Biden 2020

[The Lamb]

Oh sure, there are one way streets on Fox as well, the difference i have seen between the two, is atleast Fox lets you know when your watching the news and when its an opinion show lol. Also, the Democrat town halls Fox did during the run for Dem nominee was pretty good too.

[Dmanwuzhere]

As long as you know that Fox isn't any better...

fox may be one sided but they dont make up anonymous whistleblowers as part of the news

[Lachlan]

as I said the socialist thing you guys should have is free healthcare because most 1st world countries have that like Australia.

[William one eye]

as I said the socialist thing you guys should have is free healthcare because most 1st world countries have that like Australia.

There is no such thing as "free healthcare"
It is paid for by taxes.

Also what rights and benefits we afford our citizens is not really your buisness. As the functioning of your nation should not be ours. Nations should stay out of other nations buisness as much as possible.

[The Lamb]

as I said the socialist thing you guys should have is free healthcare because most 1st world countries have that like Australia.

Hey Kim, I only have one question for you on that thought... If all this "free" healthcare is so good, why do so many (those with the money) leave Australia, Canada, England Etc to come to the USA when they need treatment then return home?

And trust me, im not saying our healthcare doesn't need help!

[Leo]

Wait I don't see what's wrong with an anonymous whistle blower as a source. How else would the information get out?

[Leo]

well I think it was better than what you guys previously had but what you guys really need is something like medicare here in Australia. I mean with all the shootings there your gonna need it and frankly I don't get why people need so many guns, I mean I can understand like a pistol or something for self defence but you can get machine guns there and all sorts of crazy stuff and what I really don't get is why would a 18 year old be able to get a rifle which probably has longer range and is more dangerous than a handgun which you can't get when you are 18?

I used to think that the amount of guns is the cause of so many shootings in the US, but I was proven wrong.

I mean Yemen has half the number of guns that we do, and yet they really don't have any shootings. Not half the number of the US, but maybe one or two every few years. Canada also has a lot of guns, yet they don't have shootings as a major problem, not even close. I found this out when I watched Bowling for Columbine, a Micheal Moore film that gets to the bottom of the problem.

He interviewed a bunch of regular people, and asked what they thought the cause for so many shootings in the US is. Some people said violent movies and video games, some said race differentials, and some said the number of guns. He disproved all of that. Japan and India created some of the most violent movies and video games in the world, and they don't have a shooting problem. The race differential is about the same in European countries and Canada as it is in the US, so that claim is false. The number of guns, as I already mentioned, does not have to do with it.

The only thing that can be deciphered between the US and other countries is the media. Here, you turn on your TV or car radio, and what do you hear? "Covid-19 is spreading to...", "Man shot and killed last night during..." "THERE IS A SWARM OF KILLER HORNETS COMING AND YOU COULD BE AT RISK!!"

Now if you were to step into Canada and watch some TV, it would be very different. More like "Congress passes a new law that allows children to..." and "A new festival is taking place this summer..."

See the difference? The media here in the US is more... fear mongering. Almost all of the stories on the news are meant to one way or another scare you. I can't explain exactly how this is attributed to mass shootings in this short response, so I urge you to go watch the movie yourself. It is an excellent film.

But, why do we need so many guns? I really don't know. It's definitely unnecessary to have 36 different guns in your home, if not obnoxious. But Since it isn't the root of many problems, it's best that it be left alone. It does give shooters easier access to weapons, but they would find a way to obtain a gun one way or another unless we were to outlaw firearms completely, which wouldn't be the best idea. I fully support stricter background checks and banning the sale of automatic assault weapons including bump stocks. I don't see why you need a magazine that holds 50 bullets in order to go deer hunting, or even for protecting your home (unless a psycho drug cartel is on your ass, but that's a different story).

[The Lamb]

Ok some of that was pretty good blue, but automatic assault weapons are already banned and have been since prohibition.

Once all the riots started, gun sails skyrocketed, and those who listened to the propaganda were dumbfounded to find out how hard it is to get a gun and most ordinary citizens who tried couldn't.

[Leo]

When I said automatic I was referring to the gun show loophole, in which it is legal to buy automatic assault weapons. Plus, you can legally convert a regular assault rifle into an auto using a bump stock, which to me is horrifying.

In my experience it is quite easy to buy a gun. The reason people were surprised is because they thought they could just go buy a gun, when really you need to apply for a licence and that takes a while to process. But, when you think about it, for what a gun is (a lethal machine made for killing that shoots tiny lead particles at high speeds), they are very easy to obtain.

[Meliva]

Wait I don't see what's wrong with an anonymous whistle blower as a source. How else would the information get out?

The problem with that is it could very easily be a bad source and be false information. Since it's anonymous there is no way to verify the source at all. Hell, if a news network wanted to, they could just claim they were contacted by an anonymous source, and come up with a completely fabricated story.

How would anyone prove them wrong? They can't check the source, and even if they DID find evidence that what they said was false, the network could just shift the blame on the anonymous whistleblower they made up.