If you were a normie, would you find this persuasive?

>>128545964
More people are killed in US every day by legally owned firearms, retard.

>>128545964
Normies are not persuaded, they are broken, then rebuilt

>>128545964
This is good ammunition. There comes a point where our propaganda reaches it's optimal effectiveness and the only thing that matters is how entrenched the normies are.

Jihadists can literally be beheading these normies and they still wont budge claiming they don't want to be racist and they deserved it or some bullshit. Same with blacks rioting, killing and raping them and Jews completing dominated as the elite of society.

>>128546135
Deaths by legally owned firearms are relatively stable over the longrun, however. By contrast, the thread of terror is ever increasing, as terrorist attacks have increase in severity and frequency in a roughly proportional fashion to increases in immigration of people from the middle east. Thus, the concern is not primarily that 'X number people died from terrorism this year.' The concern is that the number will continue to grow without bound, and we will eventually be living in a situation like the middle east currently is. What is the requisite level of terrorism-related deaths annually before you think it should be taken seriously? At what point do we "step in" and put a stop to it? Is there a risk that, in some state of the world, we could step in too late to actually reverse the trend?

Also, 2/3 of those from firearms are by suicide. If you outlawed firearms, it is likely that suicidal individuals would still kill themselves (they can do so with a bottle of aspirin). By contrast, if you prevent terrorist attacks, there is no fear that those individuals saved will suddenly spontaneously combust.

Finally, decisions shouldn't be made about what we tolerate in society based *solely* on the number of deaths that result annually. For one, guns provide a number of other benefits (self-defense, deterrence, hunting, etc.). Second, there is a psychological effect that accompanies terrorist attacks that arguably warrants viewing terrorism from more than just the utilitarian standpoint of how many deaths result.

Fuck no, are you kidding me dude? Too many words, no flash, starts with a literal dictionary definition.

I can't be fagged reading that, never mind a normie.

File: JustAttacks.png (3MB, 3600x2981px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3600x2981px

>>128548719
Hmm okay. Worth trying to add some sort of text/commentary, or just post pic of the bottom part showing how many times we've been attacked?

File: Terror_DalaiLama.png (4MB, 3744x4320px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 3744x4320px

>>128548719
>>128549346
What about cheesy quotes at the bottom?

>>128549346
Nah, that's worse, you killed the only colours in the picture.

You need more color, less black and white examples (about half will get the point across) make the remaining ones larger so easier to read. Put a big dumb statement at the end explaining your point for people who are too thick to connect dots ( Julia everyone

>>128549892
Fucking phone. You get the idea though. Basic marketing shit.

it doesn't matter how many attacks there are. normies will always counter with "muh not all muslims." you're better off with that one chart showing how many muslims globally were in favor of death to apostates and shit, but even then they'll probably say shit like "but the muslims I know aren't like that."

File: 1.png (28KB, 1725x1080px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 1725x1080px

>>128545964
Terrorism doesn't frighten people because of how many people die. Loads more people die each year from other causes. Terrorism is unacceptable because it stems from politically unacceptable motivations. The nationalist inspired terrorism of years ago isn't as scary because the cause made sense to a lot of people even if they disagreed with it. Islamic terrorist inspiration of hatred of the west for being democratic and not locking up women doesn't resonant with anyone and so it's politically unacceptable.

If you want propaganda then point out the level of support in the middle east for ISIS especially among the young. Point out the support for ISIS among the young in France. This contradicts people's sense that things will get better with time. Remind everyone that three decades ago this was absolutely unheard of in the west. And contrast modern terrorism with old IRA terrorism. People like to point out the IRA as a "see! western people did it to!" They've forgotten that the IRA used to call ahead of time and warn people about their bombing's specifically for the point of reducing casualties. That's right. Terrorists used to be concerned about killing civilians.

http://exiledonline.com/wn-38-ira-vs-al-qaeda-i-was-wrong/

File: 1439756309674.jpg (58KB, 627x663px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 627x663px

>>128550933
Sticking with the theme of motivations feel free to point out how well regarded the hadith's of Bukhari are among the various schools of thought in islam. Make it clear that every single modern school of Sunni thought gives him credence second only to the Quran. Then point out that he is our source for Mohammed marrying a child at 6 and raping her at 9.

Alternatively talk glowingly about the rationalist school of thought of Mutazalite islam. And about Quran only islam. Talk about how educated their members are and how liberal they are. How they generally reject mandatory dress codes and all the other negative stuff people generally associate with Islam. Make it a "See bigot! I bet you didn't know that how amazing and tolerant and liberal islam is did you?". Then point out how Mutazalites were basically genocided out of existence by the other schools and how absolutely no one is thinks Quranists constitute a legitimate school of thought and they are, at best, to Sunni and Shia what Mormon's are to Protestants & Catholics.

The biggest reveal about Islam isn't how shitty it's extremists are. It's how it's more moderate versions are equivalent to Christianities most extremists backwaters.