenly 20+ pistols are trained on him.

Tropicalwood posted...

You mean all those terrorist attacks that happened in areas with almost no ability to conceal carry, those?

The last one I can think of was the Orlando club shooting, that happened almost a year ago (June 12. 2016). And no shooting has killed so many people outside of the US in the west in a long time, I can't even think of a single instance. Probably many decades ago. So your argument holds absolutely fucking 0 water.
---

Ampelas posted...

creativerealms posted...

Baneposting posted...

That banning guns won't end killing sprees

Of course it won't yet neither does more guns.

Arguably, more guns would. With proper training, of course. Imagine for a second how much different many of our past shootings would have turned out if gun ownership were as widespread as car ownership.

Random douchebag pulls out an assault rifle, suddenly 20+ pistols are trained on him.

If, somehow, all the guns in the US were revoked without incident, and to get it back they had to go through strict gun training a la driving tests, I doubt even a fraction of the people who own a gun now would pass and then be allowed to conceal carry, which I assume would entail an even harder test that involves army-level discipline.
---

Bluster posted...

Ampelas posted...

creativerealms posted...

Baneposting posted...

That banning guns won't end killing sprees

Of course it won't yet neither does more guns.

Arguably, more guns would. With proper training, of course. Imagine for a second how much different many of our past shootings would have turned out if gun ownership were as widespread as car ownership.

Random douchebag pulls out an assault rifle, suddenly 20+ pistols are trained on him.

If, somehow, all the guns in the US were revoked without incident, and to get it back they had to go through strict gun training a la driving tests, I doubt even a fraction of the people who own a gun now would pass and then be allowed to conceal carry, which I assume would entail an even harder test that involves army-level discipline.

I don't argue with that. Hence my saying "proper training". If gun ownership were encouraged in this country like car ownership is, most people at the age of 18 or so would take courses to responsibly use and maintain a firearm. Untrained civilians are more of a liability than a help in shooting situations.

Bluster posted...

yemmy posted...

ReignFury posted...

Well you cant ban guns when theres more guns than people. In saying that Im curious about how many mass rampage killers have been taken down by a civilian with a gun.

http://www.naturalnews.com/047378_murder_sprees_armed_citizens_FBI_report.html

Also, it is hard to be a "mass rampage killer" if someone shoots you after you only shoot one or two people.

Yeah, that's why there are no shooting sprees in the US while the rest of the world is absolutely RAVAGED by them. Oh fucking wait.

Did I say there wasn't a gun problem in the United States? No, I just linked an article with STATS and stated a FACT. But you made this topic to argue with people for no fucking reason. The way you jumped the first dude that plainly explained what Trump was saying.

Go the fuck away from CE. You're not gonna change anyone's minds than own 10+ guns, and you're just making this place an even bigger shithole by making one more argumentative topic that you run down people in for nothing. Being a smartass to me and getting triggered because I linked an article that someone was asking for lol.
---

Trump cuck meltdowns are da best lol
---

V-E-G-Y- posted...

Trump cuck meltdowns are da best lol

Southcoast is one of the best if you like meltdowns by Trumpanzees. 5 accounts suspended/banned last week, no exaggeration

my niece is in London right now (of all times too, I told her she was stupid as hell for going during Ramadan) and I wish she had a fuckin gun lol (I taught her how to shoot)
---

Bluster posted...

JlM posted...

What attack happened in America with a knife and truck? What did I miss?

UK, not the US. There was a terrorist attack yesterday that started with a truck hit and run and then the guy got out and started stabbing people, 7 people died. Would have been way worse if there WERE guns, there is absolutely no doubt about that, and it behooves Trump to not bring people's attention to that fact by mentioning gun policy.

but dont they have strict gun laws over there ?

if they do ......doesnt that mean they ended up killing less people because they couldnt get guns?
---

It could've been worse if there were guns, but guns aren't the only way for terrorists to kill a lot of people. Look what happened in Nice last year; a single truck was able to kill 86 and injure over four hundred people.

Asherlee10 posted...

Balkov posted...

It could've been worse if there were guns, but guns aren't the only way for terrorists to kill a lot of people. Look what happened in Nice last year; a single truck was able to kill 86 and injure over four hundred people.

Again, I would say that the weapon of choice is not the issue.

I know, I agree with you completely

Bluster posted...

Baneposting posted...

That banning guns won't end killing sprees

that's not at all what he's saying though

You ask what he's saying and then act like you already knew.

But yah, he's pretty much saying banning guns won't do shit and these fucked up people will figure out a way to kill people.
---