Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News 
Three children died after a knife man attacked a Taylor Swift themed party. Police have not released details of the perpetrator such as motive, ethnicity, religion, immigration status but English people are protesting this latest incident.
@drewtate
Considering this all took place just about 40 miles or so from me, I'm personally still reeling with the sheer shock these most tragic, awful and dreadful events.
Just how the hell can a 17 year old boy commit such unbelievable horrors. smh
Absolutely shocking... and not something which is a usual thing in the UK.
A 17 year old boy... What the hell has happened there?
I am fuming, though, that the far-right instantly starts to point the finger to foreigners, and have abused this shocking event to spew their hatred against foreigners and get into conflict with the Police.
As far as I am aware there has absolutely nothing been said about the boy's Ethnicity other than that he was born in Britain; if there was any indication this had indeed been committed by some one of foreign descent, and there was a reason for alarm, 'Possible Terrorist Motive' would have been plastered all over the news already.
It's disgusting that once again people who claim to care about the country and society show a complete disregard for the country and society. Let the police do its job, and let the community deal with this in peace.
But why did not the cops say he was white?
@strateguy632 If the boy is indeed of a different ethnicity, but what he has done has nothing to do with 'Race', there is no point in revealing his ethnicity and only fuels the Far-Right.
There are now serious 'protests' which all result in fights with the Police; Southport has been locked down and more protests up and down the country have been issued. Mosques have been warned to be careful... so there's another reason. The police is not going to pour extra oil on the fire and motivate the Far-Right even more to cause problems.
If the criminal was White, the news would repeatedly say it. Them hiding the race in multiple news agencies (ABC, CBA, NBC, etc.) is always because they are NOT White. Any time they don't mention the race of the criminal it turns out to not be White, but the media frequently supports criminals of other races.
It’s crazy and to think it’s a 17 y/o child smh 🤦♀️ this world is bad at times
Opinion
15Opinion
Don't get me started... I am spitting blood over this! We are getting more and more of these bastards (he is from Rowanda. His parents are here illegally) coming in daily. Anyone tries to protect themselves from them are thrown in prison!
The result of wokeness run amok! Same thing here in US.
@OlderAndWiser It goes much much deeper though O+W. If you look at history. The 2nd WW was a rise to power from the far right, but very few people look into the REASON for it. The Far Left alienated everyone who didn't go along with it. It was rammed down their throats. exactly like it is now.. Anyone who didn't agree with it were vilified. People had enough and thus gave power to the far right. Problem was, it went from one extreme to the other.. THAT is what will happen again, because history repeats and nobody learns from it!
Politics is the root cause of all evil.
It happened, it can't unhappen
If labour want to remain in power they'll bring back the death penalty
If they want to be the spineless creatures they are known as they let the taxpayer pay for 50 years in solitary (because his head will be a valuable commodity in prison*)
*couple of hours with Robert Maudsley should suffice
We are in the mess because of idiots like Blair.. Although Major before him was as much to blame. Now Starmer is giving us a whole new generation of brutally murdered kids to look forward to!
Yeap only he plans domestic genocide on a scale not since since his poster boys Joseph and Adolf
At this time, our thoughts and prayers should be with the victims and their families.
It's sad, who would get happy over three little kids getting stabbed?
But the fact that they look at it from a racial perspective is not right.
Even if we accept that the attack was racially motivated, does it have anything to do with all members of that race or group? Does it justify condemnation of everyone who belongs to that particular race or group?
There are supremacists in every ethnic, religious and racial group. It has nothing to do with other members.
Not the dead ones, no. The injured and the surviving family yes. Prayer is too late for the ones that are already dead.
Yeah because sociopathic violence of this kind is a national outrage, in America its just called Tuesday and will get a shrug and some ammosexuals screaming about his free- dumb.
Indeed... These kinds of events are extremely rare in the UK.
That's horrible and my heart goes out to everyone affected.
It's clear what needs to happen. All knives must be banned.
From Empire that ruled the world to crime infested 3 world hellhole in just 150 years. My applause for British elites. lol
No my thoughts And prayers are for the ones that stabbed them. They are the ones needing to be prayed for
Yeah, Christians enjoy school shootings in America. Seems they are "exporting" violence against kids in the UK and elsewhere.
Why? They are already gone, prayer won't change that. Just being real.
My thoughts are: Thank Christ he didn’t have an AR 15.
A genuine shame, that cannot be understated.
And while I hope the following doesn't detract from that sentiment, this is a clear example as to how gun control doesn't stop people from killing people, it just sometimes changes how people kill people.
And for those of you who might ridicule me for 'politicizing' the incident, most of you probably called for or agreed with gun control demands when the Nashville shooting happened (or any other mass shooting, for that matter).
Can you rephrase or elaborate?
I am sorry but I disagree... Our gun restrictions ensure that only 9% of the homicides are being committed with Guns and School Shootings do not happen in the UK.
However, you are absolutely correct would you say A) People simply resort to other weapons; 41% of homicides are being committed with Knives B) IF people want to use a Gun, Guns are still very easy to obtain on the Black market.
So while Gun Restriction laws will not prevent all Gun related crimes, they will most certainly reduce them.
There is a case to be made to allow people who live in remove, rural areas to allow gun possession. Farmers are allowed to have Shotguns and are, under certain limited circumstances, allowed to use their Shotguns when they come under threat. However, a Criminal Prosecution case will follow and conviction is still a reasonable possibly even if you have done everything according to the law; prison sentences, if any are being handed out, will generally be of a custodial nature and sentence reductions will be applied.
Pardon my confusion but what exactly are you disagreeing with? You start by saying you disagree with me but the rest sounds like you agree with me, and appear to be making the same points.
Do I misunderstand?
I think I misunderstood you and I assumed you do not support gun restrictions because you feel they do not work.
If that is indeed the case, my apologise for the wrong assumption of course.
@Skinhead-1979
Well, no, I mean, in the way you that I think you mean those words, I actually do oppose gun control. To be entirely clear, I oppose gun control where I live for various reasons, the primary one being freedom. But I entirely support the people's right to self-sovereign, so if the UK's population wants gun control, I support their right to do so.
And as to whether I think gun control "works", it depends on how we define "works" and what gun control is 'meant' to do. I'm of the opinion that virtually everyone advocating for gun control thinks it's travesty for innocent people to be murdered and are trying to prevent that. However, I'm of the opinion that in nearly all cases innocent people being murdered will not be prevented, and instead, the method of HOW the murder takes place will simply change.
Like you said, 41% of homocides are being commited with a knife. This violence is not being prevented by gun control. It's likely, though the to what extent is unclear and arguable, that some of those violent acts WOULD have been enacted with a gun if access to it was convenient. In this case, the policy does not prevent death or murder, it just changes the from it is enacted through.
And while it's a minor point, I did allude to the policy not even preventing all gun violence, and like you said, there's still a black market for guns. And a guy intending on mass-murder obviously isn't going to be like "well, since it's against the law I guess I won't do it."
@Skinhead-1979
There's a few typos in my last response due to an oversight when editing my response. Hopefully they didn't cause any confusion.
Oh, don't worry about the typos... I make them plenty too, despite trying to proof-read my comments/ replies as best as I can. I just don't notice some, until after I have press 'Submit'
Yes, I understand where you are coming from... But why do you think so many school shootings happen in the US, and here in the UK we don't have them. In general, horrible crimes, like you mention in the OP, are rare in the UK. Sadly we do have occasionally spades of knife murders amongst teenagers, generally in the London area... but nothing else really; nothing else comes to mind.
I strongly feel when more people start to arm themselves, a downward spiral of violence will start... with an ever increasingly militarised police force trying to maintain the peace. Here in the UK, more teenagers feel a need to arm themselves with knives and machetes and an increase in murders follows. If it is not knives, 'Acid Attacks' happen too frequent too; the intention is not to kill but to mutilate.
I am not opposed to guns... guns are intriguing. I think I'd get bored quite fast shooting them, but the interest is most certainly there. Would I buy 'guns', they'd most likely be replicas or guns which have been disabled for displaying purpose.
I am not opposed to hunting (I am opposed to the British Fox hunt; that's brutal) either.
So it is really not gun possession I am opposed to... I do feel it needs to be strictly regulated, and I would not like to see a heavily armed population.
@Skinhead-1979
Well I disagree with the notion that being armed with guns inclines you to be violent. While I'm not saying it's impossible, I do think a prospect like that is difficult to prove. And just citing statistics, which IS the best method we have, still doesn't paint the whole picture. The Nashvile shooting, for example, was enacted through resentment. A trans person (though I'm not suggesting all trans people are like this) resented Christians and, oddly enough, felt compelled to kill Christian children at her old school. If this person had no resentment but did own guns, would they have still done it? Obviously not. Guns aren't making people hurt people. And even if somehow the gun in some obscure way the factor that finally tips them in the direction of hurting someone (which is difficult if not nearly impossible to prove), it's almost certainly not the primary, secondary, or tertiary factor and is very likely to have had little influence on their decision. Hatred, anger, jealousy, mental illness, all of these almost certainly are much greater factors.
@Skinhead-1979
That being said, according to Gallup (link below), in 2020, 32% of Americans own guns. And according to Pewresearch (link below) in 2022 there were 381 (rounded up from 380.7) violent crimes committed per 100,000 population. If my math is correct, that is 0.38 (rounded down from 0.381) percent of the population committing violent crimes. Even if we assume that all of these violent crime committers are gun owners, which is obviously not the case, then that means that virtually nobody that owns guns is committing violent crimes. 32% of the US population (population that owns guns) is 10,779,529.2 people. 0.38% of the US population (violent crime committers) is 1,280,069. And 1,280,069 is 12% (rounded up from 11.87) of 10,779,529. So IF we assume all these violent people are gun owners (which they're not), then that means roughly 1 in ever 10 or 12 in ever 100 gun owners commits a violent crime. If guns incline people to commit violent crimes, why is such a minority of gun owners committing violent crime?
news.gallup.com/.../...age-americans-own-guns.aspx
www.pewresearch.org/.../
And to exemplify how statistical data can be misleading, there was a study a number of years ago suggesting that eating meat caused cancer, as those who ate meat had a higher rate of developing cancer. But does meat cause cancer or do meat eaters partake in other activities at greater rates that DO cause cancer? One criticism of the study, for example, referenced other data that showed that meat eaters were exponentially more likely to smoke cigarettes, which causes cancer.
@Skinhead-1979
There's also causation vs correlation. Like a study could suggest that eating ice cream causes heat strokes, since when people eat more ice cream, they're more likely to have heat stroke. But what the data doesn't show is that when it is hot out, people eat more ice cream, and when it is hot out, people have more heat strokes. It's not ice cream that causes heat strokes, it's that the rate that people eat ice cream and have heat strokes are both increased by it being hot out (like during the summer seasons).
So all that being said, even if America has a higher rate of violent crime or gun violence in particular, is that REALLY because of the presence of guns? I mean how many factors could play into these crimes? Countless, I'd imagine.
And school shootings happen primarily due to hatred/anger and mental illness. But that's kind of needless to say, and I'm sure you mean 'besides the obvious reasons', so I think part of the problem is notoriety. And while I know it wasn't a school shooting, the man who tried to assassinate Trump had extensively researched prior school shooters, and allegedly even idolized one of them. According to what I've recently read, this is relatively common among school shooters, researching and thinking favorably of those who have enacted them.
I'll also mention that many years ago, it was entirely legal for children to handle and have guns with them ON school premises, as many children at that time would often go hunting after school, yet "school shootings" were virtually unheard of. The presence of these guns are not the deciding factor of school shootings.
Thank you for your well written, very informative reply.
I would like to specifically say I fully agree with you that gun possession itself of course does not necessarily lead to a high number or more violent crimes; of course there are many other factors at play here.
Though as we have both agreed on, availability does play a part; as we've both said about the UK, because Guns are less available people will resort to other kinds of weapons to us: Knives in the case of the UK.
Size of a country of course plays a part too... While of course all the school shootings in the US are horrible, statistically the chance of being murdered during a school shooting is low... and of course the international focus is more on the US than... for example... a country like Russia. Very little is know about murders in Russia; during Soviet times, when Stalin dictated the USSR, it was being claimed that there were no Mass-Murderers in the USSR and that it was a symptom only Americans suffered from. That's a lie, of course, propaganda... There have been a number of very brutal mass-murderers in the Soviet Union, and now in present day Russia; we just don't hear anything about that.
(Same how damaging colonisation has been... and how brutal the colonists and later the US were towards 'Native Americans'; you should read what the Russians, specifically the Cossacks, have done in Siberia and beyond all the way to the Pacific Ocean; it's being claimed Russia has wiped out more than 250 ethnic groups during their colonisations and no doubt during Soviet Times too)
Some of those topics I'm not familiar enough to definitively comment on, but I think I agree with the gist of that.
Also, you're welcome, and I thank you for the same in turn.
You are welcome 😊
Fist time I am hereing about it
They hide that information in the US also.
I did not know this happened
You can also add your opinion below!
