# Guns are to blame--not people.



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 21, 2022)

The biggest problem in Ohio is that our gun laws simply are not strong enough. Domestic violence policy expert Julia Webber serves as the implementation director of the Gifford’s Law Center, a national organization striving to make America safer by working to end gun violence.

“So, unfortunately, and tragically, too many people who have lost their lives as a result of domestic violence and how often that’s been connected to use of firearms,” said Webber.

While federal laws are in place, the Gifford’s Law Center says Ohio doesn’t have any laws stopping people who are convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence from buying firearms or ammunition and the same goes for those who have domestic violence protective orders against them.

The center said there are also no state laws requiring the removal or surrender of firearms from a suspect when a protection order is issued in domestic violence cases.

*“We want to ensure that we actually allow for relinquishment, and surrender or seizure*, if necessary, to ensure that those firearms are separated from someone who’s about to be violent,” Webber said.









						Domestic violence cases on the rise in Ohio, experts believe state’s gun laws to blame
					

Domestic violence cases on the rise in Ohio, experts believe our state’s gun laws are to blame




					www.cleveland19.com
				




When you ask leftists about the government taking our guns, they say nobody wants to take away your guns.  Well here is a leftist that says they do.  

What this kook is saying is that if your girlfriend or wife files a protection order against you, the government should be allowed to come to your home and take away your firearms even if no violence was involved.  Simply get a protection order and that's all that should be needed to violate your constitutional rights.  What is a misdemeanor domestic violence?  I never heard of it, so I looked it up. Here is what I found for our state: 

_*Threatening to cause harm to a family member or household member, even if you do not physically assault the person, can still result in a fourth-degree misdemeanor.*_

So if you tell your girlfriend or wife "Yeah, and I'll slap you around"  you can be charged with this misdemeanor domestic violence law and have your firearms taken away just for that if it was up to this Julia Weber person.


----------



## Anomalism (Jan 21, 2022)

All we have to do is look to Europe to see where this is going with the left. Of course they're going to take the guns. They do it in every country that they can.


----------



## SavannahMann (Jan 21, 2022)

Question 21i on the ATF form 4473 asks if the purchaser has ever been convicted of misdemeanor Domestic Violence. So Domestic Violence is already a disqualifying issue for ownership of a weapon. 

Surrender of weapons is a common and routine condition for Bail prior to trials. 

So what is the problem, exactly?


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 21, 2022)

SavannahMann said:


> Question 21i on the ATF form 4473 asks if the purchaser has ever been convicted of misdemeanor Domestic Violence. So Domestic Violence is already a disqualifying issue for ownership of a weapon.
> 
> Surrender of weapons is a common and routine condition for Bail prior to trials.
> 
> So what is the problem, exactly?



Then why is it legal in my state to own a firearm?  Does that question disqualify you from buying a gun?  If so, then gun sellers in my state are in violation of the law which I seriously doubt.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 21, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> What this kook is saying is that if your girlfriend or wife files a protection order against you, the government should be allowed to come to your home and take away your firearms even if no violence was involved. Simply get a protection order and that's all that should be needed to violate your constitutional rights. What is a misdemeanor domestic violence? I never heard of it, so I looked it up. Here is what I found for our state:
> 
> _*Threatening to cause harm to a family member or household member, even if you do not physically assault the person, can still result in a fourth-degree misdemeanor.*_
> 
> So if you tell your girlfriend or wife "Yeah, and I'll slap you around" you can be charged with this misdemeanor domestic violence law and have your firearms taken away just for that if it was up to this Julia Weber person.



Sounds reasonable to me.  Frankly, if Julia read your crazy posts, Welfare Ray, they'd probably want to take your guns.. you're a hate crime looking for a place to happen.


----------



## Mac1958 (Jan 21, 2022)

And of course, it can only be one or the other.


----------



## Baron Von Murderpaws (Jan 21, 2022)

If guns are to blame............

Then my pencil is to blame for me failing math in school!!!!


----------



## SavannahMann (Jan 21, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> Then why is it legal in my state to own a firearm?  Does that question disqualify you from buying a gun?  If so, then gun sellers in my state are in violation of the law which I seriously doubt.



You may doubt. But it is illegal for someone to buy, possess, or use firearms if they have been convicted of Domestic Violence. Even a misdemeanor conviction is enough.

I thought obeying the law was a thing that good people did.









						The Domestic Violence Offender Gun Ban
					

The domestic violence offender gun ban, along with certain state laws, prevents those convicted of domestic violence (or with a restraining order) from owning firearms. Learn about this and more at FindLaw's Domestic Violence section.




					www.findlaw.com


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 21, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Sounds reasonable to me.  Frankly, if Julia read your crazy posts, Welfare Ray, they'd probably want to take your guns.. you're a hate crime looking for a place to happen.



Of course it sounds reasonable to you.  It does to all Communists.


----------



## Flash (Jan 21, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Sounds reasonable to me.  Frankly, if Julia read your crazy posts, Welfare Ray, they'd probably want to take your guns.. you're a hate crime looking for a place to happen.




Any stupid Liberty robbing bat shit crazy law sounds reasonable to you, Moon Bat.


----------



## Flash (Jan 21, 2022)

Americans have the Constitutional right to keep and bear arms.

Having your girlfriend pissed at you because you said she had a fat ass and reporting you to the police for abuse should not be an excuse to deny your Constitutional rights.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 21, 2022)

Flash said:


> Americans have the Constitutional right to keep and bear arms.
> 
> Having your girlfriend pissed at you because you said she had a fat ass and reporting you to the police for abuse should not be an excuse to deny your Constitutional rights.



A former coworker of mine got in a spat with his wife.  She went in his face yelling and screaming at him in which he told her to get out of his way.  She didn't so he pushed her out of the way and twisted her ankle.  She called the cops and they arrested him for domestic violence even though his wife (calmed down by then) told the police she was not filing a complaint.  The police explained that it didn't matter what she did.  The law states that the state takeover any case in a domestic violence situation.  They ignored the fact that she was blocking his way which was the only reason he pushed her away in the first place.


----------



## hadit (Jan 21, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Sounds reasonable to me.  Frankly, if Julia read your crazy posts, Welfare Ray, they'd probably want to take your guns.. you're a hate crime looking for a place to happen.


Except that he's had guns for a long time and harmed no one with them.


----------



## hadit (Jan 21, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> A former coworker of mine got in a spat with his wife.  She went in his face yelling and screaming at him in which he told her to get out of his way.  She didn't so he pushed her out of the way and twisted her ankle.  She called the cops and they arrested him for domestic violence even though his wife (calmed down by then) told the police she was not filing a complaint.  The police explained that it didn't matter what she did.  The law states that the state takeover any case in a domestic violence situation.  They ignored the fact that she was blocking his way which was the only reason he pushed her away in the first place.


That is true. Once you make that call to the police, the person you're calling about is automatically removed from your house, booked and has a restraining order put on them that they can't return until their court date.


----------



## Flash (Jan 21, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> A former coworker of mine got in a spat with his wife.  She went in his face yelling and screaming at him in which he told her to get out of his way.  She didn't so he pushed her out of the way and twisted her ankle.  She called the cops and they arrested him for domestic violence even though his wife (calmed down by then) told the police she was not filing a complaint.  The police explained that it didn't matter what she did.  The law states that the state takeover any case in a domestic violence situation.  They ignored the fact that she was blocking his way which was the only reason he pushed her away in the first place.




These stupid "Red Flag" laws can be a significant source of denying Americans of their Constitutional rights.

A despicable example of stupid people giving up liberty for a little bit of security. 

If Constitutional rights are going to be taken away it needs to be for a damn good reason and these stupid red flag laws do  not come close to meeting that test.


----------



## Otis Mayfield (Jan 21, 2022)

92% of all women killed with guns in high-income countries in 2015 were from the US.

In 2015:
800-1000 women are killed with guns.
220 are killed with knives
300 are killed with other

Access to a gun makes it five times more likely that the abusive partner will kill his female victim.

4.5 million women have reported being threatened with a gun by an intimate partner.









						Guns and Violence Against Women: America’s Uniquely Lethal Intimate Partner Violence Problem
					

Laws keeping guns out of the hands of abusers are associated with lower rates of violence against women and intimate partner homicides.




					everytownresearch.org
				





If your daughter is in an abusive relationship, and there's a gun in the house, tell her to gtfo.


----------



## JackOfNoTrades (Jan 21, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> A former coworker of mine got in a spat with his wife.  She went in his face yelling and screaming at him in which he told her to get out of his way.  She didn't so he pushed her out of the way and twisted her ankle.  She called the cops and they arrested him for domestic violence even though his wife (calmed down by then) told the police she was not filing a complaint.  The police explained that it didn't matter what she did.  The law states that the state takeover any case in a domestic violence situation.  They ignored the fact that she was blocking his way which was the only reason he pushed her away in the first place.


Shouldn't have laid a glove on her. Turn around and go back to your room and lock the door if you can't get to the door. Climb out the window to get away if necessary. Not saying your friend's wife wasn't crazy but you don't lay a glove on them unless your life is in imminent danger (like you have a gun or a knife pointed at you). Too bad for your friend. Leave her worthless ass.


----------



## Wyatt earp (Jan 21, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> Then why is it legal in my state to own a firearm?  Does that question disqualify you from buying a gun?  If so, then gun sellers in my state are in violation of the law which I seriously doubt.


So with me a record of misdemeanor domestic violence, you telling me I can go to a gun shop in Ohio and legally buy a gun?


----------



## Wyatt earp (Jan 21, 2022)

JackOfNoTrades said:


> Shouldn't have laid a glove on her. Turn around and go back to your room and lock the door if you can't get to the door. Climb out the window to get away if necessary. Not saying your friend's wife wasn't crazy but you don't lay a glove on them unless your life is in imminent danger (like you have a gun or a knife pointed at you). Too bad for your friend. Leave her worthless ass.


I gave my wife the bird when she told me she fucked some guy, she was standing in front of my face and my middle finger hit her lip....

That simple exchange I was convicted of a misdemeanor domestic violence


----------



## Flash (Jan 21, 2022)

Otis Mayfield said:


> 92% of all women killed with guns in high-income countries in 2015 were from the US.
> 
> In 2015:
> 800-1000 women are killed with guns.
> ...




Most gun crimes in this country are in our Democrat control big city shitholes among the Blacks and Browns.  Mostly druggies, gangs and street thug shootings.

This is explained to you every time one of these discussions come up but it is like you put peanut butter in your ears because you never seem to comprehend.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 21, 2022)

bear513 said:


> So with me a record of misdemeanor domestic violence, you telling me I can go to a gun shop in Ohio and legally buy a gun?



Apparently this woman believes so.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 21, 2022)

JackOfNoTrades said:


> Shouldn't have laid a glove on her. Turn around and go back to your room and lock the door if you can't get to the door. Climb out the window to get away if necessary. Not saying your friend's wife wasn't crazy but you don't lay a glove on them unless your life is in imminent danger (like you have a gun or a knife pointed at you). Too bad for your friend. Leave her worthless ass.



She did leave because it was his house in the first place.  Then she came back a few weeks later and busted out his windows in the back of the house and dented his siding with apparently the same thing she used to bust out the windows.  I hardly call a shove domestic violence.


----------



## hadit (Jan 21, 2022)

Otis Mayfield said:


> 92% of all women killed with guns in high-income countries in 2015 were from the US.
> 
> In 2015:
> 800-1000 women are killed with guns.
> ...


Sounds like she needs a gun. Abusers prey on the weak, and an armed woman is not a weak target.


----------



## Mac-7 (Jan 21, 2022)

Mac1958 said:


> And of course, it can only be one or the other.


Thats a useless comment

what is it if not one or the other?


----------



## JOSweetHeart (Jan 21, 2022)

Without people, guns only lay there and do nothing. In other words, people are who bring them to life. Therefore, people are the real issue.

God bless you always!!!

Holly


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 21, 2022)

JOSweetHeart said:


> Without people, guns only lay there and do nothing. In other words, people are who bring them to life. Therefore, people are the real issue.
> 
> God bless you always!!!
> 
> Holly



The problem is you can't explain that to a leftist.  Don't go after the criminal, go after the gun.  Don't go after the illegals, lock up Americans who knowingly or unknowingly hire them for jobs.  I don't know what's next.  Probably make cars harder to buy to help stop DUI's.


----------



## 2aguy (Jan 21, 2022)

SavannahMann said:


> Question 21i on the ATF form 4473 asks if the purchaser has ever been convicted of misdemeanor Domestic Violence. So Domestic Violence is already a disqualifying issue for ownership of a weapon.
> 
> Surrender of weapons is a common and routine condition for Bail prior to trials.
> 
> So what is the problem, exactly?




this is simply an accusation...with no actual court proceeding......no conviction either.


----------



## SassyIrishLass (Jan 21, 2022)

Slightly off topic but I smiled when I read this....

Associated Press: California's COVID gun store shutdowns ruled illegal.








						California's COVID gun store shutdowns ruled illegal
					

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — Two California counties violated the Constitution's right to keep and bear arms when they shut down gun and ammunition stores in 2020 as nonessential businesses during the coronavirus pandemic, a federal appeals court ruled Thursday.




					apnews.com


----------



## SavannahMann (Jan 21, 2022)

2aguy said:


> this is simply an accusation...with no actual court proceeding......no conviction either.



Is a normal condition of bail to surrender firearms? Haven’t we seen people with bail revoked because of that? People who were not convicted.


----------



## 2aguy (Jan 22, 2022)

SavannahMann said:


> Is a normal condition of bail to surrender firearms? Haven’t we seen people with bail revoked because of that? People who were not convicted.




They have been arrested and charged......simply putting a restraining order against someone does not require that process..........


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jan 22, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> The biggest problem in Ohio is that our gun laws simply are not strong enough. Domestic violence policy expert Julia Webber serves as the implementation director of the Gifford’s Law Center, a national organization striving to make America safer by working to end gun violence.
> 
> “So, unfortunately, and tragically, too many people who have lost their lives as a result of domestic violence and how often that’s been connected to use of firearms,” said Webber.
> 
> ...


Acquiring a firearm isn’t the issue.

The issue is domestic violence with firearms already in the home:

“The center said there are also no state laws requiring the removal or surrender of firearms from a suspect when a protection order is issued in domestic violence cases.” _ibid_

Protection orders are perfectly lawful and Constitutional.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jan 22, 2022)

SavannahMann said:


> Question 21i on the ATF form 4473 asks if the purchaser has ever been convicted of misdemeanor Domestic Violence. So Domestic Violence is already a disqualifying issue for ownership of a weapon.
> 
> Surrender of weapons is a common and routine condition for Bail prior to trials.
> 
> So what is the problem, exactly?


True.

And of course, firearms can be lawfully acquired via face-to-face intrastate tractions between residents of the same state absent the 4473 and a background check.

Again, the issue isn’t the acquisition of firearms, but incidents of domestic violence when firearms are already in the home.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 22, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> Of course it sounds reasonable to you. It does to all Communists.


Yes, because not wanting to be shot by a maniac with a gun is just like collectivization of capital... duh.  



Flash said:


> Any stupid Liberty robbing bat shit crazy law sounds reasonable to you, Moon Bat.



Uh, guy, if we all have to live with metal detectors, militarized police, active shooter drills, security doors at our workplaces,  then we are nowhere near liberty.   We are being held hostage to a gun culture that refuses to clean up their act.  



hadit said:


> Except that he's had guns for a long time and harmed no one with them.



That can be said of most of the 16,000 people who murder someone with a gun every year...


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 22, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Acquiring a firearm isn’t the issue.
> 
> The issue is domestic violence with firearms already in the home:
> 
> ...



So do we empower women (and in some cases men) to be able to remove your constitutional right to arms when they get pissed at you?  If there is a domestic problem, leave the residence.  

It's just like my former coworker.  I worked with him for several years.  He's not the violent type, especially when it comes to women.  She blocked his way bitching at him about something, he lightly pushed her out of his way.  She hurt herself and to get even with him, called the cops.  

Constitutional rights should not be removed from people on a hunch they might do something wrong with them.   We are losing our long standing ground of innocent until proven guilty.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 22, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> A former coworker of mine got in a spat with his wife. She went in his face yelling and screaming at him in which he told her to get out of his way. She didn't so he pushed her out of the way and twisted her ankle. She called the cops and they arrested him for domestic violence even though his wife (calmed down by then) told the police she was not filing a complaint. The police explained that it didn't matter what she did. The law states that the state takeover any case in a domestic violence situation. They ignored the fact that she was blocking his way which was the only reason he pushed her away in the first place.



Did Welfare Ray just rationalize domestic violence?  

Actually, the reason why cops do arrest people for that now is that they've had too many cases where no complaint was filed in the first call and on the second call, they are cleaning up a body.  Usually with that Body's nearest and dearest suing the police department for not taking the sumbitch to jail when they had the chance.


----------



## miketx (Jan 22, 2022)

The same lying assholes spew thier canned bs Everytime this nonsense comes up.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 22, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> So do we empower women (and in some cases men) to be able to remove your constitutional right to arms when they get pissed at you? If there is a domestic problem, leave the residence.
> 
> It's just like my former coworker. I worked with him for several years. He's not the violent type, especially when it comes to women. She blocked his way bitching at him about something, he lightly pushed her out of his way. She hurt herself and to get even with him, called the cops.
> 
> Constitutional rights should not be removed from people on a hunch they might do something wrong with them. We are losing our long standing ground of innocent until proven guilty.



The Constitution is not a suicide pact. 

How many cases was there a history of domestic violence that ended with someone getting shot?   Most homicides are people who know each other.


----------



## miketx (Jan 22, 2022)

2aguy said:


> They have been arrested and charged......simply putting a restraining order against someone does not require that process..........


We all know that if someone the s trying to kill you a restraining order will save you.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 22, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> She did leave because it was his house in the first place. Then she came back a few weeks later and busted out his windows in the back of the house and dented his siding with apparently the same thing she used to bust out the windows. I hardly call a shove domestic violence.



I'm sure you don't. But honestly, you made it sound minor at first, and then admitted the violence was escalating...  Sounds like a good reason to get the guns out of that house. 



2aguy said:


> They have been arrested and charged......simply putting a restraining order against someone does not require that process..........



Right, because a piece of paper is going to protect you from a lunatic with a gun.  Oh, wait. No.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 22, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> The Constitution is not a suicide pact.
> 
> How many cases was there a history of domestic violence that ended with someone getting shot?   Most homicides are people who know each other.



The Constitution contains a list of rights the American people have, one of them the right to bear arms.  You don't take that right away from people because they "might" do something other people did in their situation.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 22, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> The Constitution contains a list of rights the American people have, one of them the right to bear arms. You don't take that right away from people because they "might" do something other people did in their situation.



1) The Second Amendment is about Militias, not guns.  
2) Yes, you absolutely should take away  people's guns if they are dangerous.  

The best argument for gun control is a conversation with a gun nut.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 22, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> 1) The Second Amendment is about Militias, not guns.
> 2) Yes, you absolutely should take away  people's guns if they are dangerous.
> 
> The best argument for gun control is a conversation with a gun nut.



1) The supreme court ruled differently. 
2) Domestic disputes (such as yelling at somebody, making idol threats) does not necessarily mean a person is dangerous, especially if they have no criminal record of violence.  You Communists want to remove constitutional rights from people based on assumption.  How anti-American of you.


----------



## SavannahMann (Jan 22, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> True.
> 
> And of course, firearms can be lawfully acquired via face-to-face intrastate tractions between residents of the same state absent the 4473 and a background check.
> 
> Again, the issue isn’t the acquisition of firearms, but incidents of domestic violence when firearms are already in the home.



The hysterics screaming about the unprecedented and totally outrageous Second Amendment violation are wailing over what is in reality at most a minuscule move in that direction.

The advocates are concerned about the time between A) the incident that may lead to a conviction that would make the individual unable to own firearms. And B) The conviction that would would cement the illegality of the individual owning firearms.

You are correct. Weapons can be transferred person to person without that form. Yet. The person convicted of even Misdemeanor Domestic Violence would be prohibited. If caught that possession would be another entry in their criminal career. Now they would have a felony conviction. And of course the Conservatives believe in keeping weapons out of the hands of Convicted Felons.

My point was that the people wailing and screaming about the awful Liberals didn’t know what the law already says. And they are pounding their chests like they are the well informed defender of the Second Amendment.

Their ignorance has a cure. An easy cure at that. First calm down. Second. Learn. Then deal with the issue intelligently.


----------



## Superbadbrutha (Jan 22, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> Of course it sounds reasonable to you.  It does to all Communists.


So in your world some felons can own guns and some can't.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 22, 2022)

Superbadbrutha said:


> So in your world some felons can own guns and some can't.



Where do you get that from?  No felons can own guns but a misdemeanor is not a felony.


----------



## Flash (Jan 22, 2022)

Superbadbrutha said:


> So in your world some felons can own guns and some can't.




All these filthy ass Negro thugs in these big city shitholes who commit most of the gun crime in this country will get a firearm no matter what their criminal status.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jan 22, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> So do we empower women (and in some cases men) to be able to remove your constitutional right to arms when they get pissed at you?  If there is a domestic problem, leave the residence.
> 
> It's just like my former coworker.  I worked with him for several years.  He's not the violent type, especially when it comes to women.  She blocked his way bitching at him about something, he lightly pushed her out of his way.  She hurt herself and to get even with him, called the cops.
> 
> Constitutional rights should not be removed from people on a hunch they might do something wrong with them.   We are losing our long standing ground of innocent until proven guilty.


The thread premise is a lie – no one claims that people are not responsible for gun crime and violence.

And clearly you don’t understand the topic of the linked article, or you misrepresented the topic in a dishonest effort to support your lie.

The topic of the article is that although someone convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence cannot obtain a firearm from a licensed dealer pursuant to Federal law, the absence of a state law authorizing protection orders does nothing to prevent an abuser from accessing a firearm he currently owns obtained prior to his conviction; or obtaining and possessing a firearm through a face-to-face intrastate transaction where no background check is required.

The ability to pursue a protection order would help mitigate the above.

Of course, you and others on the dishonest right misrepresent and lie about protection orders – conservatives lie that such orders amount to ‘confiscation’ of firearms, when in fact nothing could be further from the truth. Conservatives lie that protection orders ‘violate’ the Second Amendment when in fact the Supreme Court has never ruled to invalidate protection order laws.

Those subject to protection orders are afforded full and comprehensive due process, their Second and Fourth Amendment rights in no manner ‘violated.’


----------



## hadit (Jan 22, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Yes, because not wanting to be shot by a maniac with a gun is just like collectivization of capital... duh.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Really? Have you a credible source showing that over half (that's most) of gun murders (your word. That means not suicides, not accidental deaths, etc.) are committed by people who have owned the gun they used for, let's say, at least 10 years? If not, you're just making it all up and no one believes you.


----------



## hadit (Jan 22, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> The Constitution contains a list of rights the American people have, one of them the right to bear arms.  You don't take that right away from people because they "might" do something other people did in their situation.


You do if you don't understand that freedom is dangerous and messy and you're afraid of it. You do if you prefer to trade freedom for the illusion of safety. You do if you are an authoritarian who desires to dictate how other people live their lives. You do if your first instinct is NOT to allow the victim to arm and protect herself.

Using his "logic", it would make sense to give every housewife a firearm at her wedding with the understanding that one day years down the road her husband MIGHT flip out and try to kill her.


----------



## hadit (Jan 22, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> 1) The supreme court ruled differently.


Obviously, his law degree is superior to theirs'.


Ray From Cleveland said:


> 2) Domestic disputes (such as yelling at somebody, making idol threats) does not necessarily mean a person is dangerous, especially if they have no criminal record of violence.  You Communists want to remove constitutional rights from people based on assumption.  How anti-American of you.


He has knowledge of future crimes. Perhaps it's a personal thing and he knows his internal rage will erupt if he's not constrained.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 22, 2022)

hadit said:


> Really? Have you a credible source showing that over half (that's most) of gun murders (your word. That means not suicides, not accidental deaths, etc.) are committed by people who have owned the gun they used for, let's say, at least 10 years? If not, you're just making it all up and no one believes you.



Have you ever known OCD Joe to tell the truth or give accurate facts?


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 22, 2022)

hadit said:


> Obviously, his law degree is superior to theirs'.
> 
> He has knowledge of future crimes. Perhaps it's a personal thing and he knows his internal rage will erupt if he's not constrained.



They got that from their Holy Bible, the book 1984.  They dream of the day we have Thought Police.  Hell, they even conducted a phony impeachment using thought police on President Trump.  Nowhere did Trump ever tell Zelinsky that he'd withhold arms from them unless they dig into the Biden's.  Yet they impeached him because the Communists "thought" that's what he meant.


----------



## Anathema (Jan 22, 2022)

SavannahMann said:


> So what is the problem, exactly?


The problem, exactly, is that far too often these firearms are not treated properly and the individual who surrendered them gets them back in okie condition, if at all once the protective order is rescinded or they are found not guilty of the charges.


----------



## hadit (Jan 22, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> They got that from their Holy Bible, the book 1984.  They dream of the day we have Thought Police.  Hell, they even conducted a phony impeachment using thought police on President Trump.  Nowhere did Trump ever tell Zelinsky that he'd withhold arms from them unless they dig into the Biden's.  Yet they impeached him because the Communists "thought" that's what he meant.


And they assume with no basis in reality that they are the "righteous" ones, that the Thought Police will agree with them and let them live their lives unimpeded, that only those who disagree with them will be harmed. How foolish and shortsighted they are. Give ANY government that kind of power and it WILL be abused to the detriment of the entire society.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 22, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> The thread premise is a lie – no one claims that people are not responsible for gun crime and violence.
> 
> And clearly you don’t understand the topic of the linked article, or you misrepresented the topic in a dishonest effort to support your lie.
> 
> ...



Then I think you should research misdemeanor domestic violence.  I did.  It states the person convicted of the charge must not own or be in possession of a firearm.  Not in possession means not having one in your home where you can have access to it.  

The premise of my post is that commies are constantly telling us the solution to our gun violence is taking away firearms from all people, as if guns jump out of dresser drawers, safes or gun boxes and go out shooting on their own.  The real problem we have in this country is that the offenders are not given a severe enough punishment for being in possession or using a firearm.  That means the solution is to greatly up the penalties for doing so. 

I've read articles from ex-cops and current police in Chicago where they bust a guy with an illegal gun, and he's back on the street by the end of the day.  That's the problem.


----------



## skookerasbil (Jan 22, 2022)

It's  2022.....nobody cares what the gun grabbers think   

Where is there any evidence of concern for gun control outside of internet forums?

The answer is.....nowhere.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 22, 2022)

skookerasbil said:


> It's  2022.....nobody cares what the gun grabbers think
> 
> Where is there any evidence of concern for gun control outside of internet forums?
> 
> The answer is.....nowhere.



The answer is everywhere on the left. 









						Biden renews calls for gun control bill after San Jose shooting
					

Biden called on Congress to take action on gun control in his first joint address to lawmakers in April, such as banning assault weapons and high-capacity magazines.




					www.nbcnews.com
				












						Gun Control News & Videos - ABC News
					

Follow the latest Gun Control news stories and headlines. Get breaking news alerts when you download the ABC News App and subscribe to Gun Control notifications.




					abcnews.go.com


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 22, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> 1) The supreme court ruled differently.
> 2) Domestic disputes (such as yelling at somebody, making idol threats) does not necessarily mean a person is dangerous, especially if they have no criminal record of violence. You Communists want to remove constitutional rights from people based on assumption. How anti-American of you.


I'm more for practicality.  How many spouses have been shot because SOMEONE should have taken a gun away.  

My next door neighbor at my old place shot himself.  A couple of weeks before, he fired his gun through his patio window and then lied to the cops about it.  The cops didn't take his gun and a few weeks later he offed himself.  (Oh, incidentally, NOBODY in the building heard the shot, it was only discovered when his wife came home and found him.) 



hadit said:


> Really? Have you a credible source showing that over half (that's most) of gun murders (your word. That means not suicides, not accidental deaths, etc.) are committed by people who have owned the gun they used for, let's say, at least 10 years? If not, you're just making it all up and no one believes you.



Gee, you seem to want to put a lot of qualifications to get to the point you are making.  Why not "People who were shot on Days begining with T. "


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 22, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> I'm more for practicality. How many spouses have been shot because SOMEONE should have taken a gun away.
> 
> My next door neighbor at my old place shot himself. A couple of weeks before, he fired his gun through his patio window and then lied to the cops about it. The cops didn't take his gun and a few weeks later he offed himself. (Oh, incidentally, NOBODY in the building heard the shot, it was only discovered when his wife came home and found him.)



You don't take guns away from people because YOU think it's practical.  What good is any constitutional right if it could be so easily taken away from select people?  

Your neighbor would have offed himself one way or another.  At least he didn't blow your ass to smitherenes by turning on the oven and blowing the fire out.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 23, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> You don't take guns away from people because YOU think it's practical. What good is any constitutional right if it could be so easily taken away from select people?
> 
> Your neighbor would have offed himself one way or another. At least he didn't blow your ass to smitherenes by turning on the oven and blowing the fire out.



That would have been difficult, as we had electric stoves in that complex.  

We should take guns away from people who are a danger to themselves or others....  that's actually pretty sensible.


----------



## MaryAnne11 (Jan 23, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> Then why is it legal in my state to own a firearm?  Does that question disqualify you from buying a gun?  If so, then gun sellers in my state are in violation of the law which I seriously doubt.











						Cleveland’s homicide total dips in 2021, still second highest in 30 years
					

Cleveland's homicide total dipped slightly in 2021, but it's still the second worst year for deadly violence since 1991.




					www.cleveland.com
				












						Cuyahoga County Prosecutor’s Office receives $700,000 grant from Justice Department to combat gun violence
					

The Cuyahoga County Prosecutors Office will receive a $700,000 grant from the Department of Justice in an effort to combat gun violence after another deadly year of violence in Cleveland and in the county's suburbs.




					www.cleveland.com
				












						Surge in gun violence exposes broken systems, leaves behind broken families
					

From Cleveland to Cincinnati, inner-ring suburbs to those on the outskirts, gun violence and homicides in cities across Ohio and the nation have spiked since the calendar flipped to 2020.




					www.news5cleveland.com


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 23, 2022)

MaryAnne11 said:


> Cleveland’s homicide total dips in 2021, still second highest in 30 years
> 
> 
> Cleveland's homicide total dipped slightly in 2021, but it's still the second worst year for deadly violence since 1991.
> ...



Not much different than any other commie city in the country.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 23, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> That would have been difficult, as we had electric stoves in that complex.
> 
> We should take guns away from people who are a danger to themselves or others....  that's actually pretty sensible.



And how would you know if a person is a harm to themselves or others?  Again you leftists with your obsession of Thought Police.  

In our country you are considered innocent until proven guilty; a law abiding citizen until you break our laws.  I know you hate this idea of protecting the innocent, but that's the way this country should remain.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 23, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> And how would you know if a person is a harm to themselves or others? Again you leftists with your obsession of Thought Police.
> 
> In our country you are considered innocent until proven guilty; a law abiding citizen until you break our laws. I know you hate this idea of protecting the innocent, but that's the way this country should remain.



Well, let's take my neighbor.  He shot out a window.  When the police responded, he lied at first saying someone shot in at him, but that was quickly disproven by the glass shatter pattern.  At the point, the cops SHOULD have confiscated his gun.  But they didn't.  

A couple weeks later, he killed himself with that same gun.  

Let's get real here, you guys are already holding the rest of us hostage with your fetish, as we never know when one of you is going to go Full Lanza and shoot up a school or a mall or a theater.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 23, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Well, let's take my neighbor.  He shot out a window.  When the police responded, he lied at first saying someone shot in at him, but that was quickly disproven by the glass shatter pattern.  At the point, the cops SHOULD have confiscated his gun.  But they didn't.
> 
> A couple weeks later, he killed himself with that same gun.
> 
> Let's get real here, you guys are already holding the rest of us hostage with your fetish, as we never know when one of you is going to go Full Lanza and shoot up a school or a mall or a theater.



If he wanted to kill himself, not having a gun wouldn't have stopped him.  After all, only half of all suicides in the US are by guns.  The other half succeeded in other ways.   

What evidence did police have it was him that shot the gun?  Did they find the bullet and do an on-the-spot ballistics test on it?  A broken window can be caused by a lot of things.  

Like I have said so many times, we are a nation of innocent until proven guilty.  It's why he was not charged or arrested either.  A police officer needs evidence to arrest anybody.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 23, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> If he wanted to kill himself, not having a gun wouldn't have stopped him. After all, only half of all suicides in the US are by guns. The other half succeeded in other ways.
> 
> What evidence did police have it was him that shot the gun? Did they find the bullet and do an on-the-spot ballistics test on it? A broken window can be caused by a lot of things.
> 
> Like I have said so many times, we are a nation of innocent until proven guilty. It's why he was not charged or arrested either. A police officer needs evidence to arrest anybody.



Well, he admitted it when they caught in him in his lies... so there was that.  I doubt they searched very car and tree outside to see if any of them had a bullet stuck in it. 

He probably should have been charged with unlawful discharge of a firearm and lying to the police.  But he gave them some sob story about how he was sick, (He had cancer), and they felt sorry for him.   Again, Squirrel Cops...


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 23, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Well, he admitted it when they caught in him in his lies... so there was that.  I doubt they searched very car and tree outside to see if any of them had a bullet stuck in it.
> 
> He probably should have been charged with unlawful discharge of a firearm and lying to the police.  But he gave them some sob story about how he was sick, (He had cancer), and they felt sorry for him.   Again, Squirrel Cops...



So he was dying anyway?  Of course he killed himself.  Much less painful.  But even if police did take away his gun, what would your prosecutor have done to him?  Nothing.  I read stories of your city where the police complained about busting a guy with an illegal gun, and he was back out on the streets by the end of the day.  

My former HUD neighbor who shot at his wife in the middle of the night was back over there two days later.  He didn't just shoot a gun, he was trying to kill her. 

And that goes to the point that guns are not the problem in this country--people are.  If you leftists would focus on locking up people doing bad things with guns instead of going after this inanimate object itself, we might be further ahead in the reduction of violent crime.


----------



## Superbadbrutha (Jan 23, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> Where do you get that from?  No felons can own guns but a misdemeanor is not a felony.


*If you have been arrested for domestic abuse, the charge may be elevated to a felony if:*


You caused great bodily injury (concussion, broken bones, scars, etc.) to the victim
You caused a mother to miscarry
You have prior history of domestic abuse


----------



## Superbadbrutha (Jan 23, 2022)

Flash said:


> All these filthy ass Negro thugs in these big city shitholes who commit most of the gun crime in this country will get a firearm no matter what their criminal status.


What about all these filthy ass racist rednecks.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 23, 2022)

Superbadbrutha said:


> *If you have been arrested for domestic abuse, the charge may be elevated to a felony if:*
> 
> 
> You caused great bodily injury (concussion, broken bones, scars, etc.) to the victim
> ...



But that's not what we're talking about here.  We are talking about a MISDEMEANOR domestic violence ruling.


----------



## Superbadbrutha (Jan 23, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> But that's not what we're talking about here.  We are talking about a MISDEMEANOR domestic violence ruling.


This came from your first post.

“So, unfortunately, and tragically, too many people who have lost their lives as a result of domestic violence and how often that’s been connected to use of firearms,” said Webber.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 23, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> So he was dying anyway? Of course he killed himself. Much less painful. But even if police did take away his gun, what would your prosecutor have done to him? Nothing. I read stories of your city where the police complained about busting a guy with an illegal gun, and he was back out on the streets by the end of the day.



Throwing a sick man in jail would have been inhumane.  
Taking away a method for him to kill himself would have been humane. And sensible. 



Ray From Cleveland said:


> My former HUD neighbor who shot at his wife in the middle of the night was back over there two days later. He didn't just shoot a gun, he was trying to kill her.



Well, jeez, he must have not been trying that hard, given they were in a small room at close range.   On a serious note, they took his gun, I hope.  



Ray From Cleveland said:


> And that goes to the point that guns are not the problem in this country--people are. If you leftists would focus on locking up people doing bad things with guns instead of going after this inanimate object itself, we might be further ahead in the reduction of violent crime.



We lock up 2 million people. 
We lock up 2 million people
We lock up 2 million people

Locking people up doesn't work.


----------



## Jarlaxle (Jan 23, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Did Welfare Ray just rationalize domestic violence?



No, that's your lack of comprehension. Jackasses like you are why I will not be my wife's sparring partner anymore.


----------



## Jarlaxle (Jan 23, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> My next door neighbor at my old place shot himself.  A couple of weeks before, he fired his gun through his patio window and then lied to the cops about it.  The cops didn't take his gun and a few weeks later he offed himself.  (Oh, incidentally, NOBODY in the building heard the shot, it was only discovered when his wife came home and found him.)



Joey, you've posted this steaming pile of bullshit many times. Nobody with a brain believed it then, nobody with a brain believes it now. You're so full of shit your breath stinks.


----------



## Jarlaxle (Jan 23, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Throwing a sick man in jail would have been inhumane.
> Taking away a method for him to kill himself would have been humane. And sensible.


I hope you get cancer. I hope it kills you slowly, with you living in agony for years, begging to die.


----------



## Orangecat (Jan 23, 2022)

Otis Mayfield said:


> If your daughter is in an abusive relationship, and there's a gun in the house, tell her to gtfo.


What, the abusive relationship isn't enough for you? F'n retard libs. Lol.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 23, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Throwing a sick man in jail would have been inhumane.
> Taking away a method for him to kill himself would have been humane. And sensible.



Yes, that way he would have killed himself by starting the car with the garage door closed.  A lot accomplished there, huh? 



JoeB131 said:


> Well, jeez, he must have not been trying that hard, given they were in a small room at close range. On a serious note, they took his gun, I hope.



Who knows, but he shot at her while he was in the living room while she was screaming outside.  The bullet landed in her car door and the officers had evidence and witnesses.  Apples and oranges. 



JoeB131 said:


> We lock up 2 million people.
> We lock up 2 million people
> We lock up 2 million people
> 
> Locking people up doesn't work.



Yes it does otherwise we'd have 5 million people. 

Stop and frisk worked greatly.  Three strikes worked out well.  Did they stop everybody?  No they didn't, but at least there was a reduction in violent crime. 

5 years minimum for illegally carrying a firearm would stop them from carrying guns. 10 years minimum if it was stolen.  The less demand, the less the supply meaning that gun theft would not be such a huge market as it is today if nobody wanted to buy the guns.  20 years minimum if you use a gun in the commission of a crime like robbery.  Death penalty if you use a firearm to illegally kill somebody.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 23, 2022)

Superbadbrutha said:


> This came from your first post.
> 
> “So, unfortunately, and tragically, too many people who have lost their lives as a result of domestic violence and how often that’s been connected to use of firearms,” said Webber.



Yes, that was in the OP.  What's your point?


----------



## 2aguy (Jan 23, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Well, let's take my neighbor.  He shot out a window.  When the police responded, he lied at first saying someone shot in at him, but that was quickly disproven by the glass shatter pattern.  At the point, the cops SHOULD have confiscated his gun.  But they didn't.
> 
> A couple weeks later, he killed himself with that same gun.
> 
> Let's get real here, you guys are already holding the rest of us hostage with your fetish, as we never know when one of you is going to go Full Lanza and shoot up a school or a mall or a theater.




If he killed himself, he would have killed himself with pills, his car in his garage, a rope, a train, a tall building, cutting his wrists...

suicide is not a gun issue, as the South Koreans, Japanese, Chinese, and most countries in Europe demonstrate with their higher suicide rates and extreme gun control...


----------



## 2aguy (Jan 23, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Throwing a sick man in jail would have been inhumane.
> Taking away a method for him to kill himself would have been humane. And sensible.
> 
> 
> ...




We lock up 2 million people.
We lock up 2 million people
We lock up 2 million people

The democrat party judges and prosecutors release the most violent gun offenders over and over, often within 48 hours of their arrest.......these are the individuals doing almost all of the gun crime and gun murder in democrat party controlled cities.....so locking up violent gun criminals for 48 hours is not doing anything......

The democrat party judges and prosecutors release the most violent gun offenders over and over, often within 48 hours of their arrest.......these are the individuals doing almost all of the gun crime and gun murder in democrat party controlled cities.....so locking up violent gun criminals for 48 hours is not doing anything......

The democrat party judges and prosecutors release the most violent gun offenders over and over, often within 48 hours of their arrest.......these are the individuals doing almost all of the gun crime and gun murder in democrat party controlled cities.....so locking up violent gun criminals for 48 hours is not doing anything......


----------



## 2aguy (Jan 23, 2022)

Superbadbrutha said:


> What about all these filthy ass racist rednecks.




Far outnumbered by the violent blm, antifa racists of the democrat party, who burned, looted and killed for 7 months, and threatened more and more violence if Trump won...they murdered over 40 people......

blm and antifa burned, looted and murdered in primarily black and minority neighborhoods......yet you guys didn't care about that violent racism...


----------



## 2aguy (Jan 23, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> Yes, that way he would have killed himself by starting the car with the garage door closed.  A lot accomplished there, huh?
> 
> 
> 
> ...




I think those numbers should be bumped...

30 years if a felon is caught in possession of a gun when they are legally prohibited from buying, owning or carrying a gun...

Life in prison for  any crime by a criminal with a gun....

That is how Japan has stopped the Yakuza from using guns.....and they used to use guns and grenades all the time.....a life sentence for using a gun for a crime either gets the criminals to stop using guns, or simply takes them out of society altogether...


----------



## Superbadbrutha (Jan 23, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> Yes, that was in the OP.  What's your point?


Domestic violence is a felony when you put your hands on someone.


----------



## Flash (Jan 23, 2022)




----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 23, 2022)

2aguy said:


> I think those numbers should be bumped...
> 
> 30 years if a felon is caught in possession of a gun when they are legally prohibited from buying, owning or carrying a gun...
> 
> ...



You have my vote on that.  Joe gets upset because people like us carry guns for protection.  But if we had strong enough deterrents where the criminals wouldn't dream of committing a crime against us with a gun, there would be no need for us to carry.  

If jail space is a problem, let's build more prisons.  Using money for that instead of making things greener would be a much better use of resources and save thousands of innocent lives in the process.


----------



## Superbadbrutha (Jan 23, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Far outnumbered by the violent blm, antifa racists of the democrat party, who burned, looted and killed for 7 months, and threatened more and more violence if Trump won...they murdered over 40 people......
> 
> blm and antifa burned, looted and murdered in primarily black and minority neighborhoods......yet you guys didn't care about that violent racism...


How many murders has no one been arrested for?


----------



## hadit (Jan 23, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> I'm more for practicality.  How many spouses have been shot because SOMEONE should have taken a gun away.
> 
> My next door neighbor at my old place shot himself.  A couple of weeks before, he fired his gun through his patio window and then lied to the cops about it.  The cops didn't take his gun and a few weeks later he offed himself.  (Oh, incidentally, NOBODY in the building heard the shot, it was only discovered when his wife came home and found him.)
> 
> ...


IOW, you don't have a source, you're just making it up hoping no one will call you on it. Got it. Hey, I'm working with what you actually write, so the qualifications come from you. Did you think I would really just accept a bunch of emotional blargle from you when you make such statements?


----------



## hadit (Jan 23, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Throwing a sick man in jail would have been inhumane.
> Taking away a method for him to kill himself would have been humane. And sensible.
> 
> 
> ...


I take from that you do not support assisted suicide laws.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Jan 23, 2022)

Otis Mayfield said:


> 92% of all women killed with guns in high-income countries in 2015 were from the US.
> 
> In 2015:
> 800-1000 women are killed with guns.
> ...



  I'm reminded of a a political advertisement that I saw, long ago, intended to promote the position of hoplophobic pussies such as yourself—supporting some gun proposal that was in the works at the time.

  It depicts a woman who has fled an abusive relationship, but now her abusive former husband/boyfriend/whatever is banging on her door, trying to break in and yelling threats.

  We're intended to believe that the proposal under consideration is necessary in order to insure that the abuser now trying to break into this woman's home doesn't have a gun.

  It seems to me that this advertisement did an astounding job of missing its very own point.

  In general, men are bigger and stronger and better at the use of violence, than women.  If the man in this advertisement had managed to break through the door, then he would not have needed a weapon to inflict further harm on the woman.

  The proposal intended to insure that he wouldn't have a gun (as if criminals would obey any such law anyway) would also insure that *she* didn't have a gun, and if she did have a gun, in the situation described in this advertisement, she would have been easily able to defend herself.




Otis Mayfield said:


> If your daughter is in an abusive relationship, and there's a gun in the house, tell her to gtfo.



  One again, an important point is being missed.

  If a woman is in an abusive relationshit, with a man who is so abusive that there is a credible risk that he might try to kill her or otherwise inflict serious harm on her, then she needs to GTFO, regardless of any weapons that the man may or may not have.  It's not the gun that is a threat to her life or safety; it is the abusive asshole who is the threat.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Jan 23, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Uh, guy, if we all have to live with metal detectors, militarized police, active shooter drills, security doors at our workplaces, then we are nowhere near liberty. We are being held hostage to a *gun* culture that refuses to clean up their act.



  You misspelled _“criminal”_.

  No surprise, given that you are one of the most open supporters on this forum of the criminal culture and its predations against human beings.  And a supporter of policies that have no other intent or effect than to make human beings easier prey for criminals.

  As always, you take the side of your own kind against the side of human beings.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Jan 23, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> The Constitution is not a suicide pact.



  No one claims that it is.

  However, it is the highest law in this nation, and only lawless criminals and tyrants use excuses like that to try to undermine it and justify violating it.

  We all know which side you are on, and it is not the side of human beings.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Jan 23, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Ray From Cleveland said:
> 
> 
> > Constitutional rights should not be removed from people on a hunch they might do something wrong with them. We are losing our long standing ground of innocent until proven guilty.
> ...



  You have have consistently demonstrated a strong eagerness to promote violent crime, and to deprive human beings of our most basic Constitutional rights.

  You've repeatedly, consistently expressed utter contempt for our Constitution, for the principals on which it is based, and for the rule of law as established thereunder.

  By your very own logic,  we, as a society, would be fully justified in stripping you of several important freedoms, on the basis that you've shown a strong desire to use these freedoms to violate the rights of human beings.  Starting, definitely, with freedom of speech, and voting rights.


----------



## AZrailwhale (Jan 23, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> I'm sure you don't. But honestly, you made it sound minor at first, and then admitted the violence was escalating...  Sounds like a good reason to get the guns out of that house.
> 
> 
> 
> Right, because a piece of paper is going to protect you from a lunatic with a gun.  Oh, wait. No.


No, it sounds like getting the person escalating the violence out of the house would be a good idea.  It's often the wife or girlfriend doing the escalating.  My wife had that pattern, we went to counseling and the counselor told her that when I asked her to back off and stop arguing, she should do so.  Once that happened, we almost never had a serious disagreement, let alone a fight.  In fact, I think it's been over a decade since our last fight.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Jan 23, 2022)

hadit said:


> Really? Have you a credible source showing that over half (that's most) of gun murders (your word. That means not suicides, not accidental deaths, etc.) are committed by people who have owned the gun they used for, let's say, at least 10 years? If not, you're just making it all up and no one believes you.



  One of CrimIncel Joe's favorite lies is a statistic about the likelihood of a gun in the home being used against a member of that household, which was from a study conducted by a fraud who counted as _“a gun in the home”_, guns that were brought into the home by criminals intending to use them against the rightful occupants of that home.  CrimIncel Joe is fully aware of the fraudulent nature of this claim, and yet is persists in repeating it.  I haven't read through this whole thread, yet, but I'll be surprised if before I finish doing so, I don't find that it's already repeated this lie, knowing full well that it is a lie.


----------



## AZrailwhale (Jan 23, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> I'm more for practicality.  How many spouses have been shot because SOMEONE should have taken a gun away.
> 
> My next door neighbor at my old place shot himself.  A couple of weeks before, he fired his gun through his patio window and then lied to the cops about it.  The cops didn't take his gun and a few weeks later he offed himself.  (Oh, incidentally, NOBODY in the building heard the shot, it was only discovered when his wife came home and found him.)
> 
> ...


So?  Why is his suicide any of YOUR business?  If he wanted to kill himself there are many ways to do so without using a gun.


----------



## Leo123 (Jan 23, 2022)

Anomalism said:


> All we have to do is look to Europe to see where this is going with the left. Of course they're going to take the guns. They do it in every country that they can.


In Europe, assaults are most often carried out with a knife.


----------



## AZrailwhale (Jan 23, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> That would have been difficult, as we had electric stoves in that complex.
> 
> We should take guns away from people who are a danger to themselves or others....  that's actually pretty sensible.


Who decides that they are a danger?  If they are a danger, they should be institutionalized, not have their guns taken away.  Why do you always focus on the tool rather than the user?


----------



## AZrailwhale (Jan 23, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Throwing a sick man in jail would have been inhumane.
> Taking away a method for him to kill himself would have been humane. And sensible.
> 
> 
> ...


You're really something.  You'd condemn a dying man to a torturous death by denying him the tool for a clean suicide?  I've seen people go through Chemo, my wife had to for Colon Cancer.  As the doctor told us, the Chemo kills the cancer slightly faster than it kills you IF it works.  In my wife's case it didn't work, but they removed her colon so she's still with me.  I wouldn't condemn anyone for choosing a clean, quick death over dying slowly and painfully of cancer.


----------



## AZrailwhale (Jan 23, 2022)

Superbadbrutha said:


> How many murders has no one been arrested for?


Most, most murders go unsolved.


----------



## Superbadbrutha (Jan 23, 2022)

Tell me Ray, should this domestic violence abuser be allowed to own a gun.


----------



## Superbadbrutha (Jan 23, 2022)

AZrailwhale said:


> Most, most murders go unsolved.


Only 1/3 go unsolved.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Jan 23, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> My next door neighbor at my old place shot himself. A couple of weeks before, he fired his gun through his patio window and then lied to the cops about it. The cops didn't take his gun and a few weeks later he offed himself. (Oh, incidentally, NOBODY in the building heard the shot, it was only discovered when his wife came home and found him.)



  In most cities, it is illegal to carelessly discharge a firearm within a populated area.

  Why was this neighbor not arrested then, and charged with a crime?

  But then, as you've made clear enough often enough, you're opposed to arresting dangerous criminals and putting them in prison.  So, it was entirely consistent with your own positions that this critter was allowed to remain free, and to remain a danger to itself and to others.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Jan 23, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> We should take guns away from people who are a danger to themselves or others.... that's actually pretty sensible.



  Taking a gun away from someone who is a danger to himself or to others does not cause him to not be a danger to himself or to others.

  Such a person needs to be removed form free society; either to be given whatever psychological help might allow him to cease to be dangerous; or else, if nothing else, to keep him confined to prevent him from endangering others.


----------



## AZrailwhale (Jan 23, 2022)

Superbadbrutha said:


> Only 1/3 go unsolved.


depends on where you live.
edit:  I checked. nationwide over forty percent of all homicides go unsolved.  I was wrong.  In 2018 there were slightly over sixteen thousand murders in the USA, so about six thousand four hundred went unsolved.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Jan 23, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> And how would you know if a person is a harm to themselves or others?  Again you leftists with your obsession of Thought Police.
> 
> In our country you are considered innocent until proven guilty; a law abiding citizen until you break our laws.  I know you hate this idea of protecting the innocent, but that's the way this country should remain.



  An important point, and one of the challenges of anything other than the sort of tyranny under which a creature like CrimIncel Joe would force us to all live, is that you really cannot know what any individual will do, until that individual does it.

  But once someone commits a criminal act, and is convicted thereof, we have a solid basis on which to assume that that creature is likely to commit similar acts again, if given the opportunity to do so.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Jan 23, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Well, let's take my neighbor. He shot out a window. When the police responded, he lied at first saying someone shot in at him, but that was quickly disproven by the glass shatter pattern. At the point, the cops SHOULD have confiscated his gun. But they didn't.



  At that point, the police should have arrested him.  He had already shown himself, by his action of carelessly discharging a firearm, to be an unreasonable danger to others.

  To leave him free, to create more danger, was an act of malfeasance on the part of the police.


----------



## AZrailwhale (Jan 23, 2022)

Superbadbrutha said:


> Tell me Ray, should this domestic violence abuser be allowed to own a gun.


He didn't use a gun, didn't need a gun and it sounds like he should have been locked up long ago for that temper.  Beating your girlfriend is a crime, she should have locked him up the first time he attacked her.  Most domestic violence "victims" enable their attackers until things escalate to something like this or even worse.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Jan 23, 2022)

2aguy said:


> I think those numbers should be bumped...
> 
> 30 years if a felon is caught in possession of a gun when they are legally prohibited from buying, owning or carrying a gun...
> 
> Life in prison for any crime by a criminal with a gun....



  I disagree, here.

  If a former criminal is salvageable, then once he's been rehabilitated, and has _“paid his debt to society”_, then he does not owe society any further loss of his essential freedoms.

  Those who, by an established pattern of criminality, demonstrate themselves to be an irredeemable danger to society, should be dealt with they way we used to deal with them—at the end of a rope.  After that, there is no need to worry about whether they still have the right to keep and bear arms; if they want to keep their guns, then they can have them buried with them in their graves.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Jan 23, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> You have my vote on that. Joe gets upset because people like us carry guns for protection.



CrimIncel Joe's opposition to the right of human beings to bear arms, stems from a desire to do that which would give a human being just cause to use those arms.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 23, 2022)

Bob Blaylock said:


> An important point, and one of the challenges of anything other than the sort of tyranny under which a creature like CrimIncel Joe would force us to all live, is that you really cannot know what any individual will do, until that individual does it.
> 
> But once someone commits a criminal act, and is convicted thereof, we have a solid basis on which to assume that that creature is likely to commit similar acts again, if given the opportunity to do so.



Correct but Joe wants to take guns away from people "in case" they might do something illegal with them, and the people that do get busted get nothing more than a slap on the hand.  It's like liberals have zero common sense or logic.  Taking guns away from people who committed no crime is like taking cars away from everybody to try and stop DUI"s.  The car is not the problem, it's the person driving the car that is, so that's how you address the problem, by going after the person, not the object they used.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 23, 2022)

Superbadbrutha said:


> Tell me Ray, should this domestic violence abuser be allowed to own a gun.



WTF does this have to do with what we're talking about?  This is a felony assault, not a misdemeanor assault.  Felons are not allowed to own firearms or be in possession of firearms in this country.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Jan 23, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> Correct but Joe wants to take guns away from people "in case" they might do something illegal with them, and the people that do get busted get nothing more than a slap on the hand.  It's like liberals have zero common sense or logic.  Taking guns away from people who committed no crime is like taking cars away from everybody to try and stop DUI"s.  The car is not the problem, it's the person driving the car that is, so that's how you address the problem, by going after the person, not the object they used.



  If you look at any of CrimIncel Joe's positions, from the point of view of being on the side of criminals against that of human beings, from a position of wanting criminals to be free to commit acts of theft, destruction, and violence against human beings, and of wanting human beings to be helpless to resist any such acts, then CrimIncel Joe's positions make perfect sense.

  I think it is quite clear that the only thing that CrimIncel Joe is sincerely worried that any human being •might• do with a gun is to successfully defend himself against a criminal.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 23, 2022)

Leo123 said:


> In Europe, assaults are most often carried out with a knife.



They also have higher rates of other violent crime because nobody there can protect themselves.  

In the United States, it's estimated that Americans pull out their gun between 1 to 4 million times a year to stop attacks on themselves or others.  Using the lowest figure, it's about a million times a year a crime or attack is stopped in it's tracks.  So even if it were possible to stop every American from having a gun, criminals will still find a way to carry out their crimes. 









						UK police behind effort to ban knives to end ‘knife violence’
					

British police are supporting an effort called “Save a Life: Surrender Your Knife” in an attempt to curb the growing rash of “knife crime”.




					personalliberty.com


----------



## Superbadbrutha (Jan 23, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> WTF does this have to do with what we're talking about?  This is a felony assault, not a misdemeanor assault.  Felons are not allowed to own firearms or be in possession of firearms in this country.


What is misdemeanor domestic violence?


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 23, 2022)

Superbadbrutha said:


> What is misdemeanor domestic violence?



From links that's been posted on this topic it could be yelling at your spouse and making threats against her.  Not even any physical contact.  It could be a scratch on her arm or some other superficial wound she "claims" to have suffered from you.  Any kind of physical touching even if you grab her by the shoulders and shake her while you're trying to make a verbal point.


----------



## hadit (Jan 23, 2022)

Superbadbrutha said:


> Tell me Ray, should this domestic violence abuser be allowed to own a gun.


Should his victim have been armed?


----------



## hadit (Jan 23, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> Correct but Joe wants to take guns away from people "in case" they might do something illegal with them, and the people that do get busted get nothing more than a slap on the hand.  It's like liberals have zero common sense or logic.  Taking guns away from people who committed no crime is like taking cars away from everybody to try and stop DUI"s.  The car is not the problem, it's the person driving the car that is, so that's how you address the problem, by going after the person, not the object they used.


More accurately, it would be like taking away alcohol to stop DUI's, something liberals assure us didn't work and will never work because people will always find a way to get alcohol if they want. Sound familiar? In fact, they condemn the entire war on drugs for that very reason, yet it seems to totally evade them when talking about people getting hold of guns.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 23, 2022)

Bob Blaylock said:


> If you look at any of CrimIncel Joe's positions, from the point of view of being on the side of criminals against that of human beings, from a position of wanting criminals to be free to commit acts of theft, destruction, and violence against human beings, and of wanting human beings to be helpless to resist any such acts, then CrimIncel Joe's positions make perfect sense.
> 
> I think it is quite clear that the only thing that CrimIncel Joe is sincerely worried that any human being •might• do with a gun is to successfully defend himself against a criminal.



That's why he relies on phony statistics.  You are X more likely to be killed by a gun in the house than if you didn't have one.  Well no shit.  You're also X less likely to have a fire in your home if you don't own a stove either.  

No matter how he fudges the numbers like omitting suicides in his gun homicide figures, what can't be ignored is how many times Americans use their firearms to stop attacks on themselves or others every single year.  

What they want is for criminals to roam free creating the problem, and disallowing us from self-defense from the problems they create.  Again, it makes zero sense.  if you want less people owning and carrying firearms, then you eliminate the problem that cause us to own and carry firearms, not eliminate the firearms.


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Jan 23, 2022)

Otis Mayfield said:


> 92% of all women killed with guns in high-income countries in 2015 were from the US.
> 
> In 2015:
> 800-1000 women are killed with guns.
> ...


Most of those deaths are from black men killing black women, that is a ritual i find concerning, because of the lack of black families..


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 23, 2022)

hadit said:


> More accurately, it would be like taking away alcohol to stop DUI's, something liberals assure us didn't work and will never work because people will always find a way to get alcohol if they want. Sound familiar? In fact, they condemn the entire war on drugs for that very reason, yet it seems to totally evade them when talking about people getting hold of guns.



Joe and I had this discussion.  I know people that had DUI's.  In almost all cases, they are coming from a public place where alcohol is served which is usually the bar. 

Bar people are very strange.  They are more addicted to the bar environment than they are the alcohol itself.  They get busted, quit drinking for a week or two, but that mad desire overcomes them.  They go to the bar and only drink a soda.  After a week of that, they only have one drink, then two.  Before you know it, they are right back to where they started. 

So I told Joe the way to reduce the amount of DUI's is to have your license marked.  If you have a marked license, you are not allowed in any establishment that serves alcohol even if you are not drinking yourself.  If you eliminate the attraction to public drinking, you reduce the amount of DUI's because you break this bar habit of theirs.  To be honest, it would also be the biggest deterrent from getting drunk at the bar because these people can't live without it. 

Joe claimed it could never work because the establishments that serve alcohol would never comply with inspecting all drivers licenses for a marked one.  Okay, then the bar gets fined if busted.  Very few people get drunk at home and then decide to get in the car and ride around.  It would work.  

Liberals don't like solutions, they like pandering to the problem instead.


----------



## hadit (Jan 23, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> Joe and I had this discussion.  I know people that had DUI's.  In almost all cases, they are coming from a public place where alcohol is served which is usually the bar.
> 
> Bar people are very strange.  They are more addicted to the bar environment than they are the alcohol itself.  They get busted, quit drinking for a week or two, but that mad desire overcomes them.  They go to the bar and only drink a soda.  After a week of that, they only have one drink, then two.  Before you know it, they are right back to where they started.
> 
> ...


Exactly. It would be no more onerous than a bartender carding someone to be sure they're old enough to drink. Imagine that, preventing people with a problem from accessing alcohol. It's almost like preventing people who can't control their tempers from accessing firearms. In either case, you exercise the prevention AFTER someone demonstrates they have a problem, not because you think they MIGHT have a problem.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 23, 2022)

hadit said:


> Exactly. It would be no more onerous than a bartender carding someone to be sure they're old enough to drink. Imagine that, preventing people with a problem from accessing alcohol. It's almost like preventing people who can't control their tempers from accessing firearms. In either case, you exercise the prevention AFTER someone demonstrates they have a problem, not because you think they MIGHT have a problem.



Joe has gone as far as to say firearm sellers should be liable because they sold a person a gun that passed the federal background check but looked a little crazy and then committed a crime with the gun they bought.  That's just how they think.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 23, 2022)

Jarlaxle said:


> I hope you get cancer. I hope it kills you slowly, with you living in agony for years, begging to die.


Wow, I'm wondering what I did to hurt your feeling so bad, Ditchweed... I mean besides calling you Ditchweed. 



Ray From Cleveland said:


> Yes, that way he would have killed himself by starting the car with the garage door closed. A lot accomplished there, huh?


He didn't have a garage.   Give his dry run with a gun might have well hit someone walking through the parking lot, it's a bit more serious than if he had to get more creative. 





Ray From Cleveland said:


> Stop and frisk worked greatly. Three strikes worked out well. Did they stop everybody? No they didn't, but at least there was a reduction in violent crime.



The reduction in crime in the 1990's had a lot more to do with end of the Baby Boom and people aging out of the "young and stupid" phase.  Stop and Frisk was a racist policy that encouraged the kind of police misconduct they burnt down the country over in 2020.  So, um, good job, everyone. 



Ray From Cleveland said:


> 5 years minimum for illegally carrying a firearm would stop them from carrying guns. 10 years minimum if it was stolen. The less demand, the less the supply meaning that gun theft would not be such a huge market as it is today if nobody wanted to buy the guns. 20 years minimum if you use a gun in the commission of a crime like robbery. Death penalty if you use a firearm to illegally kill somebody.



We lock up 2 million people
We lock up 2 million people
We lock up 2 million people. 

The reason why people want to buy guns is because the gun industry has made it so easy for criminals to get them, and when someone like Kellerman proves that a gun in the home is actually more dangerous to the people living in it, they stomp that shit out...  

You've been had, son.  


2aguy said:


> The democrat party judges and prosecutors release the most violent gun offenders over and over, often within 48 hours of their arrest.......these are the individuals doing almost all of the gun crime and gun murder in democrat party controlled cities.....so locking up violent gun criminals for 48 hours is not doing anything......



Except we have 2 million people in prison... so clearly prison isn't a deterrent.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 23, 2022)

Bob Blaylock said:


> You misspelled _“criminal”_.
> 
> No surprise, given that you are one of the most open supporters on this forum of the criminal culture and its predations against human beings. And a supporter of policies that have no other intent or effect than to make human beings easier prey for criminals.
> 
> As always, you take the side of your own kind against the side of human beings.



Hey, Mormon Bob, I don't worry about the criminal. 

I worry about the nutjob who shows up at a workplace because someone let him buy a gun.   The fact that companies have to have Active Shooter Policies even AFTER doing criminal background checks on their employees says the problem goes well beyond your mythical criminal.  




hadit said:


> Exactly. It would be no more onerous than a bartender carding someone to be sure they're old enough to drink. Imagine that, preventing people with a problem from accessing alcohol. It's almost like preventing people who can't control their tempers from accessing firearms. In either case, you exercise the prevention AFTER someone demonstrates they have a problem, not because you think they MIGHT have a problem.



If someone is slapping their old lady around, that indicates they have a problem.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 23, 2022)

AZrailwhale said:


> You're really something. You'd condemn a dying man to a torturous death by denying him the tool for a clean suicide? I've seen people go through Chemo, my wife had to for Colon Cancer. As the doctor told us, the Chemo kills the cancer slightly faster than it kills you IF it works. In my wife's case it didn't work, but they removed her colon so she's still with me. I wouldn't condemn anyone for choosing a clean, quick death over dying slowly and painfully of cancer.



I lost both of my parents to Cancer, at a very young age.  No, I wouldn't wish that on anyone, but I would have been more horrified if I came home one day and found they had taken their own lives.  This is what makes suicide a bad thing.  Some one ends up finding that body.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 23, 2022)

Bob Blaylock said:


> In most cities, it is illegal to carelessly discharge a firearm within a populated area.
> 
> Why was this neighbor not arrested then, and charged with a crime?



Again, he gave the Squirrel Cops some sob story about how he was dying of cancer and they felt sorry for him. 



Bob Blaylock said:


> Taking a gun away from someone who is a danger to himself or to others does not cause him to not be a danger to himself or to others.
> 
> Such a person needs to be removed form free society; either to be given whatever psychological help might allow him to cease to be dangerous; or else, if nothing else, to keep him confined to prevent him from endangering others.


Mormon Bob, doesn't see any problem that can't be solved by making the OTHER GUY suffer.  

Mormon Bob: Lock that person up for committing a minor offense... OR KILL HIM!!!
ALso Mormon Bob: The government wants me to get a shot!  MURDER THEM!!!!  



Bob Blaylock said:


> At that point, the police should have arrested him. He had already shown himself, by his action of carelessly discharging a firearm, to be an unreasonable danger to others.
> 
> To leave him free, to create more danger, was an act of malfeasance on the part of the police.



Yup, lock up the cancer patients, that's a solution, Mormon Bob.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 23, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> Joe and I had this discussion. I know people that had DUI's. In almost all cases, they are coming from a public place where alcohol is served which is usually the bar.
> 
> Bar people are very strange. They are more addicted to the bar environment than they are the alcohol itself. They get busted, quit drinking for a week or two, but that mad desire overcomes them. They go to the bar and only drink a soda. After a week of that, they only have one drink, then two. Before you know it, they are right back to where they started.
> 
> ...



Okay, that sounds nice, but the only way that works if if bars check ID's.   I haven't had a bar check my ID since the 1980's.  I imagine it would be less so if you are a regular at that bar.  

My solution was elegant.  Equip every car with a blow-meter.  Just like they all have airbags and seat belts now.  But there's money to be made from pulling over people for DUI's, so you won't ever see the government do that.  So some guy gets $10,000 in fines for blowing a .08.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 23, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> Joe has gone as far as to say firearm sellers should be liable because they sold a person a gun that passed the federal background check but looked a little crazy and then committed a crime with the gun they bought. That's just how they think.



Yes, because this guy looks perfectly normal. You should totally sell him an assault rifle with a 100 round clip. 





Don't check with his school, which was in the process of throwing him out for mental instability, or check with his family.  Nope, just rely on the Federal Background check system which was intentionally underfunded at the insistence of the NRA.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Jan 23, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Yup, lock up the cancer patients, that's a solution, Mormon Bob.



  Not because he had cancer.

  Because he had behaved in a manner that proved that he was a danger to others.

  In the end, fortunately, it turned out that he only ended up killing himself, and not someone else, but if he had killed someone else, then the malfeasant cops who allowed him to remain free after it became clear how dangerous he was would have had that blood on their hands.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 23, 2022)

Bob Blaylock said:


> Not because he had cancer.
> 
> Because he had behaved in a manner that proved that he was a danger to others.
> 
> In the end, fortunately, it turned out that he only ended up killing himself, and not someone else, but if he had killed someone else, then the malfeasant cops who allowed him to remain free after it became clear how dangerous he was would have had that blood on their hands.



We barely hold cops accountable when they straight up murder people and we have it on tape.  

Now, I don't know what actions they took against the cops in our little town with a police department of all of 11 officers.  My guess is someone got a talking to and that was it. 

Someone should have taken the man's gun.  They didn't. Locking him up would have been cruel... but then again, you are a bit of a sadist, aren't you Mormon Bob?


----------



## hadit (Jan 23, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Hey, Mormon Bob, I don't worry about the criminal.
> 
> I worry about the nutjob who shows up at a workplace because someone let him buy a gun.   The fact that companies have to have Active Shooter Policies even AFTER doing criminal background checks on their employees says the problem goes well beyond your mythical criminal.
> 
> ...


A neighbor having the power to put someone through the hassle of losing his firearms for a time, then having to defend himself in court though committing no crime, then fighting the bureaucracy to get his guns back, maybe, someday, IS a problem. And how convenient that it would be public knowledge that a house has been disarmed, leaving it a target for thieves. There's a reason why even the most ardent anti-gunners won't put a sign in their front yard stating that they have no guns, yet that's what you want forced on other people.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 23, 2022)

hadit said:


> A neighbor having the power to put someone through the hassle of losing his firearms for a time, then having to defend himself in court though committing no crime, then fighting the bureaucracy to get his guns back, maybe, someday, IS a problem.


not a problem for me!  If I had a gun nut living next door and saw him slapping his old lady around, damn straight I'd report him.  That's actually the decent thing to do. 



hadit said:


> And how convenient that it would be public knowledge that a house has been disarmed, leaving it a target for thieves.



Actually, the thieves would pass that one up.  No guns to steal.  





__





						Gun Theft In America
					

Gun theft is on the rise in the U.S. and it's increasingly becoming an issue where guns are stolen from vehicles. If you travel with firearms, you need to make sure they're locked up when unattended.




					truckvault.com
				




Every day in the U.S., roughly 1 gun is stolen *every 90 seconds*. That amounts to around 380,000 stolen guns every year, many of which are later used to commit violent crimes. People buy guns to help protect themselves, but when they don’t protect them from being stolen, they’re putting themselves and their communities in danger.

Now, given that accorind to the FBI, there are 1,117,696, it means that one out of three burglaries involved stealing a gun.  Guns don't prevent crimes.  



hadit said:


> There's a reason why even the most ardent anti-gunners won't put a sign in their front yard stating that they have no guns, yet that's what you want forced on other people.



Again, most burglaries happen when no one is home.  Understandable, if you break into a house when someone is home, the charge ups to "Home Invasion" and that's a whole other peck of trouble you don't need.  

So in addition to gun proliferation causing 23,000 suicides, a large chunk of the 16,000 homicides, and 380,000 guns getting into the wrong hands every year... how is this a benefit again?


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Jan 23, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Someone should have taken the man's gun. They didn't. Locking him up would have been cruel... but then again, you are a bit of a sadist, aren't you Mormon Bob?



  If they had locked him up, perhaps he would still be alive.  Perhaps not.  I don't know how bad his cancer was, but perhaps locking him up would have just condemned him to a much more painful death from cancer instead of a clean, quick, bullet in his head.

  In any event, at that point, it was clear that this man was a danger to others.  He had already behaved in a manner that put other people in danger, and which demonstrated a lack of concern for the danger that he was causing to others.  For the safety of others, if not his own safety, he needed to be locked up.  Your ersatz concern over what might have been _“cruel”_ to him pales next to your depraved-heart indifference toward the danger that he posed to others.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Jan 23, 2022)

hadit said:


> And how convenient that it would be public knowledge that a house has been disarmed, leaving it a target for thieves.



  It's tempting to think that one of CrimIncel Joe's motives for wanting his neighbor's gun to be taken, but the neighbor and his belongings left be, was a desire to burgle that neighbor's apartment, knowing that the neighbor was now sick, weak, disarmed, and somewhat lacking in credibility after the first event, making him a perfect target, unable to defend any of his property, or even to be taken seriously when he tried to tell police who robbed him.

  As I said, CrimIncel Joe's positions always make perfect sense, when viewed from the position of wanting a criminal to be free to prey on a human being.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Jan 23, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Actually, the thieves would pass that one up. No guns to steal.



  Do you really believe that guns are the only things that thieves are interested in stealing?

  Do you really believe that a criminal will only break into a home to rob it, if he thinks the owner has guns?

  Of course you don't.  Even you are not that stupid.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 23, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Every day in the U.S., roughly 1 gun is stolen *every 90 seconds*. That amounts to around 380,000 stolen guns every year, many of which are later used to commit violent crimes. People buy guns to help protect themselves, but when they don’t protect them from being stolen, they’re putting themselves and their communities in danger.
> 
> Now, given that accorind to the FBI, there are 1,117,696, it means that one out of three burglaries involved stealing a gun. Guns don't prevent crimes.



But what if there was no market to sell the guns?  Then guns would not be very valuable to a criminal.  That could be accomplished by making laws I suggested before which is ten years minimum prison sentence for anybody caught illegally carrying a gun that was stolen.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 23, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Yes, because this guy looks perfectly normal. You should totally sell him an assault rifle with a 100 round clip.
> 
> View attachment 592006
> Don't check with his school, which was in the process of throwing him out for mental instability, or check with his family.  Nope, just rely on the Federal Background check system which was intentionally underfunded at the insistence of the NRA.



Really?  The NRA?  You have a credible link to that?  Of course not.  More bullshit you make up as you type.  

You can't deny selling somebody a firearm because you don't like the  way they looked.  A gun seller does not have the training or expertise to make that determination.  And what if he was a minority?  That's another lawsuit waiting to happen.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 23, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Okay, that sounds nice, but the only way that works if if bars check ID's.   I haven't had a bar check my ID since the 1980's.  I imagine it would be less so if you are a regular at that bar.
> 
> My solution was elegant.  Equip every car with a blow-meter.  Just like they all have airbags and seat belts now.  But there's money to be made from pulling over people for DUI's, so you won't ever see the government do that.  So some guy gets $10,000 in fines for blowing a .08.



If bars have to check ID"s then bars have to check ID's.  how hard is that?  Why do you commies have so many problems with ID's anyway?  In our state you have to present an ID to buy cigarettes.  My mother is 87 years old, and they make her present her ID before being allowed to buy her cigarettes.  If that's the law, you obey it.  Break the law, and you face a heavy fine.  

So how much more do the rest of us non law breakers have to pay for a car by them installing a $1,000 blow meter in each one because of the few that drive drunk.  My solution doesn't cost anybody a dime but the offender.  Plus my solution would work.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 23, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Again, he gave the Squirrel Cops some sob story about how he was dying of cancer and they felt sorry for him.



No, they likely had no evidence to arrest him.  The cops make the claim he shot a gun, he denies it, there is no evidence that he did, and they can't arrest him.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 23, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Wow, I'm wondering what I did to hurt your feeling so bad, Ditchweed... I mean besides calling you Ditchweed.
> 
> 
> He didn't have a garage.   Give his dry run with a gun might have well hit someone walking through the parking lot, it's a bit more serious than if he had to get more creative.
> ...



If he didn't have a garage, it would be so difficult to rent one?  How about buying dope to OD on?  How about jumping out of a 20 floor window?  

Much like crime, you are placing the blame on an object instead of a person.  As I pointed out, only 50% of suicides are by guns.  

The reduction of crime is proportional with more and more states adopting CCW programs and laws that switched the guilt from the victim to the criminal.  But those added laws such as Stop and Frisk plus Three Strikes certainly played a part in the cities that had such policies.  When they got rid of them, violent crime once again increased.


----------



## Jarlaxle (Jan 23, 2022)

Bob Blaylock said:


> At that point, the police should have arrested him.  He had already shown himself, by his action of carelessly discharging a firearm, to be an unreasonable danger to others.
> 
> To leave him free, to create more danger, was an act of malfeasance on the part of the police.


More likely...Joey made the whole thing up.


----------



## Rogue AI (Jan 23, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> 1) The Second Amendment is about Militias, not guns.
> 2) Yes, you absolutely should take away  people's guns if they are dangerous.
> 
> The best argument for gun control is a conversation with a gun nut.


No it's not. What foolish nonsense you spew.

We have due process to determine if someone is dangerous, it requires lawfully obtained evidence and a guilty plea/verdict. You gun grabbing morons are trying to legislate away our rights.


----------



## Jarlaxle (Jan 23, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Yes, because this guy looks perfectly normal. You should totally sell him an assault rifle with a 100 round clip.
> 
> View attachment 592006
> Don't check with his school, which was in the process of throwing him out for mental instability, or check with his family.  Nope, just rely on the Federal Background check system which was intentionally underfunded at the insistence of the NRA.


Yeah...looks like a nut to me.

Wait, no, he looks like a million other people.


----------



## Jarlaxle (Jan 23, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> not a problem for me!  If I had a gun nut living next door and saw him slapping his old lady around, damn straight I'd report him.  That's actually the decent thing to do.



I expect you are SALIVATING at the thought of SWATing someone who owns guns.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 24, 2022)

Bob Blaylock said:


> If they had locked him up, perhaps he would still be alive. Perhaps not. I don't know how bad his cancer was, but perhaps locking him up would have just condemned him to a much more painful death from cancer instead of a clean, quick, bullet in his head.
> 
> In any event, at that point, it was clear that this man was a danger to others. He had already behaved in a manner that put other people in danger, and which demonstrated a lack of concern for the danger that he was causing to others. For the safety of others, if not his own safety, he needed to be locked up. Your ersatz concern over what might have been _“cruel”_ to him pales next to your depraved-heart indifference toward the danger that he posed to others.



Again.  Take away his gun. He's not a danger to others, and he's not a danger to himself.  



Bob Blaylock said:


> It's tempting to think that one of @CrimIncel Joe's motives for wanting his neighbor's gun to be taken, but the neighbor and his belongings left be, was a desire to burgle that neighbor's apartment, knowing that the neighbor was now sick, weak, disarmed, and somewhat lacking in credibility after the first event, making him a perfect target, unable to defend any of his property, or even to be taken seriously when he tried to tell police who robbed him.



Actually, I was one of the few people who talked to the guy.  I even loaned him some money so he could get gasoline for his car to get somewhere. (He blew his brains out before he could pay me back.) 




Bob Blaylock said:


> Do you really believe that guns are the only things that thieves are interested in stealing?
> 
> Do you really believe that a criminal will only break into a home to rob it, if he thinks the owner has guns?
> 
> Of course you don't. Even you are not that stupid.



Um, as stated, 380,000 guns are stolen every year.   Guns are probably a top commodity for thieves, as they can be easily fenced.  You see, most burglars don't break into a house when people are home.  That would be stupid, if they have guns or not.  The penalty for a home invasion is much higher than a burglary. They are usually smart enough to case the home to make sure nobody is there, then they have the run of the place.  And because the NRA is against gun safes, they easily pick up any guns in the house.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 24, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> Really? The NRA? You have a credible link to that? Of course not. More bullshit you make up as you type.



After the victims of the DC Snipers won a big judgement from the gun maker and seller, the NRA ran whining to Congress and got a law passed indemnifying them from liability from gun crime.  









						Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				




Which means you can sell an assault rifle to the Joker with no worries about liability. 



Ray From Cleveland said:


> You can't deny selling somebody a firearm because you don't like the way they looked. A gun seller does not have the training or expertise to make that determination. And what if he was a minority? That's another lawsuit waiting to happen.



That's why you have waiting periods to check the person out if you aren't sure about them.  A simple call to members of Holmes' family or his school would have proven he was coo-coo for cocopuffs.  But that call never got made.  Why should it.  The gun seller was protected by law no matter how reckless the sale was.  



Ray From Cleveland said:


> If bars have to check ID"s then bars have to check ID's. how hard is that? Why do you commies have so many problems with ID's anyway? In our state you have to present an ID to buy cigarettes. My mother is 87 years old, and they make her present her ID before being allowed to buy her cigarettes. If that's the law, you obey it. Break the law, and you face a heavy fine.



Again, walked into a liquor store the other day to buy my weekly bottle of wine... the sign on the door said, "Two ID's required".   Guy didn't even bother asking for my ID.  



Ray From Cleveland said:


> So how much more do the rest of us non law breakers have to pay for a car by them installing a $1,000 blow meter in each one because of the few that drive drunk. My solution doesn't cost anybody a dime but the offender. Plus my solution would work.



Why do you have to pay extra for seat belts and airbags because of the few who get into serious accidents?  



Ray From Cleveland said:


> No, they likely had no evidence to arrest him. The cops make the claim he shot a gun, he denies it, there is no evidence that he did, and they can't arrest him.


Actually, the guy admitted he shot the gun after the cops confronted him about the fact that the glass was blown outside, and there were no bullet holes INSIDE the unit.  We aren't talking about a master criminal here.  We're talking about a guy who fucked up, made up a lie, was immediately caught and fessed up.   The next step SHOULD have been to confiscate the gun and make him seek counselling.   Instead, the cops felt sorry for him, and a few days later, he shot himself.  Nobody lost his job over this.  




Ray From Cleveland said:


> The reduction of crime is proportional with more and more states adopting CCW programs and laws that switched the guilt from the victim to the criminal. But those added laws such as Stop and Frisk plus Three Strikes certainly played a part in the cities that had such policies. When they got rid of them, violent crime once again increased.



Nope. Nothing to do with it. 

Crime went down because the baby boomers aged out of the "Dumb-ass" phase.  It went back up again because Trump did what Republicans do best, wrecked the economy.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 24, 2022)

Rogue AI said:


> No it's not. What foolish nonsense you spew.
> 
> We have due process to determine if someone is dangerous, it requires lawfully obtained evidence and a guilty plea/verdict. You gun grabbing morons are trying to legislate away our rights.



what rights? your right to murder your spouse?  Your right to terrorize your neighbors?   The second Amendment was about militias, not gun ownership.  The Founding Slave Rapists never meant for guns to be owned by the great unwashed. 



Jarlaxle said:


> Yeah...looks like a nut to me.
> 
> Wait, no, he looks like a million other people.



That looks "normal" to you, Ditchweed?  Sadly, it probably does.  



Jarlaxle said:


> I expect you are SALIVATING at the thought of SWATing someone who owns guns.


Damn straight.  I want the ATF to be as feared as the IRS.


----------



## Superbadbrutha (Jan 24, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> From links that's been posted on this topic it could be yelling at your spouse and making threats against her.  Not even any physical contact.  It could be a scratch on her arm or some other superficial wound she "claims" to have suffered from you.  Any kind of physical touching even if you grab her by the shoulders and shake her while you're trying to make a verbal point.


Your wife is not your child, so why would you ever need to grab her to make a verbal point.  The verbal abuse usually turns into physical abuse.


----------



## Superbadbrutha (Jan 24, 2022)

hadit said:


> Should his victim have been armed?


Rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6.


----------



## Claudette (Jan 24, 2022)

JackOfNoTrades 
I agree. Turn and walk away. Keep out of his or her way and get out of the house any way you can. You sure as hell don't touch anyone. Not a good outcome if you do and the cops are called.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 24, 2022)

Superbadbrutha said:


> Your wife is not your child, so why would you ever need to grab her to make a verbal point.  The verbal abuse usually turns into physical abuse.



I don't want to debate that.  You asked a question and I answered it.  I was just throwing out random examples of what a misdemeanor domestic violence is.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 24, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> After the victims of the DC Snipers won a big judgement from the gun maker and seller, the NRA ran whining to Congress and got a law passed indemnifying them from liability from gun crime.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I swear, you are so demonic you can't even stop yourself from this compulsive lying problem of yours.  Trump wrecked the economy is something an 8 year old can tell you you're full of shit on.  You're like that guy at a formal party with his fly open exposing his underwear.  Everybody is laughing at you but you have no clue as to why.  

So how were you able to dig into your neighbors story Mrs Cravits?  How do you know the police didn't take away the gun he used?  You do realize that most of us gun owners have more than one firearm, don't you?  

I know you've never been in a gun store in your life, but let me tell you they are busy at times.  They don't have time to be calling people about a customer.  Even if they did, what makes the person they are calling legit?  The gun store owner only sells guns, that's it.  If it's approved by the government, that's all the gun owner needs to sell a firearm to anybody regardless what their opinion of them is. They are not responsible for what a person does with the product they sold them.  Can you sue a car dealership because they sold a car to somebody that got drunk and hit you?  Of course not, that would be stupid.  

laws very frojm state to state.  In Ohio, anybody selling tobacco products must have a sign on their door they do not sell tobacco to anybody under the age of 21, and must card every customer regardless of their obvious age.


----------



## hadit (Jan 24, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> not a problem for me!  If I had a gun nut living next door and saw him slapping his old lady around, damn straight I'd report him.  That's actually the decent thing to do.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Interesting that you seem to believe the only things thieves are looking for are firearms. Not jewelry, not cash, not artwork, not electronics, just firearms. Is that really what you believe?
Another interesting thing you seem to believe is that guns cause suicide and homicide. You explicitly stated it. Again, is that really what you believe?

Tell us this. Since you seem to believe that a home known to have no firearms is of less interest to thieves than one that does, why do we not see signs posted in front yards everywhere proclaiming the house has no weapons? I'll help you answer that since I don't believe you will give an honest answer. We don't see those signs because the opposite is true. People understand that publicly announcing your house has no firearms while your neighbor has no such sign makes your house a target.


----------



## Rogue AI (Jan 24, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> what rights? your right to murder your spouse?  Your right to terrorize your neighbors?   The second Amendment was about militias, not gun ownership.  The Founding Slave Rapists never meant for guns to be owned by the great unwashed.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


How did Alexander Hamilton die? Be specific, then go ahead and tell me all about militias. You fucking morons have no clue about anything. Educate yourself before attempting to infringe on my rights.


----------



## Jarlaxle (Jan 24, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> That looks "normal" to you, Ditchweed?  Sadly, it probably does.



Random guy with glasses and a beard. You could walk past him on the street and have no idea who he is.


----------



## Independentthinker (Jan 24, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> The biggest problem in Ohio is that our gun laws simply are not strong enough. Domestic violence policy expert Julia Webber serves as the implementation director of the Gifford’s Law Center, a national organization striving to make America safer by working to end gun violence.
> 
> “So, unfortunately, and tragically, too many people who have lost their lives as a result of domestic violence and how often that’s been connected to use of firearms,” said Webber.
> 
> ...


What the left never understands is that bad people will get both guns and ammunition if they want them. You can't expect gun control legislation is going to stop these people from getting guns and ammo. It's just not reality.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jan 24, 2022)

@ Julia Weber:    FO


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 24, 2022)

Independentthinker said:


> What the left never understands is that bad people will get both guns and ammunition if they want them. You can't expect gun control legislation is going to stop these people from getting guns and ammo. It's just not reality.



True but leftism is not based on reality, it's based on fantasy.  

If we could find a way to stop bad guys from getting guns, we would have done so with recreational narcotics already that's killing over 100K a year right now.  They've been illegal my entire life and we have a worse problem today than we had 30 years ago.


----------



## Independentthinker (Jan 24, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> True but leftism is not based on reality, it's based on fantasy.
> 
> If we could find a way to stop bad guys from getting guns, we would have done so with recreational narcotics already that's killing over 100K a year right now.  They've been illegal my entire life and we have a worse problem today than we had 30 years ago.


There is a way that most bad guys can be kept from obtaining guns and ammo - keep dangerous criminals locked up instead of sending them in and out of the ever revolving door ten or twenty times.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 24, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> I swear, you are so demonic you can't even stop yourself from this compulsive lying problem of yours. Trump wrecked the economy is something an 8 year old can tell you you're full of shit on. You're like that guy at a formal party with his fly open exposing his underwear. Everybody is laughing at you but you have no clue as to why.



You go around parties looking at other dude's crotches?  

Trump got voted out by 8 million votes... clearly a lot of people thought he wrecked the economy. 



Ray From Cleveland said:


> So how were you able to dig into your neighbors story Mrs Cravits? How do you know the police didn't take away the gun he used? You do realize that most of us gun owners have more than one firearm, don't you?



This guy didn't have enough money to buy gasoline for his car, much less buy a second gun.  



Ray From Cleveland said:


> I know you've never been in a gun store in your life, but let me tell you they are busy at times. They don't have time to be calling people about a customer. Even if they did, what makes the person they are calling legit? The gun store owner only sells guns, that's it. If it's approved by the government, that's all the gun owner needs to sell a firearm to anybody regardless what their opinion of them is. They are not responsible for what a person does with the product they sold them. Can you sue a car dealership because they sold a car to somebody that got drunk and hit you? Of course not, that would be stupid.



Cars aren't designed to kill people.  Guns are.   I was in a gun store once...  when I used to be right wing, but really had no desire to buy a gun, even when I lived in Cicero, which was a shitty neighborhood.  Then I realized it was probably a better idea to get the fuck out of Cicero and move to a nice neighborhood. 

After 11 years in the Army, with an MOS of 76Y, the last thing I wanted to ever see again was a gun.  

Back to gun stores...  If you started holding them accountable to who they sell to, you'd be amazed how fast they'd develop a system to weed out the bad guys.   The problem is, selling to the bad guys is their business model.  That way you scare everyone else into wanting a gun, like I considered buying one when I lived in Cicero. 



Ray From Cleveland said:


> laws very frojm state to state. In Ohio, anybody selling tobacco products must have a sign on their door they do not sell tobacco to anybody under the age of 21, and must card every customer regardless of their obvious age.


That's nice.  I'm betting it barely enforced, especially with regular customers.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 24, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> This guy didn't have enough money to buy gasoline for his car, much less buy a second gun.



Must be a nice place you live in if people can't afford a gun.  Sounds like this guy had more problems than cancer if he couldn't figure out how to live within his means.  



JoeB131 said:


> Back to gun stores... If you started holding them accountable to who they sell to, you'd be amazed how fast they'd develop a system to weed out the bad guys. The problem is, selling to the bad guys is their business model. That way you scare everyone else into wanting a gun, like I considered buying one when I lived in Cicero.



Great, then the gun seller could refuse to sell guns to any blacks.  Make it safer for everybody.  

I know you communists would love to hold somebody accountable for what another person does, but that doesn't fly in a non-communist country.  Here every individual is responsible for their own actions, not the actions of other people.  



JoeB131 said:


> That's nice. I'm betting it barely enforced, especially with regular customers.



Regular customers who had their ID checked by the same clerk knows the customer is of age and does carry an ID.  My mother likes a certain kind of cigarettes nobody carries except Walgreens, so I take her to the same Walgreens every month for her to buy her carton and she gets carded every time.  Half the time the clerk apologizes to her stating he (or she) has no choice.  It's the law.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Jan 24, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Again. Take away his gun. He's not a danger to others, and he's not a danger to himself.



  Someone who does not know better than to carelessly discharge a firearm in a populated area is a danger to others; and taking away his firearm does nothing to change that.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Jan 24, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> I know you communists would love to hold somebody accountable for what another person does, but that doesn't fly in a non-communist country. Here every individual is responsible for their own actions, not the actions of other people.



  Ties right in with CrimIncel Joe's aversion to acknowledge the responsibility of criminals for their own actions, and its drive to make all sorts of excuses, blaming everything and anyone but the actual criminal, for the acts of that criminal..


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 24, 2022)

Bob Blaylock said:


> Ties right in with CrimIncel Joe's aversion to acknowledge the responsibility of criminals for their own actions, and its drive to make all sorts of excuses, blaming everything and anyone but the actual criminal, for the acts of that criminal..



It's how evil works.  Cops give commands to a black suspect.  He refuses to obey those commands and makes a move giving them reason to believe he's drawing a weapon so they shoot him.  Blame the cops--not the suspect.  

Illegals are coming across our border untested and unvaxed.  Don't blame the invaders, blame American business owners for hiring them whether they know they're illegal or not. 

A person applies to purchase a firearm to do harm or cause death to others.  The government approves of his application and he buys a gun and kills his wife.  Don't blame the killer, blame the shop owner who legally sold him a gun.  

Violent crime increased in nearly all commie cities by 30% or more because the lib judges keep letting criminals back out into the streets, and the lib politicians weaken or de-fund the police.  Don't blame the lib judges, politicians or lib prosecutors, blame the NRA because they support the 2nd Amendment and armed law abiding citizens.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 25, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> Great, then the gun seller could refuse to sell guns to any blacks. Make it safer for everybody.
> 
> I know you communists would love to hold somebody accountable for what another person does, but that doesn't fly in a non-communist country. Here every individual is responsible for their own actions, not the actions of other people.



The thing is, the gun industry IS responsible for flooding our streets with guns.  They fight every sensible attempt to keep guns out of the wrong hands at ever turn.   The one time a court held them responsible, they ran off to Congress to get special protections that most industries wouldn't enjoy. 



Ray From Cleveland said:


> Regular customers who had their ID checked by the same clerk knows the customer is of age and does carry an ID. My mother likes a certain kind of cigarettes nobody carries except Walgreens, so I take her to the same Walgreens every month for her to buy her carton and she gets carded every time. Half the time the clerk apologizes to her stating he (or she) has no choice. It's the law.



So you've kind of pointed out WHY a special ID wouldn't work.  Besides the fact that it would require you to get a DUI to get the special ID, at some point, the bartender would be used to that person and probably wouldn't check to see if his ID status changed.

Breathalyzer on every car.  That would work.  Takes out the human factor.  



Bob Blaylock said:


> Ties right in with @CrimIncel Joe's aversion to acknowledge the responsibility of criminals for their own actions, and its drive to make all sorts of excuses, blaming everything and anyone but the actual criminal, for the acts of that criminal..



Takes two to Tango, Mormon Bob.  Gun sellers know they are selling to bad guys... they just don't care.  Bad guys with guns are good for business.  It keeps people like you scared and wanting guns of your own.  



Ray From Cleveland said:


> It's how evil works. Cops give commands to a black suspect. He refuses to obey those commands and makes a move giving them reason to believe he's drawing a weapon so they shoot him. Blame the cops--not the suspect.


Uh, yeah, the cops are supposed to know better.  Hello... don't be stupid. Kind of self-preservation, I don't want to be shot during a traffic stop because some loser like Timothy Loehman was able to get a job at a police department after another PD found him mentally unstable. 



Ray From Cleveland said:


> Illegals are coming across our border untested and unvaxed. Don't blame the invaders, blame American business owners for hiring them whether they know they're illegal or not.



They wouldn't come  here if people weren't hiring them. 



Ray From Cleveland said:


> A person applies to purchase a firearm to do harm or cause death to others. The government approves of his application and he buys a gun and kills his wife. Don't blame the killer, blame the shop owner who legally sold him a gun.



Yes, the same sellers that made the standard for gun selling so lax that they can't catch the bad guys.  



Ray From Cleveland said:


> Violent crime increased in nearly all commie cities by 30% or more because the lib judges keep letting criminals back out into the streets, and the lib politicians weaken or de-fund the police. Don't blame the lib judges, politicians or lib prosecutors, blame the NRA because they support the 2nd Amendment and armed law abiding citizens.



Violent crime increased because Trump let Covid wreck the economy, and people were stuck at home.  Most violent crime is people who know each other.  Or as Sarte once said, "Hell is other people".


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 25, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> The thing is, the gun industry IS responsible for flooding our streets with guns.  They fight every sensible attempt to keep guns out of the wrong hands at ever turn.   The one time a court held them responsible, they ran off to Congress to get special protections that most industries wouldn't enjoy.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Violent crime is up in commie cities, not the entire country that was also closed down.  Watching the news yesterday I learned that your commie town already had five kids gunned down, and it's not even the end of January yet alone the end of the year.  Trump has been out of office for over a year but you still have the same idiot Mayor and prosecutor.  And you still have the strictest gun laws in the country.  Only in commie liberal land does 2+2 not equal 4.  

But hey!  Keep letting your criminals go that were busted carrying illegal guns.  Keep letting violent offenders get off with a slap on the hand.  Keep making it harder and harder on your police force to do their job.  I'm sure the Trump syndrome will wear off in your city at some point.


----------



## 2aguy (Jan 25, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Yes, because this guy looks perfectly normal. You should totally sell him an assault rifle with a 100 round clip.
> 
> View attachment 592006
> Don't check with his school, which was in the process of throwing him out for mental instability, or check with his family.  Nope, just rely on the Federal Background check system which was intentionally underfunded at the insistence of the NRA.



Over 330 million people in the U.S.

600 million guns in the U.S.

Number of mass public shootings in 2021...

6

That means 6 individuals out of over 330 million people decided to illegally use guns to murder people in mass public shootings...

Total killed in the 6 mass public shootings....

43

Deer kille 200 people every year

lawn mowers kill between 90-100 every year

ladders kill 300 people every year

bathtubs kill 350 people every year...

Cars killed over 39,000 people in 2019....

Trying to justify the extreme gun control laws you want because 6 individuals used guns illegally is stupid and silly........

Americans have 600 million guns....they use those guns 1.1 million times a year to stop rapes, robberies, murders, beatings, stabbings and mass public shootings....

The Department of Justice puts that number at 1.5 million....

The 2021 Firearm survey puts it at 1.67 million....

You are an idiot.


----------



## 2aguy (Jan 25, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> The thing is, the gun industry IS responsible for flooding our streets with guns.  They fight every sensible attempt to keep guns out of the wrong hands at ever turn.   The one time a court held them responsible, they ran off to Congress to get special protections that most industries wouldn't enjoy.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




*The thing is, the gun industry IS responsible for flooding our streets with guns.  They fight every sensible attempt to keep guns out of the wrong hands at ever turn. 

Wrong........we have every law we need to arrest and jail gun criminals.....we catch them, and then what happens?*

*The democrat party prosecutors either refuse to charge them at all, even when they are on video shooting at each other on a public street......they plea bargain away the gun charge to reduce the sentences.....and then the judges give them bail, no cash bail, or ankle monitoring, and then light sentences...*


*We have all the laws we need...your party, the party founded, as you say, by slave rapists......is the problem.....not normal gun owners.*


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 25, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> Violent crime is up in commie cities, not the entire country that was also closed down. Watching the news yesterday I learned that your commie town already had five kids gunned down, and it's not even the end of January yet alone the end of the year. Trump has been out of office for over a year but you still have the same idiot Mayor and prosecutor. And you still have the strictest gun laws in the country.


Chicago hasn't had strict gun laws since the McDonald decision invalidated them.  Overnight, gun stores popped up in the city and our murder rate doubled. 




Ray From Cleveland said:


> But hey! Keep letting your criminals go that were busted carrying illegal guns. Keep letting violent offenders get off with a slap on the hand. Keep making it harder and harder on your police force to do their job. I'm sure the Trump syndrome will wear off in your city at some point.



Hey, well before BLM demonstrations, the cops didn't do a great job.  In 2018, they only cleared 17% of homicides.  



2aguy said:


> bathtubs kill 350 people every year...


Yup, you can always tell when he's getting flustered when he talks about bathtubs.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 25, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Chicago hasn't had strict gun laws since the McDonald decision invalidated them. Overnight, gun stores popped up in the city and our murder rate doubled.



And probably very few if any of those used in murders came from those gun stores.  The Giffords center rates states by most restrictive gun laws to the least.  The most restrictive are in category A and least restrictive in category F.  Ill falls into category A. 









						Giffords Annual Gun Law Scorecard
					

Year after year, the evidence is clear: strong gun laws save lives. Is your state doing enough?




					giffords.org
				







JoeB131 said:


> Hey, well before BLM demonstrations, the cops didn't do a great job. In 2018, they only cleared 17% of homicides.



So what do you expect?  You have mass amounts of murders there, commie leadership, and only so many detectives.


----------



## Superbadbrutha (Jan 25, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> Violent crime is up in commie cities, not the entire country that was also closed down.  Watching the news yesterday I learned that your commie town already had five kids gunned down, and it's not even the end of January yet alone the end of the year.  Trump has been out of office for over a year but you still have the same idiot Mayor and prosecutor.  And you still have the strictest gun laws in the country.  Only in commie liberal land does 2+2 not equal 4.
> 
> But hey!  Keep letting your criminals go that were busted carrying illegal guns.  Keep letting violent offenders get off with a slap on the hand.  Keep making it harder and harder on your police force to do their job.  I'm sure the Trump syndrome will wear off in your city at some point.


This coming from the man who thinks it is ok for a domestic violence abuser to own a gun.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 25, 2022)

Superbadbrutha said:


> This coming from the man who thinks it is ok for a domestic violence abuser to own a gun.



No, I said a person convicted of a misdemeanor domestic violence which includes yelling and making threats.


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe (Jan 25, 2022)

SavannahMann said:


> Question 21i on the ATF form 4473 asks if the purchaser has ever been convicted of misdemeanor Domestic Violence. So Domestic Violence is already a disqualifying issue for ownership of a weapon.
> 
> Surrender of weapons is a common and routine condition for Bail prior to trials.
> 
> So what is the problem, exactly?


The problem, is they want to ban guns.


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe (Jan 25, 2022)

Superbadbrutha said:


> This coming from the man who thinks it is ok for a domestic violence abuser to own a gun.


Is it ok for a domestic violence abuser to own a knife?  Hammer?  Baseball bat?


----------



## AZrailwhale (Jan 25, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> You go around parties looking at other dude's crotches?
> 
> Trump got voted out by 8 million votes... clearly a lot of people thought he wrecked the economy.
> 
> ...


So, you were a REMF supply clerk.  Probably the only time you touched a weapon was annual qualification, or an unloaded weapon on guard duty.  BFD.


----------



## AZrailwhale (Jan 25, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Chicago hasn't had strict gun laws since the McDonald decision invalidated them.  Overnight, gun stores popped up in the city and our murder rate doubled.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Violent felons don't buy guns from gun stores. they can't.  Before McDonald, Chicago's government's excuse was that the guns were coming from surrounding areas where they weren't banned.  Now I guess they are trying to blame it on the new gun stores in their own city.  Liberals always have an excuse when their stupid programs fail and it's never their fault.


----------



## Superbadbrutha (Jan 25, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> No, I said a person convicted of a misdemeanor domestic violence which includes yelling and making threats.





Ray From Cleveland said:


> No, I said a person convicted of a misdemeanor domestic violence which includes yelling and making threats.


Verbal and emotional abuse are nonphysical forms of domestic violence. While you may not feel you are being abused if you have no physical injuries, emotional abuse can be just as damaging to you mentally and psychologically as physical abuse.* In many cases, emotional or verbal abuse can also lead to physical abuse.* Verbal, emotional and psychological abuse are common precursors to physical violence in domestic abuse situations.




__





						Can Verbal Abuse & Emotional Abuse Turn to Physical Abuse?
					

Are verbal altercations that lead to emotional distress a precursor of domestic abuse? Our Solana Beach family law attorneys examine.




					www.ratzerfamilylaw.com


----------



## Ivan88 (Jan 25, 2022)

Biggest Problem in America about firearms is the Politicos who routinely vote to torture, maim and kill millions of people around the world, with their official militia, and they spend many hundreds of billions of $ every year doing it, and shaming America.
The Shit head politicos could have rebuilt the world multiple times with the wealth they have wasted on their drunken murderous binges.


----------



## Superbadbrutha (Jan 25, 2022)

Wild Bill Kelsoe said:


> Is it ok for a domestic violence abuser to own a knife?  Hammer?  Baseball bat?


No they should be only allowed to own a cupcake.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 25, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> And probably very few if any of those used in murders came from those gun stores. The Giffords center rates states by most restrictive gun laws to the least. The most restrictive are in category A and least restrictive in category F. Ill falls into category A.



That's a leper with the most fingers kind of accolade.  First, you weren't talking about Illinois, you were talking about Chicago specifically.  Nice moving the goalposts, Ray.  Second, FLORIDA gets a C-.  Fucking Florida, where you can shoot an unarmed kid buying candy and call it "self-defense".  



Ray From Cleveland said:


> So what do you expect? You have mass amounts of murders there, commie leadership, and only so many detectives.


Yet they had enough detectives to prove Jussie was a big fibber.   It's amazing how much progress they can make solving cases when they actually WANT To solve a case.  



AZrailwhale said:


> Violent felons don't buy guns from gun stores. they can't. Before McDonald, Chicago's government's excuse was that the guns were coming from surrounding areas where they weren't banned. Now I guess they are trying to blame it on the new gun stores in their own city. Liberals always have an excuse when their stupid programs fail and it's never their fault.



Wrong again.  Most of the guns recovered from Crimes were bought from Gun Stores in Indiana.  One store was the source of 850 recovered guns. 









						'Eye-popping numbers': Chicago sues Indiana gun store tied to 850 firearms recovered from crime scenes
					

The city of Chicago is suing an Indiana gun store it says is one of the main sources of illicit firearms for the criminal market.



					www.usatoday.com
				




And this is the problem.  Illinois actually has reasonably good laws to keep guns out of the wrong hands, while still allowing law abiding citizens to enjoy their pointless fetish. Yet Indiana has crappy laws, and the bad guys just drive over the border.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 25, 2022)

AZrailwhale said:


> So, you were a REMF supply clerk. Probably the only time you touched a weapon was annual qualification, or an unloaded weapon on guard duty. BFD.



Well, actually, I was in charge of the arms vault, so it was my job to make sure that every one of those guns got back to where they belonged and they were all in good operating order.   Oh, yes, and I was assigned to an infantry unit.  Nice thing about 76Y.  Every unit in the army needed them.  Downside.. Limited promotion possibilities.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 25, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> That's a leper with the most fingers kind of accolade. First, you weren't talking about Illinois, you were talking about Chicago specifically. Nice moving the goalposts, Ray. Second, FLORIDA gets a C-. Fucking Florida, where you can shoot an unarmed kid buying candy and call it "self-defense"



So what state is Chicago in?  If the state has the most restrictive laws than so do the cities within it.  Commiefornia was rated number one and how many murders do we have in that state?  

Gun laws don't work and never have because bad guys will always be able to get them.  




JoeB131 said:


> Yet they had enough detectives to prove Jussie was a big fibber. It's amazing how much progress they can make solving cases when they actually WANT To solve a case.



That case was so amateur that the detectives laughed as they looked at evidence.  Murders are different.  Somebody gets killed by a bullet from a stolen gun, nobody seen a thing.  The people suspected of actually seeing something won't talk with police.  Even if they have a suspect in mind, then it's the chore of trying to find enough evidence for an arrest.


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe (Jan 25, 2022)

Superbadbrutha said:


> No they should be only allowed to own a cupcake.


Are you suggesting a background check to buy a hammer, steak knife, baseball bat, axe, etc.?


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 25, 2022)

Superbadbrutha said:


> Verbal and emotional abuse are nonphysical forms of domestic violence. While you may not feel you are being abused if you have no physical injuries, emotional abuse can be just as damaging to you mentally and psychologically as physical abuse.* In many cases, emotional or verbal abuse can also lead to physical abuse.* Verbal, emotional and psychological abuse are common precursors to physical violence in domestic abuse situations.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



And your point is what exactly?


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe (Jan 25, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> That's a leper with the most fingers kind of accolade.  First, you weren't talking about Illinois, you were talking about Chicago specifically.  Nice moving the goalposts, Ray.  Second, FLORIDA gets a C-.  Fucking Florida, where you can shoot an unarmed kid buying candy and call it "self-defense".
> 
> 
> Yet they had enough detectives to prove Jussie was a big fibber.   It's amazing how much progress they can make solving cases when they actually WANT To solve a case.
> ...


Sounds like the bad guys are the problem, not the guns.


----------



## Rigby5 (Jan 25, 2022)

SavannahMann said:


> Question 21i on the ATF form 4473 asks if the purchaser has ever been convicted of misdemeanor Domestic Violence. So Domestic Violence is already a disqualifying issue for ownership of a weapon.
> 
> Surrender of weapons is a common and routine condition for Bail prior to trials.
> 
> So what is the problem, exactly?



A misdemeanor domestic violence is not a felony, so it is illegal to use to deny purchase.
And they are not just using convictions, but mere charges.
Nor have I ever had to surrender any weapons as a condition for bail.
It is illegal to put someone in danger by taking their weapons without a conviction.
And even then I do not see it as having a legal basis.


----------



## Rigby5 (Jan 25, 2022)

Otis Mayfield said:


> 92% of all women killed with guns in high-income countries in 2015 were from the US.
> 
> In 2015:
> 800-1000 women are killed with guns.
> ...



That is totally wrong.
Everyone in all countries have total access to guns if they want to.
In the Mideast, it is essentially a religious requirement to be armed, and yet there is less domestic violence with firearms.
The US has lots of violence because it is so materialistic, intense, expensive, stressful, unnatural, etc.
It is the same reason the US has the largest prison population % in the world.
Nothing to do with firearms, and you can easily get firearms in any country, just as you can get drugs.


----------



## Rigby5 (Jan 25, 2022)

bear513 said:


> So with me a record of misdemeanor domestic violence, you telling me I can go to a gun shop in Ohio and legally buy a gun?



When I bought a pistol at a pawn shop, I did not even have to fill out any BATF form.
Seems pawn shops are exempt since they only sell used firearms.


----------



## SavannahMann (Jan 25, 2022)

Rigby5 said:


> A misdemeanor domestic violence is not a felony, so it is illegal to use to deny purchase.
> And they are not just using convictions, but mere charges.
> Nor have I ever had to surrender any weapons as a condition for bail.
> It is illegal to put someone in danger by taking their weapons without a conviction.
> And even then I do not see it as having a legal basis.



Ok. Let’s educate you my friend. The Lautenberg Amendment is law. And has been upheld by the lower courts so far. So yes. Domestic Violence. Even Misdemeanor level conviction strips the individual of their rights.

screaming that it’s not fair won’t change the facts.

Second. Conditions of bail. Bail conditions are not universal. They are managed on a case by case basis. And surrendering weapons is a common, but not required nor universal condition. It is extremely common for violent offenders. But it is not universal.









						'Toxic combination' of drugs, firearms sends NC man charged in Capitol riot back to jail
					

James Tate Grant was arrested last month for suspected DUI and possession of an AR-15 while on pretrial release.



					www.wusa9.com
				




Possession of a firearm is reason to revoke the bond if it was a condition of release.


----------



## Rigby5 (Jan 25, 2022)

SavannahMann said:


> Ok. Let’s educate you my friend. The Lautenberg Amendment is law. And has been upheld by the lower courts so far. So yes. Domestic Violence. Even Misdemeanor level conviction strips the individual of their rights.
> 
> screaming that it’s not fair won’t change the facts.
> 
> ...



Oh I do not doubt things have changed.
But law is supposed to be based on principles that do not change.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 25, 2022)

SavannahMann said:


> Ok. Let’s educate you my friend. The Lautenberg Amendment is law. And has been upheld by the lower courts so far. So yes. Domestic Violence. Even Misdemeanor level conviction strips the individual of their rights.



Then what is the point of having any constitutional rights at all if they can be taken away from people because they yelled at another person or made an empty threat of violence against them?  If we are allowed to do that, then we can do the same for the right to peacefully assemble, freedom of speech, warrantless search and seizures by the government?  And mind you we are at a time where the commies are trying to pass a bill forcing states to rescind their restrictions of ex-felons from voting.


----------



## Batcat (Jan 26, 2022)

Anomalism said:


> All we have to do is look to Europe to see where this is going with the left. Of course they're going to take the guns. They do it in every country that they can.


This nation is not in Europe. Even if liberals pass laws requiring all civilian owned firearms be turned in that doesn’t mean it will happen.


----------



## Superbadbrutha (Jan 26, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> And your point is what exactly?


Verbal domestic abusers usually turn into violent domestic abusers.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 26, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> So what state is Chicago in? If the state has the most restrictive laws than so do the cities within it. Commiefornia was rated number one and how many murders do we have in that state?
> 
> Gun laws don't work and never have because bad guys will always be able to get them.



Gun laws don't work because we don't have a consistent national gun law with enforcement.  

California has the strongest gun laws, and they come in 44th in Gun deaths. 
Illinois has 8th in gun laws, and they come in 35th in gun deaths. 


MEANWHILE- 
Mississippi is 50th in gun laws, and they come in SECOND in gun deaths. (The first is Alaska, but that might be an anomaly because it is sparsely populated.)
Louisiana is 33rd in gun laws, and comes in sixth in gun deaths. 
Your state comes in 25th in laws, and 22nd in gun deaths. 




Ray From Cleveland said:


> That case was so amateur that the detectives laughed as they looked at evidence. Murders are different. Somebody gets killed by a bullet from a stolen gun, nobody seen a thing. The people suspected of actually seeing something won't talk with police. Even if they have a suspect in mind, then it's the chore of trying to find enough evidence for an arrest.



Ray always has an excuse. So you mean the police would actually have to do WORK for those high salaries?  OH MY GOD, what a concept.  I thought this job was just driving around, hassling black drivers and eating fucking donuts.  You mean they are supposed to conduct INVESTIGATIONS?  Who knew?  

They don't investigate murders because they don't care.  When that female police officer was shot last year, they turned over every rock until they caught her killers.   If it's some black person, meh, just phone it in, it's not like you are going to get fired or anything. those donuts aren't going to eat themselves.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 26, 2022)

Rigby5 said:


> In the Mideast, it is essentially a religious requirement to be armed, and yet there is less domestic violence with firearms.



Um, yeah, given every middle east country has been overthrown at least once in my lifetime, I'm not sure that's something we want to emulate.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 26, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Gun laws don't work because we don't have a consistent national gun law with enforcement.
> 
> California has the strongest gun laws, and they come in 44th in Gun deaths.
> Illinois has 8th in gun laws, and they come in 35th in gun deaths.
> ...



There is only so many detectives to solve an overwhelming amount of murders in commie cities like yours. 

_“So far, 329 murders have been cleared, more than the department has solved in 15 years,” he said. “Something changed.”

Not all cases are cleared with an arrest and charges, however. Of the 329 cases, 134 were cleared by a category the department calls “exceptional,” which means police have identified a suspect, but either the suspect is dead or prosecutors said there was not enough evidence to approve charges._









						Chicago police’s homicide clearance rate dips in 2020 after improvement in recent years
					

After chipping away at its persistently low homicide clearance rate, the number of murders solved by Chicago police has dropped in 2020, department officials said Monday.




					www.chicagotribune.com
				




The police are doing their jobs, but it's much tougher in a city that fosters crime instead of victims.  Yes you think their job is driving around eating doughnuts, because you think real life is what you see in movies on television.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 26, 2022)

Superbadbrutha said:


> Verbal domestic abusers usually turn into violent domestic abusers.



No because the point is that you get charged with misdemeanor domestic violence for simply screaming or making threat with no or little physical contact involved.  When you hurt somebody is when you are charged with felony domestic violence which is not what we are talking about here.


----------



## SavannahMann (Jan 26, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> Then what is the point of having any constitutional rights at all if they can be taken away from people because they yelled at another person or made an empty threat of violence against them?  If we are allowed to do that, then we can do the same for the right to peacefully assemble, freedom of speech, warrantless search and seizures by the government?  And mind you we are at a time where the commies are trying to pass a bill forcing states to rescind their restrictions of ex-felons from voting.



Rights are never absolute. They are conditional. They are conditional upon your behavior. Your freedom of speech does not give you the right to threaten to murder someone. Your freedom of Religion does not give you the right to sacrifice animals or people to your god. 

Your rights are always conditional, including the right to keep and bear arms. You have posted here many times about how irresponsible it is to allow violent criminals out of jail where they commit more crimes. What this thread started out with is an effort to reduce the numbers of violent crimes that are committed by potentially or allegedly violent people. 

To cover this again. Between the point of A) The action which got the suspect arrested. And B) Where his guilt is adjudged, the advocate of the change wants to have the suspects disarmed. 

Again surrendering firearms during bail, is common. There are a number of news stories that cover the situation repeatedly. People accused, not convicted of a crime, released on conditional bail. Conditional bail, means that they do not engage in specific activity during their time out of jail. 

Conditions have included not associating with known criminals. Not drinking or using drugs. And not having access to weapons is another of those conditions in many cases. 

This is not a permanent revocation of the right to keep and bear arms. That will be decided after the trial, when the court determines if you are Guilty of the crimes. 

If the court decides you are not guilty, then your weapons are supposed to be returned to you. 

Now, what is wrong with that? We do it a thousand times a day in this nation. We do it from coast to coast, and border to border. We are doing it even as you read this. A Judge is setting conditions of bail including the restriction of owning or possessing firearms. 

2/3 of Domestic Violence Offenders are rearrested within five years. 









						The Lasting Consequences of Repeat Domestic Violence Charges
					

Repeat offenses can change your life in countless ways.



					www.monroekinglaw.com
				




These are the habitual offenders, the repeat offenders you rail about when it is a black guy in Chicago. These are the people you scream the Liberals are trying to destroy the country by not locking them up and throwing away the key. 

Now, the Liberals are arguing that these folks should, until their case is concluded, lose the right to possess firearms. Now, you and I know they can still get their hands on guns, but in doing so they risk a Felony Conviction later. 

So what about this particular set of circumstances speaks to you personally? It isn’t the ideal of the outrage. We are talking about people accused of crimes which all too often lead to murder. Is it you who was accused of it at some point?


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 26, 2022)

SavannahMann said:


> Rights are never absolute. They are conditional. They are conditional upon your behavior. Your freedom of speech does not give you the right to threaten to murder someone. Your freedom of Religion does not give you the right to sacrifice animals or people to your god.
> 
> Your rights are always conditional, including the right to keep and bear arms. You have posted here many times about how irresponsible it is to allow violent criminals out of jail where they commit more crimes. What this thread started out with is an effort to reduce the numbers of violent crimes that are committed by potentially or allegedly violent people.
> 
> ...



The OP talks about a permanent suspension of a right, not a temporary restraint until their trial date.  Convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence does not go away.  It's a judgement that lasts a lifetime.  I have no problem with a judge suspending their right to a firearm for a week or two.  The cases I spoke about in Chicago involve an arrest of a felon who still carries guns around and let out on bail the very same day.  In select cases they simply get another one and commit theft, assault and even death before their trial.  An arrest of being in possession of a firearm as a felon should have bail set at a half-million dollars and a 10 year minimum prison sentence. 

My point is that rights being taken away over something so innocuous as words is a constitutional violation.  You don't have to threaten somebody with murder to be arrested and convicted of domestic misdemeanor charges.  You and your brother could get into an argument and you say I'm going to bash your head in.  That according to your link and others I have found can be used to charge somebody for a domestic misdemeanor and again, comes with a permanent ban on every being in possession of a firearm for life if convicted.


----------



## Rigby5 (Jan 26, 2022)

Superbadbrutha said:


> Verbal domestic abusers usually turn into violent domestic abusers.



Anticipation is not the basis for government use of force to violate rights.


----------



## Rigby5 (Jan 26, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Gun laws don't work because we don't have a consistent national gun law with enforcement.
> 
> California has the strongest gun laws, and they come in 44th in Gun deaths.
> Illinois has 8th in gun laws, and they come in 35th in gun deaths.
> ...



Wrong.
CA has a gun death rate of 9.5 per 100, 000, so is rated 16th and is above average in gun deaths.





						Stats of the States - Firearm Mortality
					






					www.cdc.gov
				




That is worse than even IL, which is 8, and Iowa, which is 6.7.

There is zero correlation between gun deaths and legislation, and there never could be because one intent on murder is not at all ever going to be deterred by legislation penalizing the illegal acquisition of a gun.
It could never be at all difficult for anyone to illegally obtain a firearm because the underground cash economy of illegal drugs has to always be awash in guns.

The real point of gun laws is to make money for the government, and make people more passive, frightened, and dependent upon police.


----------



## Rigby5 (Jan 26, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Um, yeah, given every middle east country has been overthrown at least once in my lifetime, I'm not sure that's something we want to emulate.



Nonsense.
Instability in the Mideast is entirely due to western imperialism and colonialism.
About the only time there was a popular uprising was Algeria throwing out the French occupiers.
When the Arab Spring started with the rebellion in Tunisia, 
And clearly that was over foreign colonialism.
Zine El Abidine Ben Ali was a foreign puppet.
{...
President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali had ruled Tunisia since 1987, mostly as a one-party state with the Democratic Constitutional Rally (RCD). His government was characterised by the development of Tunisia's private sector in favor of foreign investment, and the repression of political opposition. Foreign media and NGOs criticised his government, which was supported by the United States and France. As a result, the initial reactions to Ben Ali's abuses by the U.S. and France were muted, and most instances of socio-political protest in the country, when they occurred at all, rarely made major news headlines.[34]
...}


----------



## Rigby5 (Jan 26, 2022)

SavannahMann said:


> Rights are never absolute. They are conditional. They are conditional upon your behavior. Your freedom of speech does not give you the right to threaten to murder someone. Your freedom of Religion does not give you the right to sacrifice animals or people to your god.
> 
> Your rights are always conditional, including the right to keep and bear arms. You have posted here many times about how irresponsible it is to allow violent criminals out of jail where they commit more crimes. What this thread started out with is an effort to reduce the numbers of violent crimes that are committed by potentially or allegedly violent people.
> 
> ...



Rights are conditional, but ONLY in compromise to protect the rights of others.
Federal gun control is totally and completely illegal, and serves the rights of no one at all.
The federal government has ZERO constitutional authorization for any federal gun laws.
Not a single one can possibly be legal in any way.


----------



## SavannahMann (Jan 26, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> The OP talks about a permanent suspension of a right, not a temporary restraint until their trial date.  Convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence does not go away.  It's a judgement that lasts a lifetime.  I have no problem with a judge suspending their right to a firearm for a week or two.  The cases I spoke about in Chicago involve an arrest of a felon who still carries guns around and let out on bail the very same day.  In select cases they simply get another one and commit theft, assault and even death before their trial.  An arrest of being in possession of a firearm as a felon should have bail set at a half-million dollars and a 10 year minimum prison sentence.
> 
> My point is that rights being taken away over something so innocuous as words is a constitutional violation.  You don't have to threaten somebody with murder to be arrested and convicted of domestic misdemeanor charges.  You and your brother could get into an argument and you say I'm going to bash your head in.  That according to your link and others I have found can be used to charge somebody for a domestic misdemeanor and again, comes with a permanent ban on every being in possession of a firearm for life if convicted.



My wife and I were discussing politics. Past, Present, and Future. We used Welfare Reform during the Clinton Admin as an example. Compromise is missing.

In politics and diplomacy, a Compromise is when nobody is happy, but they can live with the outcome.

If we are being honest. The Activist pushing this knows good and well that they aren’t going to get a permanent ban. Like a negotiation, she is asking for it hoping to meet halfway.

Everyone knows she’s not going to get that. But the temporary restriction is possible, and probably necessary. Standing on the hill of the unrestricted right to keep and bear arms while women are being threatened. And killed. By abusive partners is a poor choice.

A couple decades ago the compromise would be a done deal. Now it is all about defeating your enemy. Even if victory does not serve your interests.

In this case your victory will be thrown back in your face every time a woman is killed by her spouse. The result will be a defacto law instead of an actual one. The surrender of firearms will end up being written into every DV bail agreement. And the spouses will sign it with no intention of obeying the clause.

That will lead to weapons violations that are more serious and make the offender a felon. That isn’t good for your cause. It isn’t good for anyone.

This issue is a loser. Not the Second. But defending it in the case of domestic violence offenders. You say harsh words. Everyone hears wife beater.

In 1987 I was going through training to be a Security Guard. A cop from the LAPD was teaching the course. He told us if anyone ever had to use force to arrest a suspect. Tell the crowd the guy was a child molester. People hate them. And their description of events will be in your favor.

So when you say harsh words or vague threat. The regular people are hearing wife beater. Child abuser. And you defending the fellow on principle is not going to go well. It may not be fair. It may not be entirely true. It is realistically what happens. And dealing with the reality as perceived is the first thing any of us have to do.


----------



## Rigby5 (Jan 26, 2022)

The way to make women safer after domestic violence, is for them to get armed and get a divorce.
There is no way to magically make the whole world safe so someone never has to defend themselves.
Is a personal responsibility, not a function of government.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 26, 2022)

SavannahMann said:


> My wife and I were discussing politics. Past, Present, and Future. We used Welfare Reform during the Clinton Admin as an example. Compromise is missing.
> 
> In politics and diplomacy, a Compromise is when nobody is happy, but they can live with the outcome.
> 
> ...



Agreed but sometimes the reality is based on a bunch of lawmakers looking to buy votes at the expense of people not really guilty of anything.  My concern is that the Constitution becomes so fragile to buy a vote that any right we have can be taken away at the slightest infraction of the law such as this misdemeanor we're talking about.  A felon?  That's a different ball game altogether.  

There is no compromising between the parties any longer.  The left went from Democrats to liberals, from liberals to progressives, and now from progressives to socialist Democrats, whatever the hell that is.  The ultimate goal is Communism, and you can't have any common ground between Communism and Constitutionalsim.  You'd have better luck finding common ground between Israel and the Palestinians.  

The left went from legislating on behalf of the country to legislating on what benefits the party.  They want to add two more states, because it would benefit the country?  No, because it would benefit the party.  They want to expand the justices of the Supreme Court.  Why, because it benefits the country?  No, because it benefits the party.  They wouldn't give Trump a dime for his wall, because it benefits the country?  No, because it benefits the party.  If you look close enough, everything they do is on behalf of benefiting the party, including this phony Voters Rights lie they are trying to pass now.  Everything for Big Brother.  

If you listen to honest Palestinians they say the only way for peace is to kill all the Jews.  So what's the half-way point on that, allow them to kill half the Jews?  And this is where we Republicans are today.  Because if we meet them half-way on strengthening their party, it weakens ours by the same degree.  Who in their right mind would do that?  As for asking them to meet us half way on issues that benefit the country, their response is.


----------



## Superbadbrutha (Jan 26, 2022)

Rigby5 said:


> Anticipation is not the basis for government use of force to violate rights.


Just wait until they are dead.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 26, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> There is only so many detectives to solve an overwhelming amount of murders in commie cities like yours.



the CPD has 14,000 cops.  They have maybe 700 murders.   Assuming it take two weeks to resolve a murder case, they could assigned 200 cops to each murder and still be fine.  

They just don't care if it isn't a white person. 



Ray From Cleveland said:


> The police are doing their jobs, but it's much tougher in a city that fosters crime instead of victims. Yes you think their job is driving around eating doughnuts, because you think real life is what you see in movies on television.



Actually, I WISH the cops were as good as the ones on the non-stop Cop-aganda we get on TV.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 26, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> If you listen to honest Palestinians they say the only way for peace is to kill all the Jews. So what's the half-way point on that, allow them to kill half the Jews? And this is where we Republicans are today. Because if we meet them half-way on strengthening their party, it weakens ours by the same degree. Who in their right mind would do that? As for asking them to meet us half way on issues that benefit the country, their response is.



Trump was an illegitimate president. There was no comprimising with him. 

Nothing he proposed benefited the country.  Not One fucking thing.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 26, 2022)

Rigby5 said:


> Wrong.
> CA has a gun death rate of 9.5 per 100, 000, so is rated 16th and is above average in gun deaths.



I was going off the site that Welfare Ray posted.  

Now sit down, shut up and mind your own business.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 26, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> the CPD has 14,000 cops. They have maybe 700 murders. Assuming it take two weeks to resolve a murder case, they could assigned 200 cops to each murder and still be fine.
> 
> They just don't care if it isn't a white person.




Two weeks to solve a murder?  Yeah, they just tell those lab people to hurry their ass up, tell those forensic science people to quit looking into micro scopes and come up with names, they tell the city coroner to start cutting faster. 

Cops are not detectives.  They call them detectives for a reason.



JoeB131 said:


> Actually, I WISH the cops were as good as the ones on the non-stop Cop-aganda we get on TV.



Good.  Start watching more television and perhaps you'll think better of your police force since you can't decipher reality from fiction with severe OCD.


----------



## Captain Caveman (Jan 26, 2022)

Anomalism said:


> All we have to do is look to Europe to see where this is going with the left. Of course they're going to take the guns. They do it in every country that they can.


It's one of two things, you're purposely speaking crap to flame, or you're fucking retarded moron.

I suggest you make an effort to read up on other countries gun laws because you're one heck of a retard.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jan 26, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> It's one of two things, you're purposely speaking crap to flame, or you're fucking retarded moron.
> I suggest you make an effort to read up on other countries gun laws because you're one heck of a retard.


Makes you feel better about yourself when you do that, doesn't it?


----------



## SavannahMann (Jan 26, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> Agreed but sometimes the reality is based on a bunch of lawmakers looking to buy votes at the expense of people not really guilty of anything.  My concern is that the Constitution becomes so fragile to buy a vote that any right we have can be taken away at the slightest infraction of the law such as this misdemeanor we're talking about.  A felon?  That's a different ball game altogether.
> 
> There is no compromising between the parties any longer.  The left went from Democrats to liberals, from liberals to progressives, and now from progressives to socialist Democrats, whatever the hell that is.  The ultimate goal is Communism, and you can't have any common ground between Communism and Constitutionalsim.  You'd have better luck finding common ground between Israel and the Palestinians.
> 
> ...




I agree, to a certain extent. However, I am more centrist. I am liberal on some issues, like Choice. And I am conservative on others, like the Second. I’ve posted before that I’m a member of both the NRA and the ACLU. All of the amendments matter to me, not just one, or excluding one. 

Now, there is a lot of truth regarding where the Democrats are today, but the mirror image of the Conservatives is the same. They have gone from conservative, to radical, on their own as well. 

Now, both sides are extremist, and unreasonable. I honestly give credit to the Republicans of old, as being right about some issues. I honestly give them a hard time for being wrong about some issues. 

Remember, I was one who a year into Trump’s admin said that the opposition to Trump was so unreasonable that if he healed a soldier at Walter Reed with a miracle touch, the Democrats would be demanding he be charged for practicing medicine without a license. 

I can now honestly say the same about Biden. The opposition is unreasonable, not based upon policy, or principles, other than hatred. Now, the childish answer is that they do it too. They did it before, and we’re going to pay them back. 

It doesn’t make sense to live that way. You don’t save a nation that way, you don’t win an argument that way, you only exacerbate the problems. You make it worse. 

This issue is a loser. But the Right will fight it to the death because they won’t even consider trying to compromise. It is all about opposing them no matter what. I honestly think that if the Democrats suddenly announced they were now pro Life, the Republicans would be Pro Choice in an hour just on the knee jerk need to be against them. The reverse is true as well. 

Everyone is so busy trying to destroy THEM they forget what the entire purpose of the argument is, to discuss and debate an issue, not the horrible people on the other side.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 26, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> Two weeks to solve a murder? Yeah, they just tell those lab people to hurry their ass up, tell those forensic science people to quit looking into micro scopes and come up with names, they tell the city coroner to start cutting faster.
> 
> Cops are not detectives. They call them detectives for a reason.



Good point.  More investigating real crime, less pulling people over for bullshit traffic violations.  



Ray From Cleveland said:


> Good. Start watching more television and perhaps you'll think better of your police force since you can't decipher reality from fiction with severe OCD.



Actually, I won't think better of them until they start holding their bad apples to account.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 26, 2022)

SavannahMann said:


> I agree, to a certain extent. However, I am more centrist. I am liberal on some issues, like Choice. And I am conservative on others, like the Second. I’ve posted before that I’m a member of both the NRA and the ACLU. All of the amendments matter to me, not just one, or excluding one.
> 
> Now, there is a lot of truth regarding where the Democrats are today, but the mirror image of the Conservatives is the same. They have gone from conservative, to radical, on their own as well.
> 
> ...



I honestly don't know what you mean by extremest on the right outside of abortion,  but Republicans have always been that way on that one issue.  I don't really believe their stance on it comes from the heart.  Many have to act like it due to keeping the religious vote happy.  I for one am pro-choice because I'm a smaller government Republican.  If people are having abortions, it's really none of my business.  You have to deal with your own conscience, not me.  

I don't know how you can compare the way Republicans are treating Dementia as unreasonable and what they did to Trump.  His entire platform is about reversing everything Trump did or was going to do his second term.  Unlike Trump who gave us a great economy and made policies to benefit most all Americans, the commies still attacked him, not only attacked him, but conducted two phony impeachments with no impeachable offenses.  Can you show me anything the Republicans have done that even compares?  

Criticism of this old fool is not personal like the commies with Trump, the man is ruining our country.  It's costing us a lot of money and for what, to show us that you're going to do everything opposite of Trump?  Besides the great expense of having this joker in the White House, now they want to blow 5 trillion dollars (CBO's estimate) of our tax dollars to mostly buy votes and keep their constituents happy.  Not only that, but unconstitutionally have the federal government takeover our entire election system.  When did Trump or the Republicans do anything close to that?  
So unless you can give me any examples of how the Republicans are anyway like the Democrats, I think your statement was not really very thought out.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 26, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Good point. More investigating real crime, less pulling people over for bullshit traffic violations.



What is it that you don't understand?  Cops don't investigate, they enforce laws.  Detectives investigate.


JoeB131 said:


> Actually, I won't think better of them until they start holding their bad apples to account.



They do, but what you consider bad apples and real bad apples are two different things.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 26, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> What is it that you don't understand? Cops don't investigate, they enforce laws. Detectives investigate.


Detectives are cops, and every officer gets training in investigative techniques... 



Ray From Cleveland said:


> They do, but what you consider bad apples and real bad apples are two different things.


Well, when you approach every police shooting as "The Darkie had it coming", then you probably aren't going see the apple as bad no matter how rotten and wormed filled it is.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 26, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Detectives are cops, and every officer gets training in investigative techniques...



No, detectives were usually once cops, but got the proper training to become a detective.  However cops are not detectives.  They get some minor investigative training, but don't handle serious issues like murder.  That's why the police supervisor calls in detectives on those cases.  All police do is keep people away from the evidence or preserve evidence that may become tainted before the detectives get to the scene. 



JoeB131 said:


> Well, when you approach every police shooting as "The Darkie had it coming", then you probably aren't going see the apple as bad no matter how rotten and wormed filled it is.



And you make my point.  You create these stories in your head and along with the movies you watch, think they are reality.  But they are not, they are nothing more than a person who is in deep need of professional psychological help.


----------



## 1stNickD (Jan 26, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> The biggest problem in Ohio is that our gun laws simply are not strong enough. Domestic violence policy expert Julia Webber serves as the implementation director of the Gifford’s Law Center, a national organization striving to make America safer by working to end gun violence.
> 
> “So, unfortunately, and tragically, too many people who have lost their lives as a result of domestic violence and how often that’s been connected to use of firearms,” said Webber.
> 
> ...


The far left absolutely wants to remove guns from law abiding citizens. once that occurs the constitution an our form of government will be gone in less than 6 weeks. If the let is not removed from congress this year o we will be gone within 6 years, second amendment or not.


----------



## 1stNickD (Jan 26, 2022)

Otis Mayfield said:


> 92% of all women killed with guns in high-income countries in 2015 were from the US.
> 
> In 2015:
> 800-1000 women are killed with guns.
> ...


393 million guns in law abiding USA households. Guns do not kill people... If they did no one would be left alive today... Murderers kill people, and ALMOST all of them are not allowed to own a gun by laws that already exist. And after BLM and antifa and other lunatics have shown their true colors and propensity for murder and violence, no one will deprive me of my ability to defend me and mine. No one.

If you can legally own a gun and you don't, you're a moron. If you shoot someone and its not to defend yourself or another, or they are invading your castle, you are a moron. In either case, but particularly the latter, I don't care what happens to you.


----------



## woodwork201 (Jan 26, 2022)

Flash said:


> These stupid "Red Flag" laws can be a significant source of denying Americans of their Constitutional rights.
> 
> A despicable example of stupid people giving up liberty for a little bit of security.
> 
> If Constitutional rights are going to be taken away it needs to be for a damn good reason and these stupid red flag laws do  not come close to meeting that test.



If constitutional rights are taken away then the Constitution is nothing more than an artifact.

The right to vote is the only right where the Constitution mentions the government's power to take it away in the case of  serious crime.


----------



## woodwork201 (Jan 26, 2022)

Otis Mayfield said:


> If your daughter is in an abusive relationship, and there's a gun in the house, tell her to gtfo.



If your daughter is in an abusive relationship, and there's a gun in the house, tell her to gtfo.


----------



## woodwork201 (Jan 26, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Acquiring a firearm isn’t the issue.
> 
> The issue is domestic violence with firearms already in the home:
> 
> ...


Confiscating guns are neither lawful or constitutional.


----------



## woodwork201 (Jan 26, 2022)

SavannahMann said:


> And of course the Conservatives believe in keeping weapons out of the hands of Convicted Felons.



Not true.  Gun controllers believe in keeping weapons out of the hands of convicted felons.  Conservatives believe in keeping convicted felons who are a threat to society in prison.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 27, 2022)

1stNickD said:


> The far left absolutely wants to remove guns from law abiding citizens. once that occurs the constitution an our form of government will be gone in less than 6 weeks. If the let is not removed from congress this year o we will be gone within 6 years, second amendment or not.



The left has been quite successful using baby steps. 

I'm old enough to remember when they only wanted to remove cigarettes from movie theaters.  That's all they wanted and they would be happy.  Fast forward to today, you can't smoke inside any public place and even outside depending on what state you're in. 

Then they waned for gays to be let out of the closet.  That's all they wanted and they will be happy.  Fast forward to today, states are forced to accept gay marriages against their will, and gays are getting children ahead of a normal couple in adoption.  

I remember when they only wanted to have lead removed from gasoline.  That's all they wanted, a cleaner environment.  Fast forward trillions of dollars, on top of the hundreds of other measures they passed, they want another 5 trillion dollars (3 trillion of that to our debt according to the CBO) for a cleaner environment.  Think they will be happy and stop crying about climate change then?  Don't you believe it. 

So when they tell us they only want X restrictions when it comes to gun, remember what will be down the road when we fast forward that issue .


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 27, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> No, detectives were usually once cops, but got the proper training to become a detective. However cops are not detectives. They get some minor investigative training, but don't handle serious issues like murder. That's why the police supervisor calls in detectives on those cases. All police do is keep people away from the evidence or preserve evidence that may become tainted before the detectives get to the scene.



Meh, you wonder why they bother, given the detectives only seem to take the time to clear 17% of the cases?  What, nobody's confessing?   And we can't beat a fake confession out of people anymore?  (Something that has happened in Chicago, a LOT.  So often the governor had to commute the sentences on everyone on death row because he couldn't say for certainty which cases were tainted by torture).  



Ray From Cleveland said:


> And you make my point. You create these stories in your head and along with the movies you watch, think they are reality. But they are not, they are nothing more than a person who is in deep need of professional psychological help.



says the guy on welfare, who sits next to his police scanner muttering about the darkies.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 27, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> The left has been quite successful using baby steps.
> 
> I'm old enough to remember when they only wanted to remove cigarettes from movie theaters. That's all they wanted and they would be happy. Fast forward to today, you can't smoke inside any public place and even outside depending on what state you're in.



Yes, since then we discovered that second hand smoke is actually bad for you, and you can get sick even if you never picked up a cigarette.  



Ray From Cleveland said:


> Then they waned for gays to be let out of the closet. That's all they wanted and they will be happy. Fast forward to today, states are forced to accept gay marriages against their will, and gays are getting children ahead of a normal couple in adoption.



"Normal"?  You mean straight, right?   If a gay couple can provide a better home than a straight couple because they are in a better place economically, I'm just not seeing the problem.   We have thousands of kids languishing in foster care right now.   



Ray From Cleveland said:


> I remember when they only wanted to have lead removed from gasoline. That's all they wanted, a cleaner environment. Fast forward trillions of dollars, on top of the hundreds of other measures they passed, they want another 5 trillion dollars (3 trillion of that to our debt according to the CBO) for a cleaner environment. Think they will be happy and stop crying about climate change then? Don't you believe it.



Again, progressing science.  We removed lead from the gasoline, which meant we didn't have smog alerts over major cities anymore, which was a common thing back in the 60's.  Then we found out that while getting lead out of the skies was reducing that problem, we had an ADDITIONAL problem of excess CO2 causing global warming.  



Ray From Cleveland said:


> So when they tell us they only want X restrictions when it comes to gun, remember what will be down the road when we fast forward that issue .



That we might not find new problems we'll have to address in the future? 

Again, I have my simple enough solution.  Let the gun industry run the background check system, but THEN let the victims of gun violence sue them when guns get into the wrong hands.  You would be amazed how quickly they get the guns out of the hands of the wrong people after that.


----------



## 22lcidw (Jan 27, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Yes, since then we discovered that second hand smoke is actually bad for you, and you can get sick even if you never picked up a cigarette.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You speak of the extremes and not the means. There are costs to all of this. And right now, we are being extruded from it all.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 27, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> That we might not find new problems we'll have to address in the future?
> 
> Again, I have my simple enough solution. Let the gun industry run the background check system, but THEN let the victims of gun violence sue them when guns get into the wrong hands. You would be amazed how quickly they get the guns out of the hands of the wrong people after that.



You have to be a complete dope to not understand my point.  Communists are very patient people.  They have a master goal right from the beginning.  They only act stupid to fool people like you.  They did with cigarettes, they did with the gays, they did with global warming that they had to convert to climate change when it was found the earth was not actually warming.   The climate has been changing since God made the place.  That's how we had an ice age and the end of it.  So they switched to climate change because it's something nobody can control and they can never be proven wrong again. 

It's the exact same with guns.  Sure, it's magazine size limits, bans on certain firearms, heavily restricted carry laws now, but once they get enough fellow commies on the SC bench, they will ultimately remove guns from law abiding citizens, and they'll be able to get away with it because of anti-American people like you who are stupid enough to think they can find a solution to gun violence by attacking the weapon and not the offenders.  Until that time they will try to remove guns by commie ideas like holding gun sellers responsible for the actions of their customers. 

I have no idea WTF you people still live here.  You hate this country, just move already.  There are utopias in the world that already have your agenda.  Try North Korea or Cuba or something.  You won't have to worry about guns, government healthcare, capitalism, income inequity, constitutional rights, the electoral college, or wealthy people ever again.  Government controls everything right down to what you can eat.  We have such places in this country already.  We call them prisons and anybody can get in.  

Just think of it, all your problems solved with one plane trip, and take your fellow comrades with you.  Because we love this country and want to preserve all the benefits that come with being an American.  You don't.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 27, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Meh, you wonder why they bother, given the detectives only seem to take the time to clear 17% of the cases? What, nobody's confessing? And we can't beat a fake confession out of people anymore? (Something that has happened in Chicago, a LOT. So often the governor had to commute the sentences on everyone on death row because he couldn't say for certainty which cases were tainted by torture).



Commies don't like the death penalty unless it's an offense against Big Brother.  You can't "commute" every death sentence without intense study of each case.  If you have a baseball game with your fellow workers, and your team only has five players while theirs has nine, you're going to lose the game by huge numbers.  There are not nearly enough detectives for the amount of crime in your shithole of A city.  That's why they only solve 17% of the cases.  



JoeB131 said:


> says the guy on welfare, who sits next to his police scanner muttering about the darkies.



What did I tell you about using big words you don't know the meaning of?  You never learn anything, do you? 

Maybe if you had people like me in your city that care enough about combating crime to personally take action against it, you wouldn't have so much of crime for detectives to solve.


----------



## 2aguy (Jan 27, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Chicago hasn't had strict gun laws since the McDonald decision invalidated them.  Overnight, gun stores popped up in the city and our murder rate doubled.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




*Overnight, gun stores popped up in the city and our murder rate doubled.

This is a direct lie.....there are no gun stores or shooting ranges within the city limits of Chicago.......not one.*


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jan 27, 2022)

SavannahMann said:


> This issue is a loser. But the Right will fight it to the death because they won’t even consider trying to compromise.


Which, issue is that, specifically?
Several have been bandied about so I don't want to take your statement out of context.


----------



## Resnic (Jan 27, 2022)

Yeah and..........

High gas prices have nothing to do with Biden shutting down domestic oil production and buying it from Russia.

Inflation is high because the economy is so good.

Climate change is why millions of illegals are waltzing in our country and being flown around the country at night and dropped off.

Republicans who want people to actually have a ID to vote are why the next election will be illegitimate and why they need to create new voting laws because ID is a conservative and racist idea.

Racism is why black people don't work, steal, burn, murder and don't work. And racism is why they get arrested when they break the law or get shot when they attack the police.

And I'm sure they also think that Jan 6th was caused by Republicans getting gremlins wet so they multiplied and put maga hats on and people clothes so they could run around the capitol before trumps alien friends came down from Mars to make us not take covid vaccines by turning us into zombies with their white supremacy brain washing ray guns.

Must be nice to always have a Boogeyman just off stage to always point your finger at.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 27, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> You have to be a complete dope to not understand my point. Communists are very patient people. T





Ray From Cleveland said:


> Commies don't like the death penalty unless it's an offense against Big Brother.



Ray, it's kind of hard to take you seriously whining about "Communists" when only one of us is living on the Public Dole.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 28, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Ray, it's kind of hard to take you seriously whining about "Communists" when only one of us is living on the Public Dole.



What does collecting what I paid into all my life have to do with the Communists?  It doesn't change anything.  They are still Communists.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 28, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> What does collecting what I paid into all my life have to do with the Communists? It doesn't change anything. They are still Communists.



Wow, you do realize that social security and disability are "communist"  programs, right?   You didn't pay anything in. You paid, other people got benefits.  Now you are getting benefits that other people are paying for.   If you were a capitalist, you would be happily dying for no longer being useful to the One Percent.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 28, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Wow, you do realize that social security and disability are "communist"  programs, right?   You didn't pay anything in. You paid, other people got benefits.  Now you are getting benefits that other people are paying for.   If you were a capitalist, you would be happily dying for no longer being useful to the One Percent.



No, as a capitalist we wouldn't have government deductions for programs and I would have invested all that money me and my employers contributed throughout the decades and retired early.  But like all private insurance programs, you pay X all your life and promised X when you need it.  That's what I did.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 28, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> No, as a capitalist we wouldn't have government deductions for programs and I would have invested all that money me and my employers contributed throughout the decades and retired early.



Guy, nobody believes that if you had 6% more of your income, you'd have wisely invested it.  (And no, your employer wouldn't have paid you more if they didn't have to do withholding.  They'd have totally kept that money.)  

You currently live in a slum.  You didn't have the good sense to get out when the getting was good.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 28, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Guy, nobody believes that if you had 6% more of your income, you'd have wisely invested it.  (And no, your employer wouldn't have paid you more if they didn't have to do withholding.  They'd have totally kept that money.)
> 
> You currently live in a slum.  You didn't have the good sense to get out when the getting was good.



Maybe, but now that I'm no longer working, it provides me with the income I need to live very comfortably.  It worked out as I planned with the exception of becoming ill.  

Unlike you who lost your ass during the beginning of the DumBama years, I was with an investment company that not only survived, but did great because of the recession.  Unless you have the education and experience in finances, you don't handle your own money for something long term like retirement.  It only costs a few bucks for maintenance fees every year on your account, and worth every dime.  

Hopefully I have a few more years left.  We'll see how the chemo is going to do.  But I hope I don't have to dig into that retirement money so I can leave it for the kids.  You see everything I contributed to the government programs will be lost.  Nobody sees a dime of it.  But with my personal investments, they get it all.  However if I do need it for some reason, it's there waiting for me.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 28, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> Maybe, but now that I'm no longer working, it provides me with the income I need to live very comfortably. It worked out as I planned with the exception of becoming ill.
> 
> Unlike you who lost your ass during the beginning of the DumBama years, I was with an investment company that not only survived, but did great because of the recession. Unless you have the education and experience in finances, you don't handle your own money for something long term like retirement. It only costs a few bucks for maintenance fees every year on your account, and worth every dime.



You are living in a slum and you require government assistance.  You are not doing well.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 28, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> You are living in a slum and you require government assistance.  You are not doing well.



I'm doing just dandy, again with the exception of medical problems. I paid for that government assistance so why not use it?  It would be stupid not to.  In May I'll also be on Medicare, another program I paid for.  That will save me even more money since I currently pay my own medical bills and prescriptions.  

So don't worry about me, worry more about yourself.  You badly need psychological help but don't have the guts to get it.  It's destroying your life and you don't even realize it.


----------



## woodwork201 (Jan 28, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Well, let's take my neighbor.  He shot out a window.  When the police responded, he lied at first saying someone shot in at him, but that was quickly disproven by the glass shatter pattern.  At the point, the cops SHOULD have confiscated his gun.  But they didn't.
> 
> A couple weeks later, he killed himself with that same gun.
> 
> Let's get real here, you guys are already holding the rest of us hostage with your fetish, as we never know when one of you is going to go Full Lanza and shoot up a school or a mall or a theater.



Then you, and your local school, should be armed so you can defend yourselves.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 28, 2022)

woodwork201 said:


> Then you, and your local school, should be armed so you can defend yourselves.



That will never happen in Chi-cago.  

*Our motto:*  The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.
*Their motto:* The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is take guns away from all the good guys.,


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 28, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> I'm doing just dandy, again with the exception of medical problems. I paid for that government assistance so why not use it? It would be stupid not to. In May I'll also be on Medicare, another program I paid for. That will save me even more money since I currently pay my own medical bills and prescriptions.



Oh, I agree, you should totally use it. 

Just don't come here whining about "Communism".


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 28, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Oh, I agree, you should totally use it.
> 
> Just don't come here whining about "Communism".



Why not?  Nobody asked me to be part of the system.  It's automatic if you work for a living or produce income on your own.  It's like auto insurance.  The law is if you drive you must pay for it.  If you get into an accident, their promise is they will cover the costs since that's what you paid for.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 29, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> Why not? Nobody asked me to be part of the system. It's automatic if you work for a living or produce income on your own. It's like auto insurance. The law is if you drive you must pay for it. If you get into an accident, their promise is they will cover the costs since that's what you paid for.



Not really comparable, as you pay more the more accidents you are involved in.  You pay more if you get moving violations as well.  

And yes, the insurance companies can actually find excuses to not pay you, or even drop your coverage after certain circumstances. 

So it's not like Middle Class entitlements/White People Welfare at all.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 29, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Not really comparable, as you pay more the more accidents you are involved in.  You pay more if you get moving violations as well.
> 
> And yes, the insurance companies can actually find excuses to not pay you, or even drop your coverage after certain circumstances.
> 
> So it's not like Middle Class entitlements/White People Welfare at all.



That's exactly what it is except it's run by government instead of private industry.  It works the exact same way as auto insurance:  

You must have auto insurance to drive a vehicle.  You must contribute to these social programs if you work or produce income.

We are promised coverage for car accidents if we need it for the money we paid.  We were promised medical and retirement benefits if needed for the money we paid.

If you never have an accident or stolen car, all that money you paid is gone.  If you are healthy until you die before retirement, all that money you paid is gone.

The money you pay is actually used for accident benefits other people have at the time.  The money you pay for social programs are used for people who are retired and need medical coverage at the time. 

The only difference between government sponsored programs and private sponsored programs is private industry invests your premium money and government puts it under a mattress until needed.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 29, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> That's exactly what it is except it's run by government instead of private industry. It works the exact same way as auto insurance:
> 
> You must have auto insurance to drive a vehicle. You must contribute to these social programs if you work or produce income.
> 
> ...



Um, not exactly... so many flaws in your argument... so many. 

First, most people live to collect Social Security. The vast majority of people never get into a serious accident. 

Second, as stated, the insurance companies can refuse to insure you if you get DUI's, multiple moving violations or have too many accidents. Or they can charge you exorbitantly. 

Because it is privately run, the insurance companies always make money.   Social Security is operated at a loss.  We are going to take care of everyone.  Even malingerers like you.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 29, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Um, not exactly... so many flaws in your argument... so many.
> 
> First, most people live to collect Social Security. The vast majority of people never get into a serious accident.
> 
> ...



That has nothing to do with the fact they both operate the exact same way.  You pay money, you were promised X when and if you need the benefits, and they provide you what you were promised.  Simple as that.  

If you don't like the programs, neither do I.  Petition your comrades to end them.  That's all.  GW tried to get that started, but the commies had a shit fit and he couldn't get his SS reform plan done.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 29, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> That has nothing to do with the fact they both operate the exact same way. You pay money, you were promised X when and if you need the benefits, and they provide you what you were promised. Simple as that.
> 
> If you don't like the programs, neither do I. Petition your comrades to end them. That's all. GW tried to get that started, but the commies had a shit fit and he couldn't get his SS reform plan done.



And a good thing he did... imagine the mess we'd be in if he had done that when the Market Crashed.  

I have no problem with the program... I just think it's funny that you whine all day about "Commies" when you are sucking off the government teet.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 29, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> And a good thing he did... imagine the mess we'd be in if he had done that when the Market Crashed.
> 
> I have no problem with the program... I just think it's funny that you whine all day about "Commies" when you are sucking off the government teet.



I'm not sucking off of anything when I collect from a program I paid into.  Your lack of education doesn't allow you to understand that.  Communism has zero to do with it.  I had no choice but to pay into the programs so now that I need them, I expect them to live up to their promise which so far they have.  You can object to having to be insured on your car, or your house if you still have a mortgage, but only an idiot wouldn't collect from something they paid into all of their lives if needed.  

If it were up to me government wouldn't be involved in any of these things.  Retirement and disability would be handled by private companies instead, but like I said, we have no choice.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 30, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> I'm not sucking off of anything when I collect from a program I paid into. Your lack of education doesn't allow you to understand that. Communism has zero to do with it. I had no choice but to pay into the programs so now that I need them, I expect them to live up to their promise which so far they have. You can object to having to be insured on your car, or your house if you still have a mortgage, but only an idiot wouldn't collect from something they paid into all of their lives if needed.
> 
> If it were up to me government wouldn't be involved in any of these things. Retirement and disability would be handled by private companies instead, but like I said, we have no choice.



Here's the thing. I don't burn down my house or crash my car intentionally because I want to get back what I am owed.  

So your analogy is flawed.  You've stated that you want to take Disability, not because you are crippled, but because you don't want to take work that pays slightly less.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 30, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Here's the thing. I don't burn down my house or crash my car intentionally because I want to get back what I am owed.
> 
> So your analogy is flawed. You've stated that you want to take Disability, not because you are crippled, but because you don't want to take work that pays slightly less.



Non-skilled labor pays a lot less than what I did.  WTF do you think tractor-trailer drivers make anyway, especially great ones like myself?  

It's your analogy that's flawed.  Nobody burned down the house.  A government doctor determined that I'm too medically Fd up to work.  The doctors at SS agreed with him.  I surrendered all my medical records to SS and told them I'd be glad to undergo any testing or medical examination by their people that they requested.  I have nothing to hide.  

But I'm not about to go find some minimum wage job somewhere that doesn't even give me the ability to pay for my medication yet alone other bills and no medical coverage.  That would be completely stupid especially given the fact I paid for something so I didn't have to struggle at retirement or if I did become too disabled to do my job.  

What you're pissed off about is your late sister was denied disability because they believed she still had the ability to make a decent living.  Well they didn't believe the same for me.  That's why they only needed my medical records to determine I was no longer able to work, and even placed me in the category of never being able to return to work.


----------



## 2aguy (Jan 30, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> Non-skilled labor pays a lot less than what I did.  WTF do you think tractor-trailer drivers make anyway, especially great ones like myself?
> 
> It's your analogy that's flawed.  Nobody burned down the house.  A government doctor determined that I'm too medically Fd up to work.  The doctors at SS agreed with him.  I surrendered all my medical records to SS and told them I'd be glad to undergo any testing or medical examination by their people that they requested.  I have nothing to hide.
> 
> ...




Ray.....I would stop engaging joe.......he isn't worth that kind of effort....he is a fascist who would gladly arrest, jail, and support any number of violent acts against innocent people if he ever had the chance to support actual leftist monsters.....not worth your time....


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 30, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Ray.....I would stop engaging joe.......he isn't worth that kind of effort....he is a fascist who would gladly arrest, jail, and support any number of violent acts against innocent people if he ever had the chance to support actual leftist monsters.....not worth your time....



Thanks guy but I come here for entertainment.  It's like when you have a laser pen and keep running your cats head into the coffee table.  Cruel?  Perhaps, but you can't help but to laugh.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 30, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> Non-skilled labor pays a lot less than what I did. WTF do you think tractor-trailer drivers make anyway, especially great ones like myself?
> 
> It's your analogy that's flawed. Nobody burned down the house. A government doctor determined that I'm too medically Fd up to work. The doctors at SS agreed with him. I surrendered all my medical records to SS and told them I'd be glad to undergo any testing or medical examination by their people that they requested. I have nothing to hide.


And never bothered to make any effort to gain other skills.   There's nothing keeping you from being an Uber Driver or working for a livery service.  You just want that sweet, sweet government cheese. 








Ray From Cleveland said:


> But I'm not about to go find some minimum wage job somewhere that doesn't even give me the ability to pay for my medication yet alone other bills and no medical coverage. That would be completely stupid especially given the fact I paid for something so I didn't have to struggle at retirement or if I did become too disabled to do my job.



So you decided that you like communism when communism works for you.  We get it man. Just don't go around advocating an "every man for himself" philosophy.  



Ray From Cleveland said:


> What you're pissed off about is your late sister was denied disability because they believed she still had the ability to make a decent living. Well they didn't believe the same for me. That's why they only needed my medical records to determine I was no longer able to work, and even placed me in the category of never being able to return to work.



Well, my sister was the kind of person who wasn't looking to game the system.  She really wanted to work.   At family gatherings, she would stop to do someone else's dishes, because that's how she was.


----------



## Ivan88 (Jan 30, 2022)

In this case it was a people; The new Secretary of something parking her car:


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 30, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> And never bothered to make any effort to gain other skills.   There's nothing keeping you from being an Uber Driver or working for a livery service.  You just want that sweet, sweet government cheese.
> 
> View attachment 594949
> 
> ...



I see, so your sister was young and healthy enough to work.  That's probably why she was denied benefits.  No, I never bothered to learn any new skills.  Not many people do unless it's related to their training or education.  Why would you learn a new blue collar trade when you already have one?  That would be pretty stupid because you'd have to quit your current trade to get training and experience at another one.  I couldn't go back to a different trade after driving for over 30 years.  Any training or experience would be outdated by the time you got back to that line of work.    A livery truck?     Another unskilled job that pays nothing.  Uber is even worse.  Yes I checked into it already.  That's why they post daily ads year round.  

Besides Uber not paying anything, it's a tax issue that takes a lot of time to work on.  But I've been in the transportation business long enough to know whatever you make must include vehicle replacement cost.  Most rookies don't even think of that.  So when you add vehicle replacement cost or lease, fuel, maintenance and repair, record keeping and taxes, you would make more serving fries at McDonald's, and it's safer too as Uber drivers constantly get robbed or car jacked.  What do you think that does to your insurance rates?    

The problem is you opine on things you have no knowledge or experience at or put any serious thought into it.  You live in the past as well.  Non-skilled labor doesn't pay enough to live on, and it's discussed on USMB constantly.  The days of making 50K a year turning nuts onto bolts are long gone and it's not coming back.  Today you need a trade or profession to live a middle-class lifestyle.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 31, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> I see, so your sister was young and healthy enough to work. That's probably why she was denied benefits.


You mean other than being legally blind?  She just wasn't as good at scamming the system as you are... probably because she was an honest person with a work ethic.  



Ray From Cleveland said:


> No, I never bothered to learn any new skills. Not many people do unless it's related to their training or education. Why would you learn a new blue collar trade when you already have one? That would be pretty stupid because you'd have to quit your current trade to get training and experience at another one. I couldn't go back to a different trade after driving for over 30 years. Any training or experience would be outdated by the time you got back to that line of work. A livery truck?  Another unskilled job that pays nothing. Uber is even worse. Yes I checked into it already. That's why they post daily ads year round.



Well, to start with, because you knew years ago that what you were allowed to drive was limited, and would become more limited. 

I'm sure you will always have an excuse, Welfare Ray.  Welfare people always do. Just like the Escort Service Whore thinks she is better than the streetwalker.  



Ray From Cleveland said:


> Besides Uber not paying anything, it's a tax issue that takes a lot of time to work on. But I've been in the transportation business long enough to know whatever you make must include vehicle replacement cost. Most rookies don't even think of that. So when you add vehicle replacement cost or lease, fuel, maintenance and repair, record keeping and taxes, you would make more serving fries at McDonald's, and it's safer too as Uber drivers constantly get robbed or car jacked. What do you think that does to your insurance rates?


Excuses, excuses, excuses..  I know a lot of folks who use Uber to supplement  their income, and they are fine.  But they have a work ethic.  



Ray From Cleveland said:


> The problem is you opine on things you have no knowledge or experience at or put any serious thought into it. You live in the past as well. Non-skilled labor doesn't pay enough to live on, and it's discussed on USMB constantly. The days of making 50K a year turning nuts onto bolts are long gone and it's not coming back. Today you need a trade or profession to live a middle-class lifestyle.



Why do you think driving in a straight line merits a living wage?  

My view, anyone who works for a living should get a living wage, full stop.  It's absurd that McDonald's pays it's CEO eight figures when the company is losing money and they can't pay the wage slaves a living wage.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jan 31, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> You mean other than being legally blind?  She just wasn't as good at scamming the system as you are... probably because she was an honest person with a work ethic.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Legally blind does not mean you cannot do most things in life.  Totally blind is a different story.  People who are considered legally blind can still lead a productive life.  They can walk the streets with no dog or cane, they can prepare their own meals, they can watch television although slightly obstructed.  You're upset because your sister was trying to scam the system but couldn't get away with it and got busted.  But what you forget is that I spent ten years in delivering and repairing medical equipment and worked with dozens of legally blind people.  

Yes driving in a straight line does warrant a living wage because we now need 11,000 drivers that industry can't find.  It's not just today, but has been going on for many years because not a lot of people have the talent or courage to operate a 60 foot 80,000 pound vehicle, especially in all weather conditions. Most are scared to death at the thought of piloting such a monstrosity.  Like I said OCD, you comment on shit you know zero about.  That's why every single member on USMB that interacts with you knows you are full of shit on 95% of things you talk about like you make a living doing resumes that anybody with YouTube access can do.  The reason you don't drive a truck is because you are a talentless fuck that makes up stories about himself like he was in the military but never heard a gun being shot before.  Come to think of it, you're so talentless you can't even makeup a good bullshit story.   

You're not only dumb, but you even hang around dumb people.  If a person can't figure out how to use a calculator to realize they are not making money at a certain job, they deserve a friend or associate like you.  While you don't serve any purpose in our society, remember that if not for people like me driving in a straight line, you'd starve to death because we are the people that put food in the gerocery stores, put supplies in Walmart, put tools in your Home Depot or hardware store, bring medication to your drug store.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 1, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> Legally blind does not mean you cannot do most things in life. Totally blind is a different story. People who are considered legally blind can still lead a productive life. They can walk the streets with no dog or cane, they can prepare their own meals, they can watch television although slightly obstructed. You're upset because your sister was trying to scam the system but couldn't get away with it and got busted. But what you forget is that I spent ten years in delivering and repairing medical equipment and worked with dozens of legally blind people.



Actually, she eventually did get it, but not before she had to ceritify no one would hire a legally blind woman to work on a computer at a telehealth company, which is something they thought she could do.  but again, she had a work ethic, something you clearly lack, Welfare Ray. 



Ray From Cleveland said:


> Yes driving in a straight line does warrant a living wage because we now need 11,000 drivers that industry can't find.


Nobody wants a dull, boring, no brain job.  



Ray From Cleveland said:


> ike I said OCD, you comment on shit you know zero about. That's why every single member on USMB that interacts with you knows you are full of shit on 95% of things you talk about like you make a living doing resumes that anybody with YouTube access can do. The reason you don't drive a truck is because you are a talentless fuck that makes up stories about himself like he was in the military but never heard a gun being shot before. Come to think of it, you're so talentless you can't even makeup a good bullshit story.


Actually, as stated, guns aren't that loud.   It's why the shot-spotter software in Chicago has been a total failure. Your story that you heard your neighbors shooting at each other just didn't pass the laugh test. My neighbor shot a gun in his house twice and no one heard a thing. 

Any idiot who thinks they can write a resume by watching YouTube is a moron.  Of course, people with ambition need resumes.  I'm sure this confuses you as you clearly have no ambition, collecting disability and living in a slum and bitching about your neighbors. 



Ray From Cleveland said:


> You're not only dumb, but you even hang around dumb people. If a person can't figure out how to use a calculator to realize they are not making money at a certain job, they deserve a friend or associate like you. While you don't serve any purpose in our society, remember that if not for people like me driving in a straight line, you'd starve to death because we are the people that put food in the gerocery stores, put supplies in Walmart, put tools in your Home Depot or hardware store, bring medication to your drug store.



Except any idiot can drive in a straight line...  and you can't even meet that low standard. Heck, there are plenty of jobs on DoorDash, Uber, etc. for people who can drive in a straight line, but you just want that sweet, sweet GOVERNMENT CHEESE.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Feb 1, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Actually, she eventually did get it, but not before she had to ceritify no one would hire a legally blind woman to work on a computer at a telehealth company, which is something they thought she could do.  but again, she had a work ethic, something you clearly lack, Welfare Ray.
> 
> 
> Nobody wants a dull, boring, no brain job.
> ...



Then why does Door Dash and others have constant help wanted ads?  They can't find people stupid enough to not understand basic business practices.  They figure they'll just jump in their cars and make money without looking at operation costs.  Once they get their taxes filed it's only then they realize what a mistake they made and get out of the business.  Yes, Uber does teach you how to list your costs and deductions.  

Anybody that thinks tractor-trailer drivers only drive in a straight line is a complete moron, and you are the poster boy for that.  You couldn't do my job for one day, and it's not because it's boring, it's because after you shit yourself a few times you'd understand the talent and experience needed to do such a job that a lot of people don't have.  Oh....sure you can drive one, but try doing it without getting into accidents or traffic violations year after year.  Try backing in a trailer into a place a lot of people struggle to back a van into without hitting shit.  Try stopping a 70,000 or 80,000 lbs vehicle when traffic suddenly stops when vision is only 50 feet.  Again, you talk about shit you're completely ignorant of.  Driving a 2,000 lbs car for Uber and driving a 75,000 lbs 60 foot vehicle are two entirely different thing, and you're not even smart enough to figure that out.  

Yeah, your sister finally did get disability, but it goes to show you how strict their standards are, and I got disability without the slightest resistance.  No examinations, no tests, not even a personal interview.  They just looked at my medical records from the world famous Cleveland Clinic and determined I can no longer reasonably work at my age.  But live your life with that grudge.  It's entertaining for me.


----------



## 2aguy (Feb 1, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> Then why does Door Dash and others have constant help wanted ads?  They can't find people stupid enough to not understand basic business practices.  They figure they'll just jump in their cars and make money without looking at operation costs.  Once they get their taxes filed it's only then they realize what a mistake they made and get out of the business.  Yes, Uber does teach you how to list your costs and deductions.
> 
> Anybody that thinks tractor-trailer drivers only drive in a straight line is a complete moron, and you are the poster boy for that.  You couldn't do my job for one day, and it's not because it's boring, it's because after you shit yourself a few times you'd understand the talent and experience needed to do such a job that a lot of people don't have.  Oh....sure you can drive one, but try doing it without getting into accidents or traffic violations year after year.  Try backing in a trailer into a place a lot of people struggle to back a van into without hitting shit.  Try stopping a 70,000 or 80,000 lbs vehicle when traffic suddenly stops when vision is only 50 feet.  Again, you talk about shit you're completely ignorant of.  Driving a 2,000 lbs car for Uber and driving a 75,000 lbs 60 foot vehicle are two entirely different thing, and you're not even smart enough to figure that out.
> 
> Yeah, your sister finally did get disability, but it goes to show you how strict their standards are, and I got disability without the slightest resistance.  No examinations, no tests, not even a personal interview.  They just looked at my medical records from the world famous Cleveland Clinic and determined I can no longer reasonably work at my age.  But live your life with that grudge.  It's entertaining for me.




Yep.......you guys that drive those trucks are amazing...and you do not get the credit you deserve.....I was driving in Chicago and  I saw a guy  make a turn with the tractor-trailer that made my blood pressure spike.......heavy traffic, 90 degree angle, short lights.......amazing.......didn't hit a thing....


----------



## Sunsettommy (Feb 1, 2022)

Rogue AI said:


> How did Alexander Hamilton die? Be specific, then go ahead and tell me all about militias. You fucking morons have no clue about anything. Educate yourself before attempting to infringe on my rights.



Joe Blow has NEVER read the FEDERALIST PAPERS which is why he is profoundly ignorant on what the Founding Fathers thought about the Second Amendment.

Guns are not the problem; it is the bad people who are the problem.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Feb 1, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Yep.......you guys that drive those trucks are amazing...and you do not get the credit you deserve.....I was driving in Chicago and  I saw a guy  make a turn with the tractor-trailer that made my blood pressure spike.......heavy traffic, 90 degree angle, short lights.......amazing.......didn't hit a thing....



Thank you very much.  We so appreciate the people that support us and understand our value in a civilized society that leftists like JoeBullshit fail to understand.  You see the same appreciation from the Canadian drivers interviewed who were touched by the support of their people during this protest of theirs, that may eventually spread to the US.  I want to see OCD Joe cry to government when he has no food in the house if our drivers finally shutdown here.  

His claim (which I don't believe for anything) is that he writes resumes for a living.  We can still function as a society without resume writers just fine, but we can't without experienced and qualified truck drivers making sure our goods are being processed or stocked in our stores.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Feb 1, 2022)

Sunsettommy said:


> Joe Blow has NEVER read the FEDERALIST PAPERS which is why he is profoundly ignorant on what the Founding Fathers thought about the Second Amendment.
> 
> Guns are not the problem; it is the bad people who are the problem.



Leftists don't think that way.  To address violent crime, set the criminals free but go after their guns.  Because after all, if you take guns away from law abiding citizens, the criminals will happily give theirs up to because they don't want to break any laws.  

This is why Communists should never be in any position of power in our country.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Feb 1, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> His claim (which I don't believe for anything) is that he writes resumes for a living. We can still function as a society without resume writers just fine, but we can't without experienced and qualified truck drivers making sure our goods are being processed or stocked in our stores.



  I wonder if you and I are the only people who think it would be amusing, to see CrimIncel Joe try to function in our respective professions.

  As much as I respect your profession, and the skills that it involves, I can much more easily see him having some vestige of a chance of actually being able to do it, than to do my job.  I do not think he'd last an hour as a construction worker.  I've had the misfortune, on a few occasions, of having had to work with his kind.  Fortunately, they do not last very long, but when they appear, I'm usually one who ends up cleaning up the mess that they make.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Feb 1, 2022)

Bob Blaylock said:


> I wonder if you and I are the only people who think it would be amusing, to see CrimIncel Joe try to function in our respective professions.
> 
> As much as I respect your profession, and the skills that it involves, I can much more easily see him having some vestige of a chance of actually being able to do it, than to do my job.  I do not think he'd last an hour as a construction worker.  I've had the misfortune, on a few occasions, of having had to work with his kind.  Fortunately, they do not last very long, but when they appear, I'm usually one who ends up cleaning up the mess that they make.



OCD Joe in construction?   

Of course I respect construction workers and their skills coming from a construction family.  My father was so articulate at his work.  We'd be driving by commercial building and my father would ask me to show him which part of the wall of the building he worked on, and if you looked closely enough, you could actually see it.  The bricks were so perfectly aligned.  Laboring for him throughout my earlier teen years all summer, I knew my fathers work.  He was a perfectionist.  

I joined the union at 18 but it didn't take long for me to realize it was not my cup of tea, and I went into transportation.  But had I stayed as a bricklayer, OCD would be telling me all I did was slop bricks on the line and any idiot could do that job.    

I don't know what that guy actually does for a living because I don't buy that resume crap.  I worked from home on the weekends teaching music and I was not up at 5:00 am to do it.  When you work from home for yourself you can relax and take it easy; sleep in a bit and get out of bed at 9:00 am or something.  Plus I most always had a cancellation every weekend and able to take a break or two.  But whatever he does he obviously doesn't take much pride in it like you or I do in our professions.  We don't need to make up stories of how we made a living because we do take pride in what we are or were.  Our kind of work is vital to a society.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 2, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> Then why does Door Dash and others have constant help wanted ads? They can't find people stupid enough to not understand basic business practices. They figure they'll just jump in their cars and make money without looking at operation costs. Once they get their taxes filed it's only then they realize what a mistake they made and get out of the business. Yes, Uber does teach you how to list your costs and deductions.


Or most people just take those jobs for a few years to supplement their income because Republicans did a fine job of demolishing the middle class.  



Ray From Cleveland said:


> Anybody that thinks tractor-trailer drivers only drive in a straight line is a complete moron, and you are the poster boy for that. You couldn't do my job for one day, and it's not because it's boring, it's because after you shit yourself a few times you'd understand the talent and experience needed to do such a job that a lot of people don't have.



Again, drove a truck when I was in the Army, and frankly, it bored me. you haven't lived until you've tried to drive a truck in blackout conditions with an AN/PVS-5.  



Ray From Cleveland said:


> Yeah, your sister finally did get disability, but it goes to show you how strict their standards are, and I got disability without the slightest resistance. No examinations, no tests, not even a personal interview. They just looked at my medical records from the world famous Cleveland Clinic and determined I can no longer reasonably work at my age. But live your life with that grudge. It's entertaining for me.



Naw, it shows me what a scam it was... when she went there, her eyesight was just good enough to see all the Malingerers waiting in line to file their claims.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 2, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> Thank you very much. We so appreciate the people that support us and understand our value in a civilized society that leftists like JoeBullshit fail to understand. You see the same appreciation from the Canadian drivers interviewed who were touched by the support of their people during this protest of theirs, that may eventually spread to the US. I want to see OCD Joe cry to government when he has no food in the house if our drivers finally shutdown here.



Yeah, people will support you for a one day protest.   They'll be less supportive if you actually trouble them... or as I always say, 








Ray From Cleveland said:


> His claim (which I don't believe for anything) is that he writes resumes for a living. We can still function as a society without resume writers just fine, but we can't without experienced and qualified truck drivers making sure our goods are being processed or stocked in our stores.



Except you haven't driven a truck for years, you are COLLECTING DISABILITY.   Either because you are really on death's door, or because some mean old bureaucrat is fucking with you, depending how you tell the story.  



Bob Blaylock said:


> As much as I respect your profession, and the skills that it involves, I can much more easily see him having some vestige of a chance of actually being able to do it, than to do my job. I do not think he'd last an hour as a construction worker. I've had the misfortune, on a few occasions, of having had to work with his kind. Fortunately, they do not last very long, but when they appear, I'm usually one who ends up cleaning up the mess that they make.



Yeah, you see, I have a job where you need a brain.  Most of my career, I've been involved in supply chain, handing millions of dollars of purchases and inventory planning. Today I do resume consulting and job placement, and I've helped thousands of people find better jobs.  

Now, I respect guys in the trades.  My dad was a Sheet Metal Worker (before he died of cancer from the asbestos he sucked in every day) and my idiot brothers are in the trades. 

Of course, the ONLY reason why you guys in the trades can make a good living is because unions fought for those good livings and Democrats supported them.  But Republicans played on your racial, religious and sexual fears and have been dismantling that for the last 40 years.   You're just too dumb to notice.  



Ray From Cleveland said:


> I don't know what that guy actually does for a living because I don't buy that resume crap. I worked from home on the weekends teaching music and I was not up at 5:00 am to do it. When you work from home for yourself you can relax and take it easy; sleep in a bit and get out of bed at 9:00 am or something



Well, YOU do that, because you are kind of lazy, Ray.  We've established that.   I set aside a couple hours in the morning to argue with the morons on USMB, but I limit myself to just a few hours because honestly, that could become a full time job.  

So when I am not consulting, I watch TV. I write.  I do stuff around the house.  Lately, I've been heavily engaged in rehabbing my old Condo because I have to get it ready for renters. (And I'm much too old for this shit at 60).  



Ray From Cleveland said:


> We don't need to make up stories of how we made a living because we do take pride in what we are or were. Our kind of work is vital to a society.



Yeah, Ray, a lot of your stories are questionable.  You either are perfectly healthy or you are on death's door.   You are either a brilliant investor or you are desperately in need of government assistance.  You either live in a nice neighborhood or you live in an urban jungle where people are shooting each other.  But what I don't see is you doing much of anything to improve your position.  YOu just come in and complain about how others have made your life miserable.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 2, 2022)

Sunsettommy said:


> Joe Blow has NEVER read the FEDERALIST PAPERS which is why he is profoundly ignorant on what the Founding Fathers thought about the Second Amendment.
> 
> Guns are not the problem; it is the bad people who are the problem.



No, bad people WITH guns are the problem.  A bad person without a gun can't really cause that much trouble, that's the thing. 

The problem is, the National Rampage Association has figured that if you give guns to the bad people, everyone else will be really, really scared and want them, too.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 2, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> Of course I respect construction workers and their skills coming from a construction family. My father was so articulate at his work. We'd be driving by commercial building and my father would ask me to show him which part of the wall of the building he worked on, and if you looked closely enough, you could actually see it. The bricks were so perfectly aligned. Laboring for him throughout my earlier teen years all summer, I knew my fathers work. He was a perfectionist.


Here's the thing... if construction jobs were all that, then why do you live in mortal terror of an illegal alien coming in and taking those jobs. 

The one thing I never have to worry about... an illegal taking my job (either my current one or my previous one). No illegal is going to get hired to issue purchase orders and make contracts on behalf of a company.  No illegal is going to be able to come in and write a resume no matter how many YouTube videos he watches.  

IN fact, if it weren't for unions, trades wouldn't pay shit...


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Feb 2, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Here's the thing... if construction jobs were all that, then why do you live in mortal terror of an illegal alien coming in and taking those jobs.
> 
> The one thing I never have to worry about... an illegal taking my job (either my current one or my previous one). No illegal is going to get hired to issue purchase orders and make contracts on behalf of a company.  No illegal is going to be able to come in and write a resume no matter how many YouTube videos he watches.
> 
> IN fact, if it weren't for unions, trades wouldn't pay shit...



Ah yes, that liberal crystal ball again.  Well today there are a lot of well paying jobs due to employers needing employees, and unions are a thing of the past.  In fact the last union company that dealt with ours got rid of their union.  They unanimously voted them out because it was a small place, and the most incompetent employee got the highest paying job due to his tenure.  The real problem was he had no ability TO do the job.  He stood around while the owner had to run the machine.  The owner had better things to do.

After the worthless union was gone, that employee was laid off along with a few others that were always worthless for the company (so I'm told) and the company and employees have never been more productive and happier.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Feb 2, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> No, bad people WITH guns are the problem. A bad person without a gun can't really cause that much trouble, that's the thing.











						Child becomes sixth person to die after Wisconsin parade attack
					

Jackson Sparks, eight, passed away from his injuries on Tuesday afternoon




					www.independent.co.uk


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 2, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> Ah yes, that liberal crystal ball again.  Well today there are a lot of well paying jobs due to employers needing employees, and unions are a thing of the past.  In fact the last union company that dealt with ours got rid of their union.  They unanimously voted them out because it was a small place, and the most incompetent employee got the highest paying job due to his tenure.  The real problem was he had no ability TO do the job.  He stood around while the owner had to run the machine.  The owner had better things to do.
> 
> After the worthless union was gone, that employee was laid off along with a few others that were always worthless for the company (so I'm told) and the company and employees have never been more productive and happier.



How was it a unanimous vote if the guy who got the highest pay due to tenure voted to stay?  

Another Ray story that lacks credibility.   

Hey, you guys all think you can do well without a union. 

Now here you are, no job, on welfare, but you showed 'em.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 2, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> Child becomes sixth person to die after Wisconsin parade attack
> 
> 
> Jackson Sparks, eight, passed away from his injuries on Tuesday afternoon
> ...


And how often does that happen?  

Compared to how many people are killed with guns every year.


----------



## hadit (Feb 2, 2022)

Superbadbrutha said:


> This coming from the man who thinks it is ok for a domestic violence abuser to own a gun.


How about a domestic violence victim?


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Feb 2, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Or most people just take those jobs for a few years to supplement their income because Republicans did a fine job of demolishing the middle class.



Anybody with a brain would take a better paying job and not risk getting their auto insurance jacked up to nearly unaffordable levels and of course much safer since those people are getting car jacked, assaulted or killed all the time.  McDonald's pays better in the long run. 



JoeB131 said:


> Again, drove a truck when I was in the Army, and frankly, it bored me. you haven't lived until you've tried to drive a truck in blackout conditions with an AN/PVS-5.



You didn't drive shit.  A small straight truck if that.  So did I but it didn't pay enough so I upgraded to a tractor-trailer license.  I figured it's just a truck like I always drove and just have to make some minor adjustments.  Boy was I wrong.  When I first got behind the wheel I realized this is no straight truck.  It's a completely different vehicle.  Anybody can drive a straight truck.  They rent them at U-Haul to people that never drove one all the time.  



JoeB131 said:


> Naw, it shows me what a scam it was... when she went there, her eyesight was just good enough to see all the Malingerers waiting in line to file their claims.



Yeah, because she (and you) knew of all the medical problems those people had, huh?  You both knew they could all do any job they wanted.  She must have been a lib too.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Feb 2, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> And how often does that happen?
> 
> Compared to how many people are killed with guns every year.



The point is if somebody wants to kill, they are going to kill, and not having access to a gun won't stop them.  it will only stop victims from protecting themselves which happens over a million times a year in this country.


----------



## Superbadbrutha (Feb 2, 2022)

hadit said:


> How about a domestic violence victim?


Why would you punish a victim.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Feb 2, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Yeah, Ray, a lot of your stories are questionable. You either are perfectly healthy or you are on death's door. You are either a brilliant investor or you are desperately in need of government assistance. You either live in a nice neighborhood or you live in an urban jungle where people are shooting each other. But what I don't see is you doing much of anything to improve your position. YOu just come in and complain about how others have made your life miserable.



As I stated I'm doing just fine.  I only have perhaps a few more years left on this planet so why should I work until my last breath?  That would be pretty stupid.  I may not even have that long, it depends on how successful the chemo is doing which I won't know for several weeks when they take a look at it.  With disability you don't have to be on deaths door to collect.  Their standards are if you cannot reasonably make a living due to health conditions.  I've posted links for you before, but you'd rather remain ignorant so you never read them.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 2, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> Anybody with a brain would take a better paying job and not risk getting their auto insurance jacked up to nearly unaffordable levels and of course much safer since those people are getting car jacked, assaulted or killed all the time. McDonald's pays better in the long run.


yes, Ray, we get that.  Everyone has an excuse.  Frankly, people have been delivering food for decades... Door Dash just made it more efficient. 



Ray From Cleveland said:


> You didn't drive shit. A small straight truck if that. So did I but it didn't pay enough so I upgraded to a tractor-trailer license. I figured it's just a truck like I always drove and just have to make some minor adjustments. Boy was I wrong. When I first got behind the wheel I realized this is no straight truck. It's a completely different vehicle. Anybody can drive a straight truck. They rent them at U-Haul to people that never drove one all the time.


And...um.... so what?  I mean, you are trying to make a big deal out of a career that wasn't that complicated, and left you with zero skills to fall back on. 

Meanwhile, I get at least one call a week from someone who wants to hire me for a purchasing job, just off my LinkedIn profile.  



Ray From Cleveland said:


> Yeah, because she (and you) knew of all the medical problems those people had, huh? You both knew they could all do any job they wanted. She must have been a lib too.



Well, she was a registered nurse for 40 years, so I am guessing she could tell a really sick person from a malingerer.   Even with degraded eyesight.



Ray From Cleveland said:


> The point is if somebody wants to kill, they are going to kill, and not having access to a gun won't stop them. it will only stop victims from protecting themselves which happens over a million times a year in this country.


Yet countries than ban guns have nowhere near our murder rates. Funny how that works.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 2, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> As I stated I'm doing just fine. I only have perhaps a few more years left on this planet so why should I work until my last breath? That would be pretty stupid. I may not even have that long, it depends on how successful the chemo is doing which I won't know for several weeks when they take a look at it. With disability you don't have to be on deaths door to collect. Their standards are if you cannot reasonably make a living due to health conditions. I've posted links for you before, but you'd rather remain ignorant so you never read them.



I actually couldn't imagine a time when I don't work.  I've been working since I was 16 and I turn 60 in May.  I honest never expected to live to my 60's...  

As much as I give you guff, I hope your Chemo turns out well.   Both of my parents died in their 50's from cancer, so I know it's a tough road, man.  

My point on disability, stands, though. If you aren't crippled or blind, you should work.  If our system lets you get away with less than that without having a retraining program, then it's broken.   I also feel the same way about most assistance programs.  There should be a work component.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Feb 2, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> I actually couldn't imagine a time when I don't work.  I've been working since I was 16 and I turn 60 in May.  I honest never expected to live to my 60's...
> 
> As much as I give you guff, I hope your Chemo turns out well.   Both of my parents died in their 50's from cancer, so I know it's a tough road, man.
> 
> My point on disability, stands, though. If you aren't crippled or blind, you should work.  If our system lets you get away with less than that without having a retraining program, then it's broken.   I also feel the same way about most assistance programs.  There should be a work component.



If I were 35 year old you'd have a point. But when you lose your entire career at the age of 60, at the beginning of the worst pandemic people alive today have never seen, you're not going to get a new career.  I'd go to school or training and what, try to be a rookie in a new field at 61 or 62?  Who would hire anybody like that? 

When Commie Care got my employer to drop our coverage, I went looking for a new job in my field of work.  Nobody offering that benefit would hire me.  Mind you I had an outstanding driving record, a perfect license with no points, years of experience, and because of my age and medical problems (which I'm required by law to alert any potential employer) nobody would even give me the time of day, even during the best economic years of this country where employers were desperate to find drivers.  The only possible reason for that was my age and medical problems.  

I was going to retire at the age of  62 anyway, so it wasn't worth my time; that and our experts in virology and the government told people like me if there was any possibility to stay home, then stay home.  We didn't have a vaccine out until after a year when I left work which took me to the age of 61.   So I applied for disability and was almost immediately accepted with no resistance whatsoever.  

In short I actually retired a year earlier than I was going to retire anyway.  Now that my months or years are numbered, what idiot would go back to work if they could?


----------



## hadit (Feb 2, 2022)

Superbadbrutha said:


> Why would you punish a victim.


How would it punish someone if we allowed them to be armed?


----------



## Superbadbrutha (Feb 2, 2022)

hadit said:


> How would it punish someone if we allowed them to be armed?


I am saying the victim should be armed.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 2, 2022)

HOly shit, look at all the excuses... Did your ancestors come from France?  



Ray From Cleveland said:


> f I were 35 year old you'd have a point. But when you lose your entire career at the age of 60, at the beginning of the worst pandemic people alive today have never seen, you're not going to get a new career. I'd go to school or training and what, try to be a rookie in a new field at 61 or 62? Who would hire anybody like that?



Really? I see a lot of people starting new careers at 60.  The oldest client I ever had as a resume writer was a man in his 80's!  (Although he was more trying to keep busy than needing the money). 



Ray From Cleveland said:


> When Commie Care got my employer to drop our coverage, I went looking for a new job in my field of work. Nobody offering that benefit would hire me. Mind you I had an outstanding driving record, a perfect license with no points, years of experience, and because of my age and medical problems (which I'm required by law to alert any potential employer) nobody would even give me the time of day, even during the best economic years of this country where employers were desperate to find drivers. The only possible reason for that was my age and medical problems.



This statement tells me a bunch of stuff. 

First, your employer didn't give enough of a fuck about you to even TRY go get you new insurance. 
Secondly, how hard did you try?  

Sometimes I think you just enjoy being miserable. 




Ray From Cleveland said:


> I was going to retire at the age of 62 anyway, so it wasn't worth my time; that and our experts in virology and the government told people like me if there was any possibility to stay home, then stay home. We didn't have a vaccine out until after a year when I left work which took me to the age of 61. So I applied for disability and was almost immediately accepted with no resistance whatsoever.


Again, excuses, excuses, excuses....


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Feb 2, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> HOly shit, look at all the excuses... Did your ancestors come from France?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



If somebody is stupid enough to pay for a resume at the age of 60, then that's on them if they want to try and find a job nobody will hire them for.  Again, you are full of shit.   As for myself, I'm a bit smarter than that and I happen to live in reality.  But this is something too confusing for you to understand called common sense.   I'm not trying to insult you, most leftists don't have common sense.  That's why they vote Democrat.  

Common sense dictates that I'm older now, and I no longer have what it takes to obtain a job that pays any kind of livable wage.  Common sense tells me I no longer have the physical abilities to work minimum wage jobs that keep me on my feet all day.  When I do work around here, it's a back break every 10 to 15 minutes.  Common sense tells me it's time to retire albeit early if I'm forced into it.  Common sense tells me I worked all of my life and paid into these programs for use if needed, and it would be stupid not to use them.  Common sense tells me since I only have X amount of time left here, to relax and use the time I have for better things than working for somebody else.  

You see, this is all common sense.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 2, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> If somebody is stupid enough to pay for a resume at the age of 60, then that's on them if they want to try and find a job nobody will hire them for.


Uh, guy, let's get real. Age discrimination IS a real problem, but not an insurmountable one.  

In many ways, older workers are desirable... they are more experienced, they are more reliable than a Millennial who changes jobs every two years.  



Ray From Cleveland said:


> Again, you are full of shit. As for myself, I'm a bit smarter than that and I happen to live in reality. But this is something too confusing for you to understand called common sense. I'm not trying to insult you, most leftists don't have common sense. That's why they vote Democrat.



Again- You live in a slum, you hate your neighbors and you rely on the government to support you and pay for your medical bills.   And you always have an excuse or someone else to blame.  



Ray From Cleveland said:


> Common sense dictates that I'm older now, and I no longer have what it takes to obtain a job that pays any kind of livable wage.


Well, with that defeatist attitude, probably not.  



Ray From Cleveland said:


> Common sense tells me I worked all of my life and paid into these programs for use if needed, and it would be stupid not to use them. Common sense tells me since I only have X amount of time left here, to relax and use the time I have for better things than working for somebody else.



Yeah, but then you don't get to whine about Communism when other people are now paying your way.


----------



## ThunderKiss1965 (Feb 2, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> The biggest problem in Ohio is that our gun laws simply are not strong enough. Domestic violence policy expert Julia Webber serves as the implementation director of the Gifford’s Law Center, a national organization striving to make America safer by working to end gun violence.
> 
> “So, unfortunately, and tragically, too many people who have lost their lives as a result of domestic violence and how often that’s been connected to use of firearms,” said Webber.
> 
> ...


If they magically get rid of the guns then the husbands can just beat their wives to death and the victim can not protect themselves. Of course none of this is about protecting people from gun violence. Criminals by their very nature do not follow the law. It's about disarming law abiding citizens. One of the first things a tyrannical government does is get rid of the firearms held by the populace.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 2, 2022)

ThunderKiss1965 said:


> If they magically get rid of the guns then the husbands can just beat their wives to death and the victim can not protect themselves. Of course none of this is about protecting people from gun violence. Criminals by their very nature do not follow the law. It's about disarming law abiding citizens. One of the first things a tyrannical government does is get rid of the firearms held by the populace.



Tryannical governments rarely have to disarm anyone... because they only happen when the people become awful.


----------



## ThunderKiss1965 (Feb 2, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Tryannical governments rarely have to disarm anyone... because they only happen when the people become awful.


What ?


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Feb 2, 2022)

ThunderKiss1965 said:


> If they magically get rid of the guns then the husbands can just beat their wives to death and the victim can not protect themselves. Of course none of this is about protecting people from gun violence. Criminals by their very nature do not follow the law. It's about disarming law abiding citizens. One of the first things a tyrannical government does is get rid of the firearms held by the populace.



It goes beyond that actually.

Democrats are not stupid, they only act that way.  They know damn well that if you disarm the public, it would create massive crime.  Just look at the commie cities that want to or did defund their police.  Look at the places that got liberal DA's and prosecutors that let the criminals go.  A 30% increase in violent crime.  Most all of these places are in states with the strictest gun laws where even if you carry and shoot somebody, the law is on the side of the criminal. 

We end up with Big Crime.  So how do we defend ourselves from Big Crime?  The same way we defended ourselves against big tobacco, big pharma, big corporations, and that's with a bigger government. 

A virtual national takeover of our police would would have to happen which would be through the door of government funding of our police departments.  if you want fed money, you will do things the fed way.  What we end up with is a police state all ran by the federal government.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Feb 2, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Uh, guy, let's get real. Age discrimination IS a real problem, but not an insurmountable one.
> 
> In many ways, older workers are desirable... they are more experienced, they are more reliable than a Millennial who changes jobs every two years.



Oh please.  My former employer hired retired guys to make van deliveries.  There are just as many boobs among the elderly as there are younger people.  



JoeB131 said:


> Again- You live in a slum, you hate your neighbors and you rely on the government to support you and pay for your medical bills. And you always have an excuse or someone else to blame.



So WTF does that have to do with my comment?  I would love to get rid of the scum in our neighborhood, but dumb people keep voting Democrat who promote putting lowlifes in nice areas turning them into slums.  You're not a real Democrat unless you are ruining things for good people.  



JoeB131 said:


> Yeah, but then you don't get to whine about Communism when other people are now paying your way.



What does communism have to do with social programs?


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 2, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> So WTF does that have to do with my comment? I would love to get rid of the scum in our neighborhood, but dumb people keep voting Democrat who promote putting lowlifes in nice areas turning them into slums. You're not a real Democrat unless you are ruining things for good people.



I lived in a neighborhood with Section 8 people...  Didn't turn our area into a slum.  Businesses didn't close.  Nobody got mugged at night.   I think the worst thing we had happen is that Amazon boxes vanish if you don't grab them quick enough.  



Ray From Cleveland said:


> What does communism have to do with social programs?



Okay, so we can define "Communism" as "any Social Program Ray doesn't use!"


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 2, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> Democrats are not stupid, they only act that way. They know damn well that if you disarm the public, it would create massive crime. Just look at the commie cities that want to or did defund their police. Look at the places that got liberal DA's and prosecutors that let the criminals go. A 30% increase in violent crime. Most all of these places are in states with the strictest gun laws where even if you carry and shoot somebody, the law is on the side of the criminal.



Crime went up across the country, not just in the cities... and it had more to do with people being couped up than the police not being able to do Driving While Black stops.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Feb 2, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Crime went up across the country, not just in the cities... and it had more to do with people being couped up than the police not being able to do Driving While Black stops.



Oh, that myth about driving while black, as if police have nothing better to do.  QUIT WATCHING MOVIES ON TELEVISION!  You think television is reality.  

It has nothing to do with being cooped up.  Why would being cooped up have anything to do with people leaving their homes and committing murder?  People cooped up in white suburbs don't do that.  

All these prosecutors are criminals themselves and don't lock up the bad guys, like that pig running your city.  When criminals understand they can get away with just about anything, of course they commit more crime.


----------



## woodwork201 (Feb 2, 2022)

2aguy said:


> *Overnight, gun stores popped up in the city and our murder rate doubled.
> 
> This is a direct lie.....there are no gun stores or shooting ranges within the city limits of Chicago.......not one.*



And the murders that have increased are not being committed with guns that the murderer bought at the nearby gunstores, either.


----------



## woodwork201 (Feb 2, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Ray, it's kind of hard to take you seriously whining about "Communists" when only one of us is living on the Public Dole.


So you're saying that all these dissidents in the Soviet Union were actually communists because they ate communist potatoes and slept in communist  apartments?






						Soviet dissidents - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				




Because we have a socialist government and that government takes from us and gives us a socialist dole, does not make us communists or socialists.


----------



## woodwork201 (Feb 2, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Tryannical governments rarely have to disarm anyone... because they only happen when the people become awful.


Wow.  Hitler only killed Jews when they became awful?  Pol Pot only killed Cambodians because they became awful?  Lenin only killed 20 million awful people? 

Good thing for 60 million awful deplorables that Hillary didn't become president.


----------



## woodwork201 (Feb 2, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> 1) The Second Amendment is about Militias, not guns.
> 2) Yes, you absolutely should take away  people's guns if they are dangerous.
> 
> The best argument for gun control is a conversation with a gun nut.



I can understand how you arrive at the mistaken opinion in your 1).  Even so, even if the intent was about militias,  then to make sure the militias are armed, the right to *keep* and *bear* arms cannot be infringed. It changes nothing.


----------



## Batcat (Feb 2, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> The biggest problem in Ohio is that our gun laws simply are not strong enough. Domestic violence policy expert Julia Webber serves as the implementation director of the Gifford’s Law Center, a national organization striving to make America safer by working to end gun violence.
> 
> “So, unfortunately, and tragically, too many people who have lost their lives as a result of domestic violence and how often that’s been connected to use of firearms,” said Webber.
> 
> ...


So if your girl friend gets pissed at you and decides to leave you she can disarm you on her way out. It’s her word that you threatened her. To go along with that plan you would have to believe all women are totally honest and never would lie. Of course a man also could lie and disarm his ex-girlfriend too.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 3, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> Oh, that myth about driving while black, as if police have nothing better to do. QUIT WATCHING MOVIES ON TELEVISION! You think television is reality.



I think reality is reality.  









						Opinion | Driving while Black: How police racism endangered three generations of my family
					

As my father — and life — taught me, it doesn't matter how carefully you drive or how respectfully you behave. And now I must teach my daughter this, too.




					www.nbcnews.com
				




At 16 years old — before I took my driver's license test in Detroit — my father, Howard, asked me to sit down at the kitchen table in our home in a middle-class neighborhood on the city's East Side for "The Talk," which many Black fathers were having (and still have) with their sons and daughters across America.

If I was pulled over, my father told me, I shouldn't make any sudden moves and I should keep my hands on the steering wheel; he said that I should have my driver's license and insurance card easily available and that I should answer questions respectfully.

As time passed, my worst fears as a teenager were realized: I saw the flashing lights of a police squad car in the rearview mirror, and I was pulled over. Two white police officers stood on either side of my mother's car with their hands on their hips, inches from their guns. Neighbors looked on; I felt like a criminal.



Ray From Cleveland said:


> It has nothing to do with being cooped up. Why would being cooped up have anything to do with people leaving their homes and committing murder? People cooped up in white suburbs don't do that.



Most murders are domestic violence.  You coop people up for long periods of time, they are more likely to get on each other's fucking nerves.   This isn't rocket science. 



Ray From Cleveland said:


> All these prosecutors are criminals themselves and don't lock up the bad guys, like that pig running your city. When criminals understand they can get away with just about anything, of course they commit more crime.



We lock up 2 million people.  Locking people up isn't a solution, and frankly, thanks to TRUMP PLAGUE, it actually proved to be a public health menace.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 3, 2022)

woodwork201 said:


> I can understand how you arrive at the mistaken opinion in your 1). Even so, even if the intent was about militias, then to make sure the militias are armed, the right to *keep* and *bear* arms cannot be infringed. It changes nothing.



Well, it changes a lot.  Today we don't have militias, we have a professional army and professional police forces.  So there is really no good reason for an average citizen to own a gun.  

The thing was, in colonial times, gun ownership was rare.  Guns were too expensive for most people to own, the firing mechanisms had to be imported from Europe. Like most of the "rights" established by the Founding Slave Rapists, they were meant for a class of the landed gentry, not regular folks. 



Batcat said:


> So if your girl friend gets pissed at you and decides to leave you she can disarm you on her way out. It’s her word that you threatened her. To go along with that plan you would have to believe all women are totally honest and never would lie. Of course a man also could lie and disarm his ex-girlfriend too.


Then don't piss your old lady off.  Of course, if you paid enough attention to her that you do to your gun, you probably wouldn't have that problem.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 3, 2022)

woodwork201 said:


> Wow. Hitler only killed Jews when they became awful? Pol Pot only killed Cambodians because they became awful? Lenin only killed 20 million awful people?
> 
> Good thing for 60 million awful deplorables that Hillary didn't become president.



NO, man, the GERMAN people became awful, that's why they killed the Jews.  The German people had plenty of guns, and not a one of them rushed out to stop the SS when they were taking the _Juden Schwein_ to the camps.   The only reason Germans will tell you the Holocaust was bad now is because Germany lost the war.  

Same thing with the Cambodians.  The rural people were regularly abused by the Americans and their urban allies, and when the tables turned, those people were marched out into the country and slaughtered. 

Guns don't stop "dictators" because Dictators usually happen when a majority is fine with them.


----------



## 22lcidw (Feb 3, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> I think reality is reality.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You have some legitimate gripes. progs will not make things better. Thye will dumb us down and there will be more people of color in positions of power. But that will only make us poorer. For they are doing this with an inferior social justice system they set up that has helped people to abuse the benefits. This has to be cleaned up. Then you will see a great improvement in living standards. And it will help all people.


----------



## 22lcidw (Feb 3, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> NO, man, the GERMAN people became awful, that's why they killed the Jews.  The German people had plenty of guns, and not a one of them rushed out to stop the SS when they were taking the _Juden Schwein_ to the camps.   The only reason Germans will tell you the Holocaust was bad now is because Germany lost the war.
> 
> Same thing with the Cambodians.  The rural people were regularly abused by the Americans and their urban allies, and when the tables turned, those people were marched out into the country and slaughtered.
> 
> Guns don't stop "dictators" because Dictators usually happen when a majority is fine with them.


You may know people who have not lived good. Maybe they made the most of what they had. The Germans after WW 1 suffered. The United States had the roaring 20's even with people living in tough ways. The people in Germany were trying to survive by the draconian rules put upon them by the Treaty of Versailles. Inflation ran rampant and misery expanded across their land.  That is fertile for a Hitler type. Especially for an intelligent people kept down by the then globalists.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 3, 2022)

22lcidw said:


> You may know people who have not lived good. Maybe they made the most of what they had. The Germans after WW 1 suffered. The United States had the roaring 20's even with people living in tough ways. The people in Germany were trying to survive by the draconian rules put upon them by the Treaty of Versailles. Inflation ran rampant and misery expanded across their land. That is fertile for a Hitler type. Especially for an intelligent people kept down by the then globalists.



There's a globalist hiding under your bed, right now.  

Obviously, I have kind of a personal view, as my Grandfather came here from Germany in 1925. (He then attempted to return in 1930 but realized that the country was going nuts and decided to stay in America.)  

Yes, misery was rampant, and Hilter, like Trump, tried to blame a marginalized minority instead of blaming the people really responsible.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Feb 3, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> I think reality is reality.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It's happening even worse during the Biden plague.  You know, the one that killed more Americans than Trump; two more variants and three Trump vaccines and he still did a worse job.  

So where is this evidence of yours the surge in violent crime is domestic?  Oh that's right, you make shit up as you go along.  Your story is a black guy making assumptions.  If you read the article, you'd see that by his own admission that he matched the description of a black guy the police were on the lookout for.  He obeyed all commands by police, when they figured out he wasn't their suspect, they let him go and he simply drove away like anybody else.  Then he talks about being a child in 1960 when his father got pulled over for a traffic violation, so I have no idea why you posted this garbage in the first place.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 3, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> It's happening even worse during the Biden plague. You know, the one that killed more Americans than Trump; two more variants and three Trump vaccines and he still did a worse job.


Again, you'd blame the fire department instead of the arsonist.... 




Ray From Cleveland said:


> So where is this evidence of yours the surge in violent crime is domestic? Oh that's right, you make shit up as you go along.











						A Majority of Gun Victims Know Their Assailant
					

Here are the victims of fatal gun violence we aren't talking about.




					newrepublic.com
				






Ray From Cleveland said:


> Your story is a black guy making assumptions. If you read the article, you'd see that by his own admission that he matched the description of a black guy the police were on the lookout for. He obeyed all commands by police, when they figured out he wasn't their suspect, they let him go and he simply drove away like anybody else. Then he talks about being a child in 1960 when his father got pulled over for a traffic violation, so I have no idea why you posted this garbage in the first place.


----------



## Batcat (Feb 3, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Well, it changes a lot.  Today we don't have militias, we have a professional army and professional police forces.  So there is really no good reason for an average citizen to own a gun.
> 
> The thing was, in colonial times, gun ownership was rare.  Guns were too expensive for most people to own, the firing mechanisms had to be imported from Europe. Like most of the "rights" established by the Founding Slave Rapists, they were meant for a class of the landed gentry, not regular folks.
> 
> ...


We live in a throw away society today. most marraiges don’t last long. 









						How Long Does the Average Couple Stay Married?
					

Planning to tie the knot? Learn the average length of marriage in the U.S.




					www.brides.com
				




***snip***

Average Length of Marriage In the U.S.​_On average, the typical U.S. marriage that ends in divorce lasts just eight years.3Worldwide, the average length of marriage can vary widely by country. In Italy, for example, the typical couple stays married for 17 years and the divorce rate is around 42%.4 In Qatar, on the other hand, the divorce rate is 69.5%, with marriages lasting less than 5 years on average.5

There's just as much variation when you consider divorce rates by U.S. state. Fourteen states have a divorce rate of 50-65%. Oklahoma, for example, has the highest divorce rate of any state, with 65.7% of marriages ending in divorce court. Twelve states have a divorce rate ranging from 15% to 39%, with the remaining states falling in between. Hawaii boasts the lowest divorce rate of any state, at around 20%

So why is there such a difference? One explanation for higher divorce rates in certain states than others is that those states also have higher marriage rates.7 It's purely a numbers game; more couples getting married means a higher probability for divorce. Divorce rates can also be higher when at least one spouse is getting remarried. Sixty percent of second marriages and 73% of third marriages are likely to end in divorce.7_


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Feb 3, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Again, you'd blame the fire department instead of the arsonist....
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Given I swore I would never read anything you post since you don't read it yourself, the title of the article tells it all: this has nothing to do with what we're talking about.  All it likely says is that most domestic violence is the most deadly, which we've known for many years now.  I asked for evidence of this surge we are seeing the last year or so.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Feb 3, 2022)

Batcat said:


> We live in a throw away society today. most marraiges [sic] don’t last long.



  It's a tragedy that has serious far-reaching consequences for society as a whole, well beyond the harm to the individuals who let their marriages fail.

  We've known, for longer than any of us have been alive, of the tragic effect on children who come from broken homes; and how they often end up adversely affecting those around them.  It used to be rare.  Now it is common, and with it, the tragic consequences that it produces.  And even worse, we're normalizing the situation of children never having proper, normal families to begin with, broken or otherwise.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 4, 2022)

Batcat said:


> We live in a throw away society today. most marraiges don’t last long.





Bob Blaylock said:


> It's a tragedy that has serious far-reaching consequences for society as a whole, well beyond the harm to the individuals who let their marriages fail.
> 
> We've known, for longer than any of us have been alive, of the tragic effect on children who come from broken homes; and how they often end up adversely affecting those around them. It used to be rare. Now it is common, and with it, the tragic consequences that it produces. And even worse, we're normalizing the situation of children never having proper, normal families to begin with, broken or otherwise.



Or people are realizing that Marriage is an outdated custom that really isn't necessary.   It might have made sense in a period where women didn't have opportunities and were considered less than equal.   

Frankly, kids being in a family where the parents hate and resent each other can be even more damaging. 

We don't have a problem because divorce is common.  We have a problem because for the last 40 years, the wealthy have been slowly stealing away the middle class, with the Religious right driving the getaway car.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Feb 4, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Or people are realizing that Marriage is an outdated custom that really isn't necessary.   It might have made sense in a period where women didn't have opportunities and were considered less than equal.
> 
> Frankly, kids being in a family where the parents hate and resent each other can be even more damaging.
> 
> We don't have a problem because divorce is common.  We have a problem because for the last 40 years, the wealthy have been slowly stealing away the middle class, with the Religious right driving the getaway car.



No, the problem is the left destroyed the nuclear family by kissing the asses of radicals in the women's lib movement in the 70's and 80's.  The concept that women don't need men in their lives took root in this country and today women have kids with no husband or men in their lives.  The male children grow up without a father figure and the female can't control them when they become teenagers.  

Polls of prisoners showed that the majority of them came from single family homes.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 4, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> No, the problem is the left destroyed the nuclear family by kissing the asses of radicals in the women's lib movement in the 70's and 80's. The concept that women don't need men in their lives took root in this country and today women have kids with no husband or men in their lives. The male children grow up without a father figure and the female can't control them when they become teenagers.
> 
> Polls of prisoners showed that the majority of them came from single family homes.



A poll would find the same thing among the population at large.  

41% of Americans are born out of wedlock now.   51% of marriages end in divorce.  

In actually, Crime has DECLINED since the 1990's.  So your logic that the social policies of the 80's regarding feminism and single motherhood doesn't quite ring true.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Feb 4, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> A poll would find the same thing among the population at large.
> 
> 41% of Americans are born out of wedlock now.   51% of marriages end in divorce.
> 
> ...



Crime decreased due to the economy and more and more states adopting CCW laws.  Today we use our firearms between 1 to 4 million times a year for self-defense or to stop a crime from taking place.  But successful programs like stop and frisk along with three strikes were eventually eliminated by the left.  Over the past year violent crime once again went up by 30% in most commie cities that use hand slapping instead of hard time to deal with criminals.


----------



## Batcat (Feb 4, 2022)

Bob Blaylock said:


> It's a tragedy that has serious far-reaching consequences for society as a whole, well beyond the harm to the individuals who let their marriages fail.
> 
> We've known, for longer than any of us have been alive, of the tragic effect on children who come from broken homes; and how they often end up adversely affecting those around them.  It used to be rare.  Now it is common, and with it, the tragic consequences that it produces.  And even worse, we're normalizing the situation of children never having proper, normal families to begin with, broken or otherwise.


I totally agree.









						Fewer than half of U.S. kids today live in a ‘traditional’ family
					

Just 46% of U.S. kids under 18 are living in a home with two married heterosexual parents in their first marriage, a marked change from 1960.




					www.pewresearch.org
				





JoeB131 said:


> A poll would find the same thing among the population at large.
> 
> 41% of Americans are born out of wedlock now.   51% of marriages end in divorce.
> 
> ...


There factors rarely mentioned on the decrease of crime since the 1990s …

1) More guns less crime. Gun sales skyrocketed during this period. 

2) Laws permitting concealed and open carry of firearms swept across our nation.

3) Cameras. Cameras are everywhere — on telephone poles and on cameras. 

Of course now police are turning reactive rather than proactive  because of riots following incidents like  the death of George Floyd. Plus many prosecutors are refusing to prosecute crimes. 

If you don’t bother to enforce existing laws people will take advantage of that fact and break the law. Obviously if the cops don’t bother to arrest people as they know they will not be prosecuted crime will skyrocket.


----------



## hadit (Feb 4, 2022)

Batcat said:


> I totally agree.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Joe doesn't like being reminded that gun sales went up at the same time the crime rate came down.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 4, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> Crime decreased due to the economy and more and more states adopting CCW laws. Today we use our firearms between 1 to 4 million times a year for self-defense or to stop a crime from taking place. But successful programs like stop and frisk along with three strikes were eventually eliminated by the left. Over the past year violent crime once again went up by 30% in most commie cities that use hand slapping instead of hard time to deal with criminals.


Guy, you just made a statement that single mothers were causing crime... 

But the numbers show that crime has actually gone down over the last 30 years. 

The one crime that hasn't gone down- gun homicides.. those have gone up.  



Batcat said:


> There factors rarely mentioned on the decrease of crime since the 1990s …


None of which had anything to do with guns. In fact, gun murders increased.  

Here's why Crime went down.  First, the economy got better.  Secondly, the Baby Boom ended in 1965, which means that the cases of Dumbass went down when those kids started aging out of the Dumbass Pool.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Feb 4, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Guy, you just made a statement that single mothers were causing crime...
> 
> But the numbers show that crime has actually gone down over the last 30 years.
> 
> The one crime that hasn't gone down- gun homicides.. those have gone up.



Most of which were suicides which are not actual attacks on other people. 

I never said single mothers were causing any crime.  What I said is that incarcerated people mostly come from single-family homes.  It's also in relation to poverty.  According to the CDC, it costs a middle-class parent(s) 244 thousand dollars  for each child between birth and the age of 18.  If you want the now standard family, you better have a half-million to shell out in the next 20 years.  Tough even for a couple yet alone a single-mother. 

If violent crime decreased, why has incarceration increased during the same period/  Drugs?  Not really enough to change statistics all that much.






Could it be that the more people we send away, the less violent crime we have?


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 5, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> Most of which were suicides which are not actual attacks on other people.



Nope, I specificially said "homicides".  






						Guns in the United States — Firearms, gun law and gun control
					

Gun law, gun control statistics, number of guns in United States, gun deaths, firearm facts and policy, armed violence, public health and development




					www.gunpolicy.org
				




Gun Homicides increased from 9257 in 1998 to 14389 in 2019, and the numbers from 2020 are going to be truly horrific when they are tabulated.  You flood your streets with guns, people are going to settle their disagreements with GUNS.  



Ray From Cleveland said:


> I never said single mothers were causing any crime. What I said is that incarcerated people mostly come from single-family homes. It's also in relation to poverty. According to the CDC, it costs a middle-class parent(s) 244 thousand dollars for each child between birth and the age of 18. If you want the now standard family, you better have a half-million to shell out in the next 20 years. Tough even for a couple yet alone a single-mother.



Except, again, not really.  that's 244K over 18 years.  Or about 13K a year.  Now, yeah, the fact that we have so many poor people in this country is kind of awful and we ought to be ashamed, but unwed motherhood isn't the problem. 

The French are close to 60% unwed motherhood...  Guess what, they also have a sensible system of social welfare, so they have NOWHERE NEAR our crime rates.  And before you go to you "Blame the darkies, but I'm totally not racist" stance, the French have a lot of minorities from their colonial days.  



Ray From Cleveland said:


> If violent crime decreased, why has incarceration increased during the same period/ Drugs? Not really enough to change statistics all that much.



Incarceration has increased because we have a Prison Industrial Complex that locks up people for petty drug and property crimes.  It's been a social disaster. But as Deep Throat said, "Follow the Money".  Someone is making big bucks off locking up 2 million people. 

Once again- the Europeans don't do this, because it's stupid.  They only lock up the truly dangerous.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Feb 5, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Nope, I specificially said "homicides".
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Nope, gun murders actually went down.  A slight increase in mass shootings which the FBI considers four or more deaths.  Accidental deaths were up quite a bit.  Suicides up a tad.  Children up a bit mostly due to drive by's and teen gang activity.  And uninentional shootings up quite a bit. 









						Gun Violence Archive
					






					www.gunviolencearchive.org
				




As for unewd mothers, of course they are a problem.  As you know I listen to my police scanner all the time.  It's constant calls from mothers on their own children.  When kids decide on the limits is how they end up in trouble with the law.  And there you go again, trying to compare a country of mostly white people with our diverse country.  Apples and oranges which is always the case with you.  Why don't you try making similar comparisons.  

If there are  such big bucks in prisons, why is it this country doesn't have enough of them?  Judges especially in big cities are pressured into handing out lighter sentences because they have no place to put these people without creating an overcrowding problem, another factor in our crime in this country.  Quit listening to commie propaganda and start reading the news.


----------



## woodwork201 (Feb 5, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Well, it changes a lot.  Today we don't have militias, we have a professional army and professional police forces.  So there is really no good reason for an average citizen to own a gun.
> 
> The thing was, in colonial times, gun ownership was rare.  Guns were too expensive for most people to own, the firing mechanisms had to be imported from Europe. Like most of the "rights" established by the Founding Slave Rapists, they were meant for a class of the landed gentry, not regular folks.



No; we still have militias, both defined in the Constitution and in current Federal Law.  
You show how ignorant you are.  We do have a militia; it is all the men 17 to 45 by Federal Law.  By original intent, it is all men 16 to 60.  Though Federal Law cannot change the Constitution, you can choose which you accept because, in either case, "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

You're completely wrong about gun ownership in the late 18th and early 19th centuries.  Most rifles were privately held by about 6 to 1 ratio; for example, in Pennsylvania, the Philadelphia newspaper, The Democratic Press, put it this way:

_*Our stock of Public Arms are respectable but it is still more gratifying to observe the number of Private Arms returned. There are no less than twelve thousand six hundred and seventy-eight Rifles reported as private property, and two thousand and thirty-eight public rifles …. Sharp Shooting, Good Marksmanship, is eminently a trait in the American Character*_


In fact, during the first decades of the 19th century, Tench Coxe oversaw the program that delivered arms created under Federal contract to the states and, ultimately, issued without charge to those in the militia who could not afford their own arms.  These were termed returnable arms, in that they remained the property of the State.  Even so, having a government arm was considered charity - something frowned upon by our forefathers. 

It wasn't until 1807 and 1808  that the government began to arm any in the militia; every man was expected to provide his own arms, reinforcing the fact that the 2nd Amendment, even when considering the prefatory clause as controlling, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.  Congress cannot undo the 2nd Amendment simply by creating a State administered but federally controlled armory where those who the government chooses can be assigned the temporary use of an arm for when the government approves.

The argument that the National Guard is the militia is absurd.  For instance, the Constitution states that Congress shall have the authority _*to provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions.  *_

Nowhere is the Congress or the Federal Government, including the President, authorized by the Constitution to call the militia to fight on foreign soil, yet the National Guard and reserves accounted for 45% of the troops ordered into the Mid-East over the last 20 years.  Where in the Constitution, and I quoted the authority above, does it give the Federal Government the authority to send State militias into foreign wars?

The National Guard is a federal military force that the Federal Government plays some games to pretend, and make idiots like you believe, that it legally and constitutionally replaces the Militia.  It does not.


----------



## woodwork201 (Feb 5, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Guns don't stop "dictators" because Dictators usually happen when a majority is fine with them.


Got it.  Like Antifa, BLM, you, and others on the left following Biden.


----------



## woodwork201 (Feb 5, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> There's a globalist hiding under your bed, right now.
> 
> Obviously, I have kind of a personal view, as my Grandfather came here from Germany in 1925. (He then attempted to return in 1930 but realized that the country was going nuts and decided to stay in America.)
> 
> Yes, misery was rampant, and Hilter, like Trump, tried to blame a marginalized minority instead of blaming the people really responsible.


Which marginalized minority did Trump blame?


----------



## woodwork201 (Feb 5, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> Nope, gun murders actually went down.  A slight increase in mass shootings which the FBI considers four or more deaths.  Accidental deaths were up quite a bit.  Suicides up a tad.  Children up a bit mostly due to drive by's and teen gang activity.  And uninentional shootings up quite a bit.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The two officers killed in NYC last week were killed after the killer's mother called them on her own son.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Feb 5, 2022)

woodwork201 said:


> The two officers killed in NYC last week were killed after the killer's mother called them on her own son.



And this goes on all the time.  About two months ago in my suburb two black kids, ages 12 and 13 shot and killed a 14 year old.  Do you think these two kids were raised in a two parent household?


----------



## 2aguy (Feb 6, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Nope, I specificially said "homicides".
> 
> 
> 
> ...



From 1993 to 2015 ownership of guns and carrying g guns increased by the millions…….from about   200 million guns in private hands to over 600 million……from about 2 million people legally carrying guns to over 19.5 million…..

Gun murder in that 22 year period went down 49%

gun crime went down 75%

So you are full of shit…..

gun ownership by normal people does not increase gun crime or gun murder…..

What caused the increase in gun murder starting in 2015?

The democrat party decided that attacking the police was the strategy they wanted to use……..so they went to war on the police…to the point that police across the country stopped going after street level criminals because the political party you vote for went after their jobs, their pensions and their freedom…..

the democrats then unleashed their brown shirts, BLM and antifa to burn, loot and kill…….in primarily black neighborhoods…….for 7 months and the democrat party mayors and governors ordered their police officers to stand down……


At the same time, the slave rapist party you vote for ……you called the founders slave rapists, yet the democrat party was created by two slave owners……you vote for the democrats…….

the democrat party prosecutors and judges, since 2015 have gone into overdrive releasing known, violent, repeat gun offenders…….they release them over and over again…..no matter how many times they are arrested for felony gun possession, armed robberies and even murder……

So no, gun ownership isn’t causing gun crime……the democrat party, founded by slave rapists caused the increase in gun murder….


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 6, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> Nope, gun murders actually went down.


No, they went up... as stated in the link I provided. 



Ray From Cleveland said:


> As for unewd mothers, of course they are a problem. As you know I listen to my police scanner all the time.


Yes, we realize your life is sad, Ray.  



Ray From Cleveland said:


> It's constant calls from mothers on their own children. When kids decide on the limits is how they end up in trouble with the law.



Uh, let's get real here... kids are gonna be kids.  My idiot brother who is now a trump supporter got into all sorts of trouble when he was a teen, even though we had pretty strict parents.  The only difference is that he was white, and he got a pass, while kids of color don't.  



Ray From Cleveland said:


> And there you go again, trying to compare a country of mostly white people with our diverse country. Apples and oranges which is always the case with you. Why don't you try making similar comparisons.



Actually, the UK and France have substantial minority populations... and 'diversity" should have nothing to do with it.  Either we have liberty and justice for all or we don't. 



Ray From Cleveland said:


> If there are such big bucks in prisons, why is it this country doesn't have enough of them?



We don't. We have too many.  We lock up 2 million people.  



Ray From Cleveland said:


> Judges especially in big cities are pressured into handing out lighter sentences because they have no place to put these people without creating an overcrowding problem, another factor in our crime in this country.



That's true. There was this guy who shot a kid 16 times, and they gave him 7 years, but they let him out in three...oh, wait, he was an ex-cop.  

No, but seriously, the problem here is that we lock up too many people for drug and minor property offenses, because there's big money in prisons for the companies living off the government dime.  That's where the profit part comes in.  Of course, schmucks like you are paying for it. 



Ray From Cleveland said:


> Quit listening to commie propaganda and start reading the news.


I have read the news...  America is failing miserably on crime compared to other countries.  We really need to try something else.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Feb 6, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> No, they went up... as stated in the link I provided.
> 
> 
> Yes, we realize your life is sad, Ray.
> ...



Correct, we do need to try something else, but people are not smart enough to stop voting Democrat.  They keep voting for the same failed politicians over and over and over again.  That's why Lighthead is your Mayor.  We are not hurting for prison space?  How many links would you like me to post that say you're FOS as always?  Yes kids will be kids, but if you didn't have that white privilege of growing up in a two parent household, your brother might be in prison or dead today; maybe you as well.  

UK demographics.

Ethnic groups
White: 87.2% Black/African/Caribbean British: 3% Indian/British: 2.3% Pakistani/British: 1.9%, Mixed race: 2% Other: 3.7% (2011 est.)









						Demography of the United Kingdom - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				




France Demographics​
A law from 1872 prohibits the French Republic from conducting a census by making any official distinction between its citizens in terms of race or religious beliefs, so French demographics can be a bit hard to determine. In 2004, it was estimated that 85% of the population of Metropolitan France was white or of European origin, with 10% from North Africa, 3.5% Black and 1.5% Asian.



			France Population 2022 (Live)


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 7, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> Correct, we do need to try something else, but people are not smart enough to stop voting Democrat. They keep voting for the same failed politicians over and over and over again. That's why Lighthead is your Mayor. We are not hurting for prison space? How many links would you like me to post that say you're FOS as always? Yes kids will be kids, but if you didn't have that white privilege of growing up in a two parent household, your brother might be in prison or dead today; maybe you as well.



Uh, guy, we are hurting for prison space. 









						Since you asked: Just how overcrowded were prisons before the pandemic, and at this time of social distancing, how overcrowded are they now?
					

As states mandate reducing the capacity of public spaces to slow the spread of COVID-19, we collect the data to show just how overcrowded almost ...




					www.prisonpolicy.org
				




_Prison overcrowding has always been a serious problem, correlated with increased violence, lack of adequate health care, limited programming and educational opportunities, and reduced visitation. But during the current pandemic, overcrowded prisons — and even prisons operating at levels approaching capacity — are more deadly than ever. In a recent study of Texas prison capacity, COVID infection rates, and mortality, researchers found that prisons holding between 94 and 102% of their capacity had higher infection rates and more deaths than prisons operating at 85% of their total capacity, suggesting that a prison’s crowdedness correlates with viral spread. This makes sense when we consider that many state and local governments have mandated restaurants, retail spaces, and schools to operate at a reduced capacity to slow the spread of COVID-19 through communities_.

The only white privilege he got was the cops treated him differently than when they caught a black kid.   Ironically, we haven't talked in 5 years because he's friends with that POS Cop who shot the kid 16 time (and only spent 3 years in prison for it because our system is racist.)  He could have been that kid if he were black. 



Ray From Cleveland said:


> UK demographics.



So you just admitted that UK and France aren't completely white, yet they have nowhere near our crime levels...

Wait for it... Wait for it... 

It must be the guns.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Feb 7, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Uh, guy, we are hurting for prison space.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



WTF are you talking about? I just posted links that at most they have less than 3% of blacks in those countries.  Over 50% of our murders are committed by just 7% of our population in this country which are black males. So it makes a world of difference.  It's the same here in the US.  If your city has a scant amount of blacks, you won't see much trouble from them.  They stand out.  Once you get past the 50% range, that's when the armed robberies take place, murders, riots, businesses closing up and leaving.


----------



## woodwork201 (Feb 7, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Uh, guy, we are hurting for prison space.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It's a lie.  The prisons were emptied for Covid and to make room for political (mask) criminals.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Feb 7, 2022)

woodwork201 said:


> It's a lie.  The prisons were emptied for Covid and to make room for political (mask) criminals.



  We've literally seen almost exactly that, in some blue states.

  Law-abiding business owners arrested and jailed for trying to keep their businesses open in defiance of the illegal shutdowns, and dangerous, violent criminals turned loose to make room for them.


----------



## woodwork201 (Feb 7, 2022)

Bob Blaylock said:


> We've literally seen almost exactly that, in some blue states.
> 
> Law-abiding business owners arrested and jailed for trying to keep their businesses open in defiance of the illegal shutdowns, and dangerous, violent criminals turned loose to make room for them.



Yes, if someone just committed murder then the risk of them getting Fauci is just too great in prison so they must be let go.  But if someone defied Fauci then they go to prison regardless of the risk of catching Fauci.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 8, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> WTF are you talking about? I just posted links that at most they have less than 3% of blacks in those countries. Over 50% of our murders are committed by just 7% of our population in this country which are black males. So it makes a world of difference. It's the same here in the US. If your city has a scant amount of blacks, you won't see much trouble from them. They stand out. Once you get past the 50% range, that's when the armed robberies take place, murders, riots, businesses closing up and leaving.



Tell us again how not racist you are, Ray.  
That shit never gets old.  

Oh, crime in Cleveland is worse than Crime in Chicago... 



Bob Blaylock said:


> We've literally seen almost exactly that, in some blue states.
> 
> Law-abiding business owners arrested and jailed for trying to keep their businesses open in defiance of the illegal shutdowns, and dangerous, violent criminals turned loose to make room for them.



Well, try to overcome the Cult Brainwashing here and use some logic, Mormon Bob. 

Who is the greater threat. The guy who steals a TV, or the guy who keeps a store open for an unnecessary service and continues to spread Covid. 

Hint. Only one of those actions might result in people DYING


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Feb 8, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Tell us again how not racist you are, Ray.
> That shit never gets old.
> 
> Oh, crime in Cleveland is worse than Crime in Chicago...



We didn't have one murder all last week.  How did you commies in Chicago do? 

Statistics can't be racist.  Statistics are simply facts that you can't accept. 



JoeB131 said:


> Well, try to overcome the Cult Brainwashing here and use some logic, Mormon Bob.
> 
> Who is the greater threat. The guy who steals a TV, or the guy who keeps a store open for an unnecessary service and continues to spread Covid.
> 
> Hint. Only one of those actions might result in people DYING



Covid was still with us last year and this year and all those unnecessart businesses stayed open.  You must have missed the latest John Hopkins report.  Lockdowns didn't so shit in stopping the virus.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Feb 8, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Who is the greater threat. The guy who steals a TV, or the guy who keeps a store open for an unnecessary service and continues to spread Covid.
> 
> Hint. Only one of those actions might result in people DYING



  A much greater threat than those two combined is those who have exploited an exaggerated cold/flu outbreak to sabotage the economy and destroy basic freedoms, and the useful idiots who are stupid enough to believe and obey them.

  Your usual effort to dismiss the impact of a common criminal on the rights of human beings is noted.


----------



## Soupnazi630 (Feb 8, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> 1) The Second Amendment is about Militias, not guns.
> 2) Yes, you absolutely should take away  people's guns if they are dangerous.
> 
> The best argument for gun control is a conversation with a gun nut.


The second amendment is about individual rights not militia

The biggest gun nuts are armed and working for government which is the best argument against gun control


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 8, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> We didn't have one murder all last week. How did you commies in Chicago do?
> 
> Statistics can't be racist. Statistics are simply facts that you can't accept.



Really?









						Cleveland’s homicide total dips in 2021, still second highest in 30 years
					

Cleveland's homicide total dipped slightly in 2021, but it's still the second worst year for deadly violence since 1991.




					www.cleveland.com
				




Cleveland ended 2021 with 170 homicides, the second worst year for homicides in the city since there were 175 in 1991. The total is down from 2020’s 193 homicides, the worst year for homicides since 1982.

Now, Cleveland has a current population of 395,000    170/395,000    Or 1 out of 2323 Clevelanders met an untimely end.  
Chicago had 800 homicides.  Which sounds awful, but we have a population of *2,739,797, or 1 out of 3424 *



Ray From Cleveland said:


> Covid was still with us last year and this year and all those unnecessart businesses stayed open. You must have missed the latest John Hopkins report. Lockdowns didn't so shit in stopping the virus.



Kind of exactly the point, isn't it?  We practiced any serious containment for about three months. In some parts of the country.  

That thing we didn't try didn't work.  What a surprise. Just ignore the countries like Japan that DID do lockdowns and practiced safety measures.  We're Americans, we're special. 

Like Short Bus Special... but special. 



Bob Blaylock said:


> A much greater threat than those two combined is those who have exploited an exaggerated cold/flu outbreak to sabotage the economy and destroy basic freedoms, and the useful idiots who are stupid enough to believe and obey them.
> 
> Your usual effort to dismiss the impact of a common criminal on the rights of human beings is noted.



I've had a TV stolen from me.  I got a new one. 
I die of covid, because some asshole didn't get his vaccination and held a mass spreader event, I'm not coming back from that one.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Feb 8, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Kind of exactly the point, isn't it? We practiced any serious containment for about three months. In some parts of the country.
> 
> That thing we didn't try didn't work. What a surprise. Just ignore the countries like Japan that DID do lockdowns and practiced safety measures. We're Americans, we're special.
> 
> Like Short Bus Special... but special.



We people have a constitution that prohibits any real lock down.  A federal judge ruled that a lock down was unconstitutional in PA.  Experts agree that part of Japan's success is they are generally healthier people than we in the US.  They weigh less because it's the law with their socialized healthcare system.  Too fat for too long they haul you ass away to a fat farm until you reach government mandated weight.  They eat little fast food and nutrition is important to most of the population which aids in weight related diseases like diabetes and obesity.  

Unlike in the US, the Japanese people trust their government and only need suggestions to act whereas we in the US have plenty of people that do not trust the government nor their recommendations.  Most of our deaths were the elderly with pre-existing conditions which was much rarer in Japan.  And most of our deaths were people found with huge deficiencies in Vitamin D.  Here we greet each other with hand shakes, hugs and kisses.  Over there, greetings are keeping distance from each other and bowing, a generations old tradition.  

In fear of overwhelming their health facilities, especially during the Olympics, they had minimum testing because they didn't want anybody that had covid with mild symptoms in their hospitals, so of course their report rate was much less than the US.  Here, healthcare facilities considered a covid death if you died with covid instead of because of covid like what happened to my Uncle and thousands of similar stories across the US.  









						How Japan managed to curb the pandemic early on: Lessons learned from the first eight months of COVID-19
					






					www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
				












						Fat in Japan? You're breaking the law.
					

As the health care debate rages in the US, Tokyo lawmakers set a maximum waist size. Are you too fat for Japan?




					theworld.org
				






JoeB131 said:


> I've had a TV stolen from me. I got a new one.
> I die of covid, because some asshole didn't get his vaccination and held a mass spreader event, I'm not coming back from that one.



Vaccinated people spread covid no different than unvaccinated.  The vaccine only protects you, not anybody else.


----------



## otto105 (Feb 8, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> The biggest problem in Ohio is that our gun laws simply are not strong enough. Domestic violence policy expert Julia Webber serves as the implementation director of the Gifford’s Law Center, a national organization striving to make America safer by working to end gun violence.
> 
> “So, unfortunately, and tragically, too many people who have lost their lives as a result of domestic violence and how often that’s been connected to use of firearms,” said Webber.
> 
> ...


Yes, in a republic we demand that domestic violence be solved by guns or the thread of guns and the desire of guns to discharge.

There will be no condom.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Feb 8, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> I die of covid, because some asshole didn't get his vaccination and held a mass spreader event, I'm not coming back from that one.



  Whether any other person chooses to allow or not to allow himself to be injected with dangerous experimental drugs has no impact whosoever on your risk of dying from COVID-1984.

  Someone else's choice to not be used as a test subject for a risky medical experiment is none of your fucking business.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Feb 8, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> Experts agree that part of Japan's success is they are generally healthier people than we in the US. They weigh less because it's the law with their socialized healthcare system. Too fat for too long they haul you ass away to a fat farm until you reach government mandated weight.



  Can you just imagine CrimIncel Joe drooling at the prospect of government having the power to take such control over people's lives?


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 9, 2022)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> We people have a constitution that prohibits any real lock down. A federal judge ruled that a lock down was unconstitutional in PA. Experts agree that part of Japan's success is they are generally healthier people than we in the US. They weigh less because it's the law with their socialized healthcare system. Too fat for too long they haul you ass away to a fat farm until you reach government mandated weight. They eat little fast food and nutrition is important to most of the population which aids in weight related diseases like diabetes and obesity.



The Constitution is not a suicide pact.   The Japanese are more health conscious and have universal health care.   

It amazes me the that crazy right defines the ability to die young of a treatable disease as a freedom, but the idea that you guys can go around spreading a deadly disease is a right as well. 



Ray From Cleveland said:


> Unlike in the US, the Japanese people trust their government and only need suggestions to act whereas we in the US have plenty of people that do not trust the government nor their recommendations. Most of our deaths were the elderly with pre-existing conditions which was much rarer in Japan. And most of our deaths were people found with huge deficiencies in Vitamin D. Here we greet each other with hand shakes, hugs and kisses. Over there, greetings are keeping distance from each other and bowing, a generations old tradition.



The Japanese have more elderly people than we do... and yet they only had 18K Covid Deaths compared to our 900,000.   And they considered 18K deaths a failure, as the PM resigned in disgrace.  



Ray From Cleveland said:


> In fear of overwhelming their health facilities, especially during the Olympics, they had minimum testing because they didn't want anybody that had covid with mild symptoms in their hospitals, so of course their report rate was much less than the US. Here, healthcare facilities considered a covid death if you died with covid instead of because of covid like what happened to my Uncle and thousands of similar stories across the US.


Yes, we're back to that...  pretending that people didn't really have Covid when they did.  Anything to pretend Trump didn't fuck this up and leave a steaming mess on Biden's desk. 



Ray From Cleveland said:


> Vaccinated people spread covid no different than unvaccinated. The vaccine only protects you, not anybody else.



Well, still not true.  









						Vaccinated people are less likely to spread Covid, new research finds
					

British scientists examined how the Pfizer-BioNTech and the AstraZeneca vaccines affected the spread of the virus if a person had a breakthrough infection.




					www.nbcnews.com
				












						Fully vaccinated less likely to pass COVID-19 to others
					

Research on transmission prevention is ongoing. But as more people receive the vaccine, the spread of COVID-19 continues to slow.




					www.osfhealthcare.org


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 9, 2022)

Bob Blaylock said:


> Whether any other person chooses to allow or not to allow himself to be injected with dangerous experimental drugs has no impact whosoever on your risk of dying from COVID-1984.
> 
> Someone else's choice to not be used as a test subject for a risky medical experiment is none of your fucking business.



So the guy who thinks that his magic underwear protects him from evil rejects proven science.  Right.  



Bob Blaylock said:


> Can you just imagine @CrimIncel Joe drooling at the prospect of government having the power to take such control over people's lives?



Coming from a guy who belongs to a deranged cult that makes people shun their own family members? 

It amazes me that you obey your cult with slavish devotion, but you reject even the most sensible recommendation from your government.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Feb 9, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> So the guy who thinks that his magic underwear protects him from evil rejects proven science.  Right.
> 
> Coming from a guy who belongs to a deranged cult that makes people shun their own family members?
> 
> It amazes me that you obey your cult with slavish devotion, but you reject even the most sensible recommendation from your government.



  Even if my religion was truly as bizarre as your insane and absurd lies make it out to be, it would still be more reasonable and sane than _“the most sensible recommendation from your government”_ that you keep slavishly defending.

  In any event, your hateful lies about my religion are not relevant to the topic of this thread, nor in any of the other threads where you use them to wave your hatred and your deceitfulness around as if it was some proud banner.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 9, 2022)

Bob Blaylock said:


> Even if my religion was truly as bizarre as your insane and absurd lies make it out to be, it would still be more reasonable and sane than _“the most sensible recommendation from your government”_ that you keep slavishly defending.



Funny thing.  Every day, most of us drive on government roads, we are kept safe in our beds at night by government first responders, our food is safe to eat because of government inspectors and government subsidized farms...  America has never seen war on our own soil in 165 years because our military (run by the government) was so proficient. 



Bob Blaylock said:


> In any event, your hateful lies about my religion are not relevant to the topic of this thread, nor in any of the other threads where you use them to wave your hatred and your deceitfulness around as if it was some proud banner.



Yet you've never pointed out one thing I've gotten wrong.   And I generally avoid the really fun stuff like Joseph Smith predicting we would find people on the moon wearing Quaker Dress.    Or Baptizing Dead People. Or the Mountain Meadow Massacre..  

Come on, point out one thing about Mormon Beliefs I've gotten wrong.   Don't worry, you can't.


----------



## Esdraelon (Feb 9, 2022)

SavannahMann said:


> if the purchaser has ever been* convicted* of misdemeanor Domestic Violence.


Your article seems to equate an accusation with a confirmation of violent behavior ending in conviction.  A conviction already ends your ability to own a firearm.  If you attempt to purchase a weapon and lie on the NICS form and it's discovered that you lied... that's a potential prison sentence.


----------

