Jump to content

Hystery

Members
  • Content Count

    2,090
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

Hystery last won the day on April 4 2016

Hystery had the most liked content!

About Hystery

  • Rank
    #MakeSearchbarGreatAgain
  • Birthday 07/09/1991

Profile Information

  • Country
    France
  • Location
    France
  • Interests
    GTA, LCPDFR
  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

17,681 profile views
  1. Hystery

    Synagogue shooting in Pittsburgh

    Writing your post in a different and bigger font doesn't make any of what you say truthful. So I'll just answer by: no. Also: Really? Because as far as I know, your constitution was written by a bunch of dudes, not by any god. So god-given rights? Yeah no, hold your horses there champ. Everytime I see someone saying this as an argument, I just can't wrap my head around it. How is it a bad thing for the government to know how many guns are in circulation and who owns them? It'd make life easier for so many people, especially LEO. Just think about it, they get a call about domestic disturbance or anything, they just have to check that registry to know if the place they're going to has guns are not and prepare accordingly and to know what to possibly expect once on scene. And please, don't give me the "evil government!" crap, because we both know your government won't turn onto you, ever, just like mine won't, just like any of the western, most developed countries won't. I genuinely want to know what makes having a registry of gun ownership is bad for anyone. Because when it comes to sharing personal information and data, you don't seem bothered all that much that most of the companies in the world trade those without you even knowing it, so I feel some double standards here, again.
  2. Hystery

    Synagogue shooting in Pittsburgh

    No, implying that if it's not working 100% of the time, then it's not a miracle solution and doing what Mister Orange said won't prevent those things from happening like he likes to think and say. It's just the easy way to deal with it. "Oh yeah, put armed guards everywhere". Maybe there are other possibilities to deal with the issue before resorting to that. Like, I don't know, having decent intel. The guy was known on extreme-right social networks for saying "death to all jews" and lots of conspiracy theories. This kind of people should be investigated. Knowing they have the eye of the law over their head would already be a deterrent to some. And again, the way he said it, just sounded like he blamed the victims for not having protection rather than putting the blame on the psycho who shot them. You just don't do that. But Trump is a pro at victim-shaming.
  3. Hystery

    Synagogue shooting in Pittsburgh

    Because having an armed, trained guard does not mean 100% fullproof against this kind of incident.
  4. Hystery

    Synagogue shooting in Pittsburgh

    The way Trump said it felt like he just blamed the victims for not having protection, instead of putting the blame on yet another psycho. It's sickening.
  5. So you basically agree for every regulation to be removed because "I want to be free". No more driver licenses, or no more licenses for anything for that matter, no more speed limits, no more drug laws, no regulation in any shape or form for anything, no matter if someone or something suffers from it, regardless of if it actually is useful or not, regardless of the world around you. Because you matter more than the others, your liberties (fucking christ this liberty shit seriously, no one said you'd be forbidden to have guns so cut that crap), and everything revolving around you wanting to do things is more important than the rest of us. The ultimate embodiement of selfishness, narcissism and navel gazing. Society doesn't work like that. Society is living together. Living together implies sometimes having to make compromises to move forward. That's what you don't seem to get, and will probably never get. No wonder so many countries are rated to be better to live in than the US, if that's the vision of society, which is based on individualism all over.
  6. Because it also escalates the situation, and if the guy in front of you also has a gun, who tells you he won't come back right in your back once he left after you pointed your fancy gun at him? Nothing. Draw your gun, you take the chance the guy in front does the same and shoots you, or someone around. It doesn't increase shit, it makes things even more dangerous. Nice way to not answer the point. He says "you've statistically higher chances to shoot a member of your family or an innocent person than a criminal", you say "What's wrong if I kill someone that is attacking him", which is irrelevant to the original argument. Facts are there. In all your time owning a gun, you statistically will have a higher chance to shoot yourself, someone of your family, or an innocent person. Period. Facts. You can't discuss them, because they're facts, realities. Deal with them. Again, nice way to not answer the point. He says "guns make it more likely for suicidal persons to commit suicide", you answer "but they can commit suicide with anything", which is irrelevant to the original argument. The point is that easy access to a gun makes it easier for someone to kill themselves. You grab the gun, swallow the barrel and press the trigger. Done. It doesn't matter if there are other ways to kill yourself, the point is that having a gun in the house makes it much more likely. Again, facts, from studies, made by people much more intelligent than you and me. Deal with it. I don't know what's more sickening. People blatantly ignoring the fact people do bad things with guns and have accidents with guns, or people, like you, who are perfectly aware of those, but prefer to simply not care about them because your selfish enjoyment of owning a weapon is above the safety of others. And here's the most ridiculous argument from pro-gun people. The comparisons to other objects. Except that it's so stupid, so nonsensical, that it ridicules them more than anything. Here's why. Ready? It might be a shock. A. Computer. Was. Never. Designed. Or. Manufactured. With. The intent. To. Traffic. Child porn. NEVER. N. E. V. E. R. On the other hand, ready? Second shocking reveal. A. Gun. Was. Designed. And. Manufactured. With. The intent. To. Kill. The. Person. Standing. In. Front. Of. The. Barrel. PERIOD. You all have to stop comparing things that can't be compared. No, you won't register people that have computers. Why? Because computers are a tool that was manufactured to communicate, to program, to record. What other people do with it is a side-effect. Yes, you can register people who have guns. Why? Because guns are a tool that was manufactured to KILL. Nothing else. A gun doesn't protect you. It's not a shield, it's not an alarm, it's not going to magically make things disappear. The only purpose of a gun is to kill. People doing sports out of it are a side-effect that was never intended in the beginning. But look, I'm going to apply the same logic you use there, but the other way around. Look at drugs. They don't kill anyone, right? Sure, there are accidents, like overdoses. But it's on people's fault, isn't it? For not doing it properly. And it does some good, right? It makes people happy for a while. So why are they forbidden? We shouldn't punish everyone just for the actions of a few, should we? Drugs should be allowed. Oh, or another. Look at speed limits. Speeding doesn't kill anyone, right? Sure, there are accidents, like car crashes. But it's on people's fault, isn't it? For not knowing how to drive properly and pay attention to the road and other cars. And it does some good, right? You reach your destination faster, and it's fun to drive fast. So why do we have speed limits? Why do we punish everyone to drive so much slower just for the actions of a few who were speeding and got killed or killed someone? We shouldn't have speed limits. See how stupid it is? And it can be applied to anything, literally. With that logic, you've no restriction, free use of everything, and in less than a month you end in a country in complete anarchy. Everything needs to be regulated. That's how you keep things in check and orderly. That's why laws exist. The fact that you simply choose to disregard that is both baffling and stupid.
  7. A bit weak on the modified name, lack of effort, C- grade at best. You could have gone for puns at least, hysteria, hysteric, hissyfit, I don't know, be imaginative man, I'm disappointed. Also, starting your looong, absolutely-never-heard-before litany with that kind of school playground intro is laughable. You know what they say, against intelligence, the only weapon of the weaks of mind are insults. Think about that. Ah yes, now that's more like you! Yes, you're right, look at them, living in a european communist heaven! The governments took so many things they don't have the right, nor do they own anything anymore! They took their guns, and then they took their rights to own a car, to own a house, yes, indeed, they kept taking and will continue to take until there's nothing left, totally. Look, they're even taking my computer as I'm talking right now? Why? I don't know, but governments take everything until there's nothing left! Look at Australia! Damn, poor aussies, they took their guns, and then their koalas and kangaroos, they don't have anything left! Damn governments, greatest evil force in the universe! Okay, I'll bite. Yes, cops aren't there to protect you in the heat of a crime happening, unless that crime took some time to resolve, like a store robbery for example. But then, you'll notice that I said "trained officers to UPHOLD THE LAW." Not to protect you, unless it's in some planned event like protests and the like. I've never seen, nor anyone I know, nor anywhere I've heard as far as I can recall, of a situation where someone just got randomly attacked by one or more people. Ain't happening. There's always a reason. But in the event of if indeed I get attacked, for what, getting robbed or something, first I know the guy(s) I'd have in front of me wouldn't have a gun (joy of living in a country where they're regulated ), meaning I could actually try to run away to safety if I tried, or call bystanders for support, and second, if I failed in both cases, do you know what? I'd just give them what they want. I'm not on Earth to play the hero, to be like "Hey, did you see how I shot down this bastard who tried to rob me of my 20 euros in my wallet? Damn my penis is so large!". If I get mugged, they can get what they want and leave me alone, because insurances exist for a reason, I'll get repaid anyway. And afterwards I'd just stroll in the police station to fill a complaint that would result in this guy eventually getting arrested. That's how a civilized country works, by letting cops and justice do their work rather than having citizens playing the role of judge, jury and executioner, that's why we don't have people shot dead every week, and that's why we aren't afraid of everything attacking us around every corner like you 'muricans seems to be considering how you always try to justify yourself with "but i could get attacked, muh gunz". Deal with it.
  8. Ah yes, those damn societies not in favor of these weapons, relying on trained officers to uphold the law, such savages, totally subjugated by invaders and by "the most powerful evil force that anyone has ever seen." Modern time slaves obviously, let's never look their way, it can't be good no matter what.
  9. Oh yes, I am terribly subjugated at the moment.
  10. "A mass shooting is an incident involving multiple victims of firearms-related violence. The United States' Congressional Research Service acknowledges that there is not a broadly accepted definition, and defines a "public mass shooting" as one in which four or more people selected indiscriminately, not including the perpetrator, are killed, echoing the FBI definition of the term "mass murder". However, according to the Investigative Assistance for Violent Crimes Act of 2012, signed into law in January 2013, a mass killing is defined as a killing with at least three deaths, excluding the perpetrator." So yes, 3+ victims can perfectly and objectively be called a mass shooting.
  11. I think you missed the point the article you quoted was trying to make there. They seemed to specifically talk about terrorist attacks, in which case I definitely agree that an excellent intelligence and better community policing are the ways to go, rather than arming a larger portion of officers. Acting preemptively to avoid those attacks from happening is much better than letting them happen and just hope to be able to deal with it with armed officers once they occur. Good intelligence services allow for better tracking of dangerous individuals, and proper community policing can prevent some people in poor or segregated communities to fall into extremism.
  12. Don't worry, it's a normal day in Amerca.
  13. Do you ever look into a mirror? -You- have a narrative. Something happens, it's muslisms' or black people's fault. An officer is attacked, it's a muslim or a black person, gotta be one. A shop is being looted, it's muslims immigrants or african americans, gotta be them. And if someone disagrees with you, they're nasty people hating the US and guns. And you dare tell others are close-minded and narcissistic? You can't be serious. Being 30 (I do hope you actually aren't because otherwise it'd be scary af to act this way at this age) never stopped anyone to act like a child, which is exactly what you're doing. Repeating the same thing, over and over, and over and over and over like a kid asking "Are we there yet?". And don't you dare start talking about antogonize and instigate, because, and I'd love to remind you, this was supposed to be a discussion about a british officer being assaulted, and YOU brought France in the discussion, YOU directly named me even though I didn't talk to you but about the topic discussed at hand in the first place, all by yourself. Stop trying to victimize yourself because it won't work, everyone can see through your petty attempt at saving yourself.
  14. Hystery

    Bakersfield Shooting

    Similar situation here. I live just a few kilometers away from Marseille, 2nd largest city in France and holding the largest community of muslims in the whole country. My father, who's a police officer, is regularly called as back-up there as he's part of the motorized brigade (the cops on bikes). I've been living here for 21 years, and yet I have never seen or heard anything like the stuff showed in those videos, nor did my dad. The no-go zones are a myth, created by Fox News, who has been sued by the townhall of Paris for defamation. Fox News publicly apologized for making up this hoax, but it was too late as idiots who knew nothing about it picked it up and began to spread it, whether it was true or not. Yeah, there are difficult neighborhoods. Just like there are difficult neighborhoods in the US. Public forces still go in them when needed, be it police, firefighters or medical services. I guess that's too difficult to understand for some people.
  15. Oh really? Tell me, I'm pretty sure most US citizens know your cops have weapons, right? So technically, anyone in the US who also doesn't have a gun on them would be outgunned and keep quiet, right? So, what's going on when one of them is in a traffic stop but decides to suddenly assault the police officer, or to try and ram his car before taking off? Did they have a sudden memory loss about the weapon the officer is carrying? Hint: no, they didn't, because a gun is not a deterrent to someone who decided to commit a crime on a police officer. Those guys were decided on assaulting this police officer. Them having a weapon would have changed little to nothing, safe for one of them to be injured. Worse, the weapon of the officer could have been turned against them, for the worse. So, no, what I said was not stupid and made perfect sense. Just because -you- happened to not understand doesn't mean it was. Yes yes, I hate the US so much that I actually planned to visit it several times. Boohoo I hate americans so so much I'm friend with some of them. What next, you're going to say I support Al Qaeda and I was happy when 9/11 happened? You're pathetic man, just like your lack of relevent arguments. As usual, you're wrong. Norway has been rated the best country to live in in the world, and this for several years in a row. 13 years in a row actually. And you can check that by just googling "best country to live in", you'll have all the rankings. But I'm not surprised someone as obsessed and stuck up as you wouldn't know that -or would try to say it's not true. After all, how a racist and islamophobic american could believe the best country to live in is in... GASP... Europe. You know, the Europe you love to claim is turning into a second middle-east. Go to bed now kid, it's late.
×