So it happened... again.

  • Using yahoo mail? Some of you have been flagging us as spam, hence mails sent to a yahoo email account will no longer be delivered for an undisclosed time. Please consider using a different email host if you really need those emails.
23 July 2019
168
16
18
34
Where my feet take me
Species
Indeterminable
Relationship status
Unspoken
Gender
Male
#21
Well for starters, what goes on in the UK is not my problem. Frankly put I don't care about the UK. If they want to be slaves, then that's their problem. I'm not going to roll over without a fight. Gun Control is People Control, and we've already let them control us enough. Also, I don't support public schools, so that probably should take care of itself. Mass Shootings? First of all, dig into the actual data and you'll see that the numbers are misleading. And I'm gonna be cold here, but my rights are not up for sale because of someone else's mistakes. It's like restricting someone's internet because they made you cry. It's a violation of human rights. All gun laws are infringements. People who support gun laws are too afraid to learn how to fend for themselves without a government to nanny them. Personally, if we got rid of the government , we'd be in a better place. But people are too weak to admit that the government does more harm than it ever will good. We tried gun control once. And again and again. Why must gun owner's surrender their rights, yet no one else is willing to sacrifice theirs?
I'll take actual facts, figures and reports about when we've tried gun control and it only got worse. Please include your sources for review. Also! You keep going on and on about the UK's citizens being enslaved to the Government. I'm gonna have to ask for the source on that, likely peer reviewed, and well researched study to back up that claim. Don't worry, I'll wait for you to present your evidence for these statements.
 

wraith138

Active Member
3 October 2016
890
108
43
27
Louisiana
Species
SpottedHyena
Gender
Male
#22
I'll take actual facts, figures and reports about when we've tried gun control and it only got worse. Please include your sources for review. Also! You keep going on and on about the UK's citizens being enslaved to the Government. I'm gonna have to ask for the source on that, likely peer reviewed, and well researched study to back up that claim. Don't worry, I'll wait for you to present your evidence for these statements.
I don't care if it works or not. My rights are not up for barter is my point.

As for the UK: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Television_licensing_in_the_United_Kingdom
https://www.gov.uk/buying-carrying-knives
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/firearms-licensing-police-guidance
Looks like slavery to me.
 
23 July 2019
168
16
18
34
Where my feet take me
Species
Indeterminable
Relationship status
Unspoken
Gender
Male
#23
So... that is not the definition of slavery at all. Let me help you - A slave is a person owned by someone and slavery is the state of being under the control of someone where a person is forced to work for another. A slave is considered as a property of another as the one controlling them purchases them or owns them from their birth."

And the television license is literally a form of tax collected directly to fund public access broadcasts. So! Only people who actively watch television are required to pay the tax for it - unlike the United States where a portion of EVERYONE'S taxes, even those who don't own a TV or watch live broadcasts or streaming, still goes to PBS. An amount equal to 30 million US dollars back in the days of Mister Roger's Neighborhood. So... not slavery? Not by definition or even any stretch of the imagination.

So no, your slavery point is ridiculously inaccurate. That would be like saying people are slaves because they need a license to drive a car or to be certified to practice medicine in a clinical setting. That isn't enslavement. Again! The knife and gun thing is literally just regulations, one that has resulted in a murder rate far less than our own. And again the TV thing is just to have people who use TV to fund public broadcasting.

And the stance of your argument is that the 10,000 people murdered in gun violence and the additional 20,000 lost to suicide doesn't matter... because...? What? You misunderstand that the Constitution not only was designed to be rewritten, and in fact has been rewritten?

And your rights aren't up for negotiation? That is missing the point and spirit of the US Constitution. As Thomas Jefferson once wrote to James Madison - Madison considered the architect of the constitution, and in agreement with Jefferson - and I quote "Every constitution then, and every law, naturally expires at the end of 19 years. If it be enforced longer, it is an act of force, and not of right."

Which means that by being unwilling to adapt or change what you consider your fundamental right, is a litteral act of tyranny as written by our founding fathers. And considering how much you were going on about tyrants, you'd think you would be more in agreement with those who founded this nation, but I am wholly not surprised by the fact you are not.

I do believe that addresses every point you've made so far. Though you have chosen to ignore anything contrary to your preconceived and factually unsubstantiated views - unless you'd like to weigh in on our higher murder/suicide rate, or why we as a nation should find it acceptable to reach the point where we are training literal children to throw themselves at a gunman, instead of taking steps that have shown to reduce violent incidents around the globe.
 

wraith138

Active Member
3 October 2016
890
108
43
27
Louisiana
Species
SpottedHyena
Gender
Male
#24
So... that is not the definition of slavery at all. Let me help you - A slave is a person owned by someone and slavery is the state of being under the control of someone where a person is forced to work for another. A slave is considered as a property of another as the one controlling them purchases them or owns them from their birth."

And the television license is literally a form of tax collected directly to fund public access broadcasts. So! Only people who actively watch television are required to pay the tax for it - unlike the United States where a portion of EVERYONE'S taxes, even those who don't own a TV or watch live broadcasts or streaming, still goes to PBS. An amount equal to 30 million US dollars back in the days of Mister Roger's Neighborhood. So... not slavery? Not by definition or even any stretch of the imagination.

So no, your slavery point is ridiculously inaccurate. That would be like saying people are slaves because they need a license to drive a car or to be certified to practice medicine in a clinical setting. That isn't enslavement. Again! The knife and gun thing is literally just regulations, one that has resulted in a murder rate far less than our own. And again the TV thing is just to have people who use TV to fund public broadcasting.

And the stance of your argument is that the 10,000 people murdered in gun violence and the additional 20,000 lost to suicide doesn't matter... because...? What? You misunderstand that the Constitution not only was designed to be rewritten, and in fact has been rewritten?

And your rights aren't up for negotiation? That is missing the point and spirit of the US Constitution. As Thomas Jefferson once wrote to James Madison - Madison considered the architect of the constitution, and in agreement with Jefferson - and I quote "Every constitution then, and every law, naturally expires at the end of 19 years. If it be enforced longer, it is an act of force, and not of right."

Which means that by being unwilling to adapt or change what you consider your fundamental right, is a litteral act of tyranny as written by our founding fathers. And considering how much you were going on about tyrants, you'd think you would be more in agreement with those who founded this nation, but I am wholly not surprised by the fact you are not.

I do believe that addresses every point you've made so far. Though you have chosen to ignore anything contrary to your preconceived and factually unsubstantiated views - unless you'd like to weigh in on our higher murder/suicide rate, or why we as a nation should find it acceptable to reach the point where we are training literal children to throw themselves at a gunman, instead of taking steps that have shown to reduce violent incidents around the globe.
Slavery through complacency is still slavery. You can get a gold medal in mental gymnastics, and it still won't change that.

The constitution is a piece of paper. Every human has the right to free speech, to protect themselves any means necessary from a tyrannical government, and to do what they wish so long as it causes no non consensual harm to people or property, and an ancient piece of parchment won't change that. So no, you haven't really addressed any of my points, like at all. To put it bluntly, I don't give two shits about what some lunatic does and how many kids he's killed or with what. Tragic, but it doesn't affect my rights. And if you think it should, then you don't deserve any of your rights.
 
23 July 2019
168
16
18
34
Where my feet take me
Species
Indeterminable
Relationship status
Unspoken
Gender
Male
#25
Slavery through complacency is still slavery. You can get a gold medal in mental gymnastics, and it still won't change that.

The constitution is a piece of paper. Every human has the right to free speech, to protect themselves any means necessary from a tyrannical government, and to do what they wish so long as it causes no non consensual harm to people or property, and an ancient piece of parchment won't change that. So no, you haven't really addressed any of my points, like at all. To put it bluntly, I don't give two shits about what some lunatic does and how many kids he's killed or with what. Tragic, but it doesn't affect my rights. And if you think it should, then you don't deserve any of your rights.
Mental gymnastics? Considering your the one equating weapon ownership and television - or the lack there of - to slavery, is one of the most ludicrous things I have ever heard of. It isn't even indentured servitude. Hell! By your logic the vast majority of the world exists as slaves. Which honestly there is no actual logic in your point of view. And the whole idea of you using your guns to protect our freedom is complete garbage.

An M1A2 Abrams is barreling down upon your neighborhood to oppress your rights and freedoms, which of your guns is going to stop the tyranny of the government? What the hell if your antitank plan? Whats your defense against the governemnt deciding to make an example out of your hometown by leveling it with a cruise missle strike?

If you don't have a counter measure for the reality of modern warefare than what you have is a power fantasy, and nothing else. And frankly NOBODY with any sense of reason cares about your fantasies. Because truth be told, your guns aren't making us safer. They've lead to a higher murder rate. To over 200 mass shootings this year by the FBI's definition, and a net loss of life nearing 40,000 people. And that is with some kind of regulation in place.

Your idea of a perfect anarchist society without government would literally never work. People like the Manson family, Jeffery Dahmer and other prolific serial killers would still be out there. Hell half the technological advances you've enjoyed wouldn't exist since much of it is funded in part, or in full, through taxes collected by thr government. The fact you and I are having this conversation is only possible through the progress of civilization - which is made possible by having a functioning, though not anywhere close to perfect government. Why? Because the advancement of society has allowed us more leisure time than our ancestors.

So lets roll back to your point on slavery: so the UK is full of slaves because they have a higher rated healthcare system than us, less chance of being brutally murdered and a lower suicide rate? Thats not slavery. Try talking to someone from the UK, or better yet actually go there. Get some experience. And while you are at it try brushing up on what slavery actually is

Everything you've stated has been opinion and conjecture, with a splash of fantasy thrown in. I mean your entire argument boils down to "I have guns and think I should have them, therefore I should have them". Its circular reasoning at its finest. I mean not only do you lack anything to back up your claims but your own opinion, you haven't any logic or hell even philosophy. I mean you could kind of make a case here through Nietzsche's philosophy because his belief in a "will to power", and a gun makes powerful the most cowardly of men as well as the strongest. You could argue it helps balance those who have no power against those who could.

It would still, ultimately, be a short sighted and more importantly a misinterpretation of philosophy, but at least it would have some reasoning behind it. But! No. Instead we get your armchair philosophy and clear misunderstanding of a lot of complex - and not so complex subjects.

To put it blunty, everything you've said has been complete and utter... 《click here》. Because for the record repetition of your points doesn't make you right. Being loudest and wrong still makes you wrong. And choosing to ignore when I litterally go point by point on why you aren't just wrong, but so far removed from logic I'm surprised your fursona isn't the Mad Hatter, doesn't make you right.

Nothing you said has been based on anything substantial or factual, and frankly I'd be surprised if you could actually provide me any substantiated facts because at this point I'm not even certain you understand how the world works, or that opinions do not equal facts.
 
Last edited:

Tygriss

Active Member
20 April 2018
222
25
28
33
tygriss.sofurry.com
Species
Tiger anthro
Gender
Female
#26
Slavery through complacency is still slavery. You can get a gold medal in mental gymnastics, and it still won't change that.

The constitution is a piece of paper. Every human has the right to free speech, to protect themselves any means necessary from a tyrannical government, and to do what they wish so long as it causes no non consensual harm to people or property, and an ancient piece of parchment won't change that. So no, you haven't really addressed any of my points, like at all. To put it bluntly, I don't give two shits about what some lunatic does and how many kids he's killed or with what. Tragic, but it doesn't affect my rights. And if you think it should, then you don't deserve any of your rights.
Tyrannical government? Um you clearly haven't a first clue about Britain, and I can speak from first hand knowledge as I live in the UK.
What you are doing is just painting a bad an inaccurate image and by all accounts, its very sick and twisted to do such a thing.

For one, we are as free as any other country thank you very much. If you look at your facts the reason why knife and guns are regulated is because of a rise in knife crimes, so they regulate for the public's protection.

If you want to debate what goes on then feel free to take it up with me, I'd be happy to set you straight on facts.
 
27 October 2018
15
4
3
46
Yorkshire England Gods own county
Species
dragon
Gender
Male
#27
I'm a Brit too and I will happily take my chances against a nanny state and knife crime and the vanishing small possibility of being gunned down in the street to not have headlines such as ' Boy, 6, fatally shoots toddler brother while playing ‘cops and robbers 'dad arrested appear in my papers. We had one mass shooting in a school in Dunblain when I was a kid and that was more than enough . We banned handguns which were rare anyway but one incident was one too many . As for our personal freedoms I see a lot more use of the national guard to control Americans than I see armed police used here and even more infrequently our army .
 

Alenicia

~ Gold Edition Delight ~
3 October 2016
209
22
18
26
Wisconsin
Species
Dragon
#28
In my state there was a news article yesterday literally of a woman teaching her teenage son to drive and let him handle the driving. When he was about to make a turn, another guy decided to run the light and they collided. But the mother attempting to talk to the guy ended up getting shot .. and then her son drove her to the hospital where she later died.

As much as it is that it might be our "right" to have guns, I do see that it is hugely problematic that the people who do guns use them for more than the second amendment covers it for. Whether that means using rifles to hunt or just having it for self-defense, but I feel like there's really something more being covered that isn't addressed with the second amendment and the frequency of which we do see news headlines that involve a gun. You really don't go a day around the United States without seeing something about it .. but at the same time you get the same arguments from the people who do have guns talking about their rights.
 
28 November 2018
45
18
8
25
Species
Dragon
Relationship status
Single (seeking)
Gender
Male
#29
The heck have I walked into here? All I'll say is that the thing about gun control is that just makes the criminals the only ones with guns; criminals are called such because they don't follow laws in the first place, so what point does regulating guns do but make honest citizens weaker?
 
23 July 2019
168
16
18
34
Where my feet take me
Species
Indeterminable
Relationship status
Unspoken
Gender
Male
#30
The heck have I walked into here? All I'll say is that the thing about gun control is that just makes the criminals the only ones with guns; criminals are called such because they don't follow laws in the first place, so what point does regulating guns do but make honest citizens weaker?
Which is why Australia hasn't had a mass shooting since 1996 right? Because by taking the guns away from the citizens it has turned into a violent dystopian hellscape... or the compelte opposite. And look at the United Kingdom which has much stricter gun laws than the US - our murder rate is 18 times higher. And if you factor in for population differences, guess what? We have a murder rate that is still quadruple theres. So! If guns make us safer, why is it the countries with stricter gun control laws have less instances of violence crime? By your logic they should be higher, but they aren't. Because here is the thing you seem to be overlooking - MOST guns used in crimes are purchased legally and then later used to commit violent crimes. Which is why gun control actually reduces crime. Again! I've posted the statistics in previous posts, feel free to browse them, consider them, and then come back to discuss/debate them.

But actually have sources and figures to back whatever you say because I will call you out on any bullshit. Speaking of sources! Between January 1st 2000 and September 6th 2019 the United States has had over 250 school shootings. Just school shootings mind you. Thankfully not all of them had any fatalities and some by sheer luck even had no injuries. But! More than 250 school shootings in just 19 years have occurred in the United States.

And the United Kingdom for the same period has had exactly ZERO school shootings since January 1st 2000 to September 6th 2019. In fact! The last school shooting occured on March 13th 1996. Because after that shooting the United Kingdom passed tighter gun control regulations. So! There is a lot of evidence in this post and my previous ones that literally show that more guns does not equal safer. The opposite is true, more gun control equals safer.

I eagerly await your own evidence to support your arguments.
 
28 November 2018
45
18
8
25
Species
Dragon
Relationship status
Single (seeking)
Gender
Male
#31
Yeah no thanks. This is going to get toxic very fast and honestly I'm not in the mood for this to tonight.
 
28 November 2018
45
18
8
25
Species
Dragon
Relationship status
Single (seeking)
Gender
Male
#33
Put it this way, if you were a criminal, would you rather go burglarize a neighborhood known to have a lot of guns, or a neighborhood that is known not to? Similarly, would you feel more enticed to mug someone in an area with or without guns? Either way I'm not giving up my guns any time soon just so that shithead criminal will be the only one with a gun. And what do you really have against guns so much?
 
28 November 2018
45
18
8
25
Species
Dragon
Relationship status
Single (seeking)
Gender
Male
#34
Also for the matter, while I agree more guns does open the possibility of more gun related incidents, but I like to think that it's a double-edged sword; there's also more guns to STOP the person who's doing bad things. Just got to hope more guns does more good than harm, and that's the unfortunate side effect of it, and it depends on who has said guns, untrained morons who will use their gun over a heated argument or shoots themselves in the foot, or properly trained citizens who actually know when and how to use a gun. I believe more guns is a better help than hinderance, but only if training is emphasized on top of it. I'm highly against gun control, but I'm not saying give guns to morons who have no business with them.
 
23 July 2019
168
16
18
34
Where my feet take me
Species
Indeterminable
Relationship status
Unspoken
Gender
Male
#35
Put it this way, if you were a criminal, would you rather go burglarize a neighborhood known to have a lot of guns, or a neighborhood that is known not to? Similarly, would you feel more enticed to mug someone in an area with or without guns? Either way I'm not giving up my guns any time soon just so that shithead criminal will be the only one with a gun. And what do you really have against guns so much?
So... what sources do you have to back up these claims that neighborhoods with restrictive access to guns have a higher instance of violent crime, or even burglary? Because again, the United States rate of theft/burglary and other property crimes is fourteen percent higher than the United Kingdom. So fewer guns... and fewer burglarys. Meaning your thought exercise falls apart.

Furthermore! The United States has a rate of more than double that of the United Kingdom for assault/muggings and other violent crimes. And the United States has a murder rate committed by youths that is FIFTY-NINE (59) times higher than that of the United Kingdom.

So! Why should we be okay with these numbers? Again! Why should we be okay that a school is training CHILDREN NO OLDER THAN 12 to fight against an armed gunman, because with our rate of violent crime it has become inevitable? I want you to justify why we should allow 250 school shootings to occur in less than two decades when other countries have zero. Justify why and how guns make us safer when more than 10,000 people have been gunned down this year alone - which isn't even counting the over 23,000 suicides by gun.

Why should we value your desire to own a boomstick over the saftey of our own citizens? I don't have an actual problem with guns by the way. I was raised around them, I grew up shooting them for fun. But you know what I can't do? I can't accept that we as a nation have allowed the more than 110 CHILDREN to die this year alone. Is it really worth it?

Maybe while you look for some sources to support your self defense angle, you can finish counting all the children dead by gun violence this year alone - I stopped counting at a 110 because it was way to depressing. I didn't even make it past the first page, maybe you will have better luck.
 
Last edited:
23 July 2019
168
16
18
34
Where my feet take me
Species
Indeterminable
Relationship status
Unspoken
Gender
Male
#36
Also for the matter, while I agree more guns does open the possibility of more gun related incidents, but I like to think that it's a double-edged sword; there's also more guns to STOP the person who's doing bad things. Just got to hope more guns does more good than harm, and that's the unfortunate side effect of it, and it depends on who has said guns, untrained morons who will use their gun over a heated argument or shoots themselves in the foot, or properly trained citizens who actually know when and how to use a gun. I believe more guns is a better help than hinderance, but only if training is emphasized on top of it. I'm highly against gun control, but I'm not saying give guns to morons who have no business with them.
Yet every nation with stricter regulations on firearms have fewer violent incidents. I don't want your opinion - I want actual FACTS and SOURCES to back up your claims.
 
28 November 2018
45
18
8
25
Species
Dragon
Relationship status
Single (seeking)
Gender
Male
#37
Do I really need sources for that? What are you, my English teacher? Be your own source. Go out and do it for yourself. Go rob a house or mug someone, where are you going to do it, a sketchy neighborhood full of gangbangers or ex mitary or even cops, or a neighborhood full of old people and sheltered types with no guns? You're going to go rob the latter, because that's simple logic and doesn't need a source. Crime in places with more guns is more likely that you're going to get shot, that IS fact and a bullet to your head IS your source. Go out and plan a shooting, where are you going to do it, a police station full of cops or a school full of scared kids? You're going to choose the latter, because basic human instinct (or any animal) is survival, we don't want to die. Granted, a fair amount of such shootings do involve a shooter with an active deathwish who seeks to die anyway, but regardless, you cannot deny basic instinct. Do you want to die? Of course not. It's not even just from the criminal side; if someone shows up with a gun, guess who's going to fucking die, YOU, because the criminal is the one with the gun, as rare and unlikely as it may be that it may ever happen; the whole reason we have guns is just in case that should happen, and if it does, maybe you'll realize as you're about to die as the cops take ten minutes too long to show up and you're already dead.
 
23 July 2019
168
16
18
34
Where my feet take me
Species
Indeterminable
Relationship status
Unspoken
Gender
Male
#38
Do I really need sources for that? What are you, my English teacher? Be your own source. Go out and do it for yourself. Go rob a house or mug someone, where are you going to do it, a sketchy neighborhood full of gangbangers or ex mitary or even cops, or a neighborhood full of old people and sheltered types with no guns? You're going to go rob the latter, because that's simple logic and doesn't need a source. Crime in places with more guns is more likely that you're going to get shot, that IS fact and a bullet to your head IS your source. Go out and plan a shooting, where are you going to do it, a police station full of cops or a school full of scared kids? You're going to choose the latter, because basic human instinct (or any animal) is survival, we don't want to die. Granted, a fair amount of such shootings do involve a shooter with an active deathwish who seeks to die anyway, but regardless, you cannot deny basic instinct. Do you want to die? Of course not. It's not even just from the criminal side; if someone shows up with a gun, guess who's going to fucking die, YOU, because the criminal is the one with the gun, as rare and unlikely as it may be that it may ever happen; the whole reason we have guns is just in case that should happen, and if it does, maybe you'll realize as you're about to die as the cops take ten minutes too long to show up and you're already dead.
Literally everything you've said is opinion, conjecture and unsubstantiated by actual facts, history, statistics or any other data point. And this might come as a shock to you, but your opinion means nothing in face of the evidence. So! Address this! If the UK has made it ILLEGAL for citizens to own guns or firearms, WHY do they have a LOWER rate of muggings? Explain that one. I'll wait.

And! No "whataboutism" this time. Give me a clear, logical explanation for why they are in fact safer with less guns despite your insistence to the opposite.

Oh and yes. You need sources, because constant repetition of the same point doesn't make you right. I have given you numbers, souces, and factual information that proves you are either misguided or misinformed. So either say something that is actually credible or learn something.

Because much like the other Wraith, unless you can back what you say than it is complete and utter { click me }. Because tell me how we are safer with a HIGHER murder rate? How are we safer when more than 10,000 people - more than 110 children - have died this year alone? How are we made safer when by the FBI's own data, and definition of the term, have had more mass shootings than days this year?

I want goddamn hard evidence to support your side of this. Because otherwise you don't have a leg to stand on. Fucking show me actual proof that what you say is REALLY how the world works. Show me the proof we are safer in the United States than say the UK, Australia or hell even Denmark.

Because I can't find it, and if you can't provide it, than everything you've said has been without merit or value. You want to have a debate on the benefits and saftey of an armed population? Fine! But keep in mind opinions can in fact be wrong, so the burden of proof is on you, because I've quoted numbers, statistics and linked my sources all through this thread.

Prove me wrong. Show me the evidence, because otherwise your opinions mean nothing in the face of raw data. Please, in all seriousness, show me where your argument is based on actual factual precedent. Because frankly it would do a lot to calm my own concerns and anxiety about the future.
 
28 November 2018
45
18
8
25
Species
Dragon
Relationship status
Single (seeking)
Gender
Male
#39
Good lord. I return not even knowing why, and this is the mess I return to. I have better shit to do than keep feeding this flame of ignorance. I am genuinely impressed by this, however for the wrong reasons. You remind me of the people that want guns with barrel shrouds or "clipazines" banned because they're "evil". I'm less and less interested in this by the minute, yet can't wrap my head around sheltered people like you that actually believes taking away guns solves dick. Get the fuck out of here with the OCD source bullshit. SOURCES, SOURCES, one of these days if and when bad people come into your life and gun could save your life, that will be the only source you need, and you can believe what you want until then. For now I'm out of here, because I'm losing brain cells each time I click on the damn alert.
 
23 July 2019
168
16
18
34
Where my feet take me
Species
Indeterminable
Relationship status
Unspoken
Gender
Male
#40
Good lord. I return not even knowing why, and this is the mess I return to. I have better shit to do than keep feeding this flame of ignorance. I am genuinely impressed by this, however for the wrong reasons. You remind me of the people that want guns with barrel shrouds or "clipazines" banned because they're "evil". I'm less and less interested in this by the minute, yet can't wrap my head around sheltered people like you that actually believes taking away guns solves dick. Get the fuck out of here with the OCD source bullshit. SOURCES, SOURCES, one of these days if and when bad people come into your life and gun could save your life, that will be the only source you need, and you can believe what you want until then. For now I'm out of here, because I'm losing brain cells each time I click on the damn alert.
Again. Thats "whataboutism". And its bullshit. Ok... so answer at least this - why has Australia had no mass shootings since 1996 when they held a massive firearm ban/buyback? Why has the United States had over 200 this year with our looser regulations?

Stop giving garbage scenarios and actually answer a damn question for once. If guns make us safer why is our murder rate higher than countries who have stricter firearm regulations? No imaginary scenarios. Just answer the question.