And now, Stockholm...

[Jackie]

Goodness, not everything is racism, guys. Religiously motivated terrorist attacks get more attention on the news because of what they are and the fear they instill in  people. Not because the perp has brown skin.

Religion is tribal and that is what causes racism, no, not in every individual, but it is what religion hides behind to avoid scrutiny.

You tell a Jew that Jewish is not a race, but a religion, they call you a racist, even when you point out someone like black Jew Sammy Davis Jr. You get called racist by Buddhists even when you point out western born white people who adapted that religion. You get called racist by people from India when you say Hindu is not a race.

You get called, as an atheist all those things, despite being able to post links to countless atheist pages from multiple nations run by the people born and raised in them. Not even the word "atheist" is a race either. We exist in every nation and come in all skin tones and have left all the world's major religions bar none.

Religions are religions, not races. You can leave a religion for another religion or ditch all religions. Nobody can leave their skin tone, we are all born with our skin tones. Your parents can raise you with ideas that you might ditch later on  in life, but you cant leave your skin tone.

[surreptitious57]

Although Islam is not a race it can be treated the same as one as most Muslims are brown. That is why the left think Islam should not be criticised because it is regarded as another type
of racism. The problem with this is that while there are racists who are Islamophobic not everyone who criticises Islam is racist. Also while one can be racist towards Muslims of the same
ethnicity or nationality one cannot be racist towards Islam itself. And the distinction has to be acknowledged else any criticism of Islam can be deemed Islamophobic and racist when this
is definitely not so. If the majority of Muslims were white the left would have no problem criticising Islam. But criticism of any ideology should focus on the ideology itself not the melanin
deficiency of its followers. Having brown skin does not give one a free pass when it comes to punishing apostasy and homosexuality by death or inflicting female genital mutilation on pre
pubescent girls or equating rape victims with adulterers if their rapists are not their husbands. If Christians did that the left would rightfully condemn it so it should be the same for Islam

[WinterHold]

What's new? crazy nuts exist in every city, take guns away and they will strangle, take ropes away and they will stab. 

There is a harsh reality here that the easier you make it for people to kill people, the more people will be killed. If strangulation was the only way to kill someone, the murder rate in the USA would plummet.

The meaning I meant is pretty clear.
Hanging to words like that, is just like saying "burger!" when someone faces you with "I fear an army of sheep led by a lion".

The meaning; in other words; is that "guns don't kill; people do".
I challenge you: put a gun on the table and see if it shoots by itself at the neighbors.

Americans kill because the society teaches violence as a culture. Gangsta rap, Violent videogames, SAW, Indiana Jones.
What is safer though? to live with Americans, or 1000 years ago in Western France? There weren't guns around; but English archers literally raped a lot of French girls.

They call it "loot".

[Crunchy]

There is a harsh reality here that the easier you make it for people to kill people, the more people will be killed. If strangulation was the only way to kill someone, the murder rate in the USA would plummet.

The meaning I meant is pretty clear.
Hanging to words like that, is just like saying "burger!" when someone faces you with "I fear an army of sheep led by a lion".

The meaning; in other words; is that "guns don't kill; people do".
I challenge you: put a gun on the table and see if it shoots by itself at the neighbors.

Americans kill because the society teaches violence as a culture. Gangsta rap, Violent videogames, SAW, Indiana Jones.
What is safer though? to live with Americans, or 1000 years ago in Western France? There weren't guns around; but English archers literally raped a lot of French girls.

They call it "loot".

The mantra that "guns don't kill; people do" does not address the issue I pointed out that the easier you make it for people to kill people, the more people will be killed. If the English archers had been given AK47's at that time, I'm going to guess the slaughter of the French would have been worse.

You could just as easily say "grenades don't kill people, people do" or "rocket launchers don't kill people, people do" but I don't see anyone anywhere using this as a reason to allow the widespread distribution of these weapons. So why apply this faulty reasoning to handguns?

[Catholic_Lady]

Although Islam is not a race it can be treated the same as one as most Muslims are brown. That is why the left think Islam should not be criticised because it is regarded as another type
of racism. The problem with this is that while there are racists who are Islamophobic not everyone who criticises Islam is racist. Also while one can be racist towards Muslims of the same
ethnicity or nationality one cannot be racist towards Islam itself. And the distinction has to be acknowledged else any criticism of Islam can be deemed Islamophobic and racist when this
is definitely not so. If the majority of Muslims were white the left would have no problem criticising Islam. But criticism of any ideology should focus on the ideology itself not the melanin
deficiency of its followers. Having brown skin does not give one a free pass when it comes to punishing apostasy and homosexuality by death or inflicting female genital mutilation on pre
pubescent girls or equating rape victims with adulterers if their rapists are not their husbands. If Christians did that the left would rightfully condemn it so it should be the same for Islam

Agreed.

[Minimalist]

[Amarok]

The meaning I meant is pretty clear.
Hanging to words like that, is just like saying "burger!" when someone faces you with "I fear an army of sheep led by a lion".

The meaning; in other words; is that "guns don't kill; people do".
I challenge you: put a gun on the table and see if it shoots by itself at the neighbors.

Americans kill because the society teaches violence as a culture. Gangsta rap, Violent videogames, SAW, Indiana Jones.
What is safer though? to live with Americans, or 1000 years ago in Western France? There weren't guns around; but English archers literally raped a lot of French girls.

They call it "loot".

The mantra that "guns don't kill; people do" does not address the issue I pointed out that the easier you make it for people to kill people, the more people will be killed. If the English archers had been given AK47's at that time, I'm going to guess the slaughter of the French would have been worse.

You could just as easily say "grenades don't kill people, people do" or "rocket launchers don't kill people, people do" but I don't see anyone anywhere using this as a reason to allow the widespread distribution of these weapons. So why apply this faulty reasoning to handguns?

Indeed guns and people kill people . And indeed why can't I manufacture anthrax or build a dirty bomb after all neither of those kill people  according to gun fanatic logic . And indeed the reason people own guns is there convenient for killing people at least far more then other options. And lastly atlas blaming violent media is stupid Korea, Japan ,Sweden. Lots of other cultures eat the U.S alive when it comes to violence so why aren't they filled with psychopaths ?

[Isis]