# Do Americans need weapons?



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

The idea of the 2nd Amendment is to have weapons to create a militia if necessary and prevent the arbitrariness of the feds. It doesn't work, the feds are constantly getting stronger, and the Americans have already turned into obedient sheep of the left regime. The weapon has become a fetish. The left is not afraid of it.


----------



## JoeBlow (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> The idea of the 2nd Amendment is to have weapons to create a militia if necessary and prevent the arbitrariness of the feds. It doesn't work, the feds are constantly getting stronger, and the Americans have already turned into obedient sheep of the left regime. The weapon has become a fetish. The left is not afraid of it.


They do now!!! lol


----------



## JustAGuy1 (Jan 26, 2022)

They/You should only fear if you're going to try and take away Rights. Make no mistake, we will use them.


----------



## konradv (Jan 26, 2022)

Time to add rocket artillery to the second.


----------



## Man of Ethics (Jan 26, 2022)

RIP over 30,000 people who die by guns in USA every year.  

Weapons are of little use except murder and suicide.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

Relative Ethics said:


> RIP over 30,000 people who die by guns in USA every year.
> 
> Weapons are of little use except murder and suicide.


Need an adequate policy for organizing the defense of the states.
It is necessary to hold training camps and exercises


----------



## Otis Mayfield (Jan 26, 2022)

"Der taken r guns!"

They haven't "taken ur guns" for over 245 years. Don't hold your breath.


----------



## Man of Ethics (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Need an adequate policy for organizing the defense of the states.
> It is necessary to hold training camps and exercises


I do not think there will be a civil war anytime soon.

Perhaps economic division between Republicans and Democrats, but not a war.  

Weapons are very harmful.


----------



## Flash (Jan 26, 2022)

Relative Ethics said:


> RIP over 30,000 people who die by guns in USA every year.
> 
> Weapons are of little use except murder and suicide.


You are confused Moon Bat.

Firearms are used for recreational purposes.  I go to the range every week and enjoy shooting.  I also enjoy building and collecting firearms.  Millions of Americans enjoy shooting firearms.  Just because little pussies like you don't like to shoot doesn't mean other people should be prevented from doing it.

Firearms are also useful for self defense.  Everyday in the US firearms are used for self defense and that is a good thing.

Lastly, but most importantly, our Founding Fathers said that they are "necessary for the security of a free state".


----------



## Man of Ethics (Jan 26, 2022)

Flash said:


> You are confused Moon Bat.
> 
> *Firearms are used for recreational purposes.  I go to the range every week and enjoy shooting.*  I also enjoy building and collecting firearms.  Millions of Americans enjoy shooting firearms.  Just because little pussies like you don't like to shoot doesn't mean other people should be prevented from doing it.
> 
> ...


Firearms are very dangerous and unnecessary toys.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

Relative Ethics said:


> I do not think there will be a civil war anytime soon.
> 
> Perhaps economic division between Republicans and Democrats, but not a war.
> 
> Weapons are very harmful.


You need to be ready for everything.
Those problems that you listed are due to the fact that people forget why they need weapons. It will sober them up.

If you have a weapon, you should be in the reserve of the militia. It's written in the second amendment. Carrying a weapon makes a man liable for military service.


----------



## BlindBoo (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> The idea of the 2nd Amendment is to have weapons to create a militia if necessary and prevent the arbitrariness of the feds.


It had nothing to do with the people revolting against the government of the people.   Congress had the authority to establish and regulate the various state militias.


----------



## Confederate Soldier (Jan 26, 2022)

Otis Mayfield said:


> "Der taken r guns!"
> 
> They haven't "taken ur guns" for over 245 years. Don't hold your breath.




I have to agree. Even if they tried, it wouldn't be successful.


----------



## marvin martian (Jan 26, 2022)

konradv said:


> Time to add rocket artillery to the second.



It's not excluded now, nothing to add.


----------



## Flash (Jan 26, 2022)

Relative Ethics said:


> Firearms are very dangerous and unnecessary toys.




I gave you three examples of why firearms are necessary.  You must have trouble with reading comprehension.

Yes they are dangerous.  If you own one they you should follow the four rules for firearm safety just like if you drive a vehicle you need to follow road safety rules.  

If you think they are dangerous and unnecessary then don't get one. Problem solved!

Don't be a Karen dipshit and advocate taking that Constitutional right away from others.  That just makes you look like an asshole.


----------



## marvin martian (Jan 26, 2022)

Relative Ethics said:


> Firearms are very dangerous and unnecessary toys.



Translation: I'm scared of guns, so no one should be allowed to own them.

Fuck off.


----------



## AZrailwhale (Jan 26, 2022)

BlindBoo said:


> It had nothing to do with the people revolting against the government of the people.   Congress had the authority to establish and regulate the various state militias.


Only when called to federal service.


----------



## Mac-7 (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> The idea of the 2nd Amendment is to have weapons to create a militia if necessary and prevent the arbitrariness of the feds. It doesn't work, the feds are constantly getting stronger, and the Americans have already turned into obedient sheep of the left regime. The weapon has become a fetish. The left is not afraid of it.


What country do you come from?


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

BlindBoo said:


> It had nothing to do with the people revolting against the government of the people.   Congress had the authority to establish and regulate the various state militias.


Can not be. It's written about the state militia to defend the freedom of the state.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

Mac-7 said:


> What country do you come from?


What's the difference?


----------



## Unkotare (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> The idea of the 2nd Amendment is to have weapons to create a militia if necessary and prevent the arbitrariness of the feds. It doesn't work, the feds are constantly getting stronger, and the Americans have already turned into obedient sheep of the left regime. The weapon has become a fetish. The left is not afraid of it.


Wrong again, loon.


----------



## Unkotare (Jan 26, 2022)

Relative Ethics said:


> RIP over 30,000 people who die by guns in USA every year.
> 
> Weapons are of little use except murder and suicide.


None of your fucking business.


----------



## Unkotare (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Need an adequate policy for organizing the defense of the states.
> It is necessary to hold training camps and exercises


When we need advice on running our country, we will let you know. Until then, STFU.


----------



## marvin martian (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> What's the difference?



Because you lack a basic understanding of our civil rights. It would be a shame if you're an American, because you don't deserve to be.


----------



## Unkotare (Jan 26, 2022)

Do Americans "need" freedom of speech? Do we "need" protection from illegal search and seizure? We sure as hell don't "need" some presumptuous, half-wit foreign busy-body doling out his sage advice on things that are none of his fucking business.


----------



## Flash (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> You need to be ready for everything.
> Those problems that you listed are due to the fact that people forget why they need weapons. It will sober them up.
> 
> If you have a weapon, you should be in the reserve of the militia. It's written in the second amendment. Carrying a weapon makes a man liable for military service.


You are confused Moon Bat.

The Supreme Court has ruled that the right to keep and bear arms is an individual right and protected the same as free speech and freedom of religion.

You don't have to be a member of any organization to be afforded that right.  It is all in_ Heller _case.  Go look it up.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

marvin martian said:


> Because you lack a basic understanding of our civil rights. It would be a shame if you're an American, because you don't deserve to be.


No, I'm not an American.
What exactly do you mean? That the feds took away your freedoms? Isn't this visible?
Of course, you still have more freedoms than in Europe, but this does not negate the fact that the feds became stronger.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

Flash said:


> You are confused Moon Bat.
> 
> The Supreme Court has ruled that the right to keep and bear arms is an individual right and protected the same as free speech and freedom of religion.
> 
> You don't have to be a member of any organization to be afforded that right.  It is all in_ Heller _case.  Go look it up.


This is bad because it doesn't help create a militia, instead gun ownership becomes chaotic and will eventually lead to the left taking those rights away under the pretense of endangering life.


----------



## marvin martian (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> This is bad because it doesn't help create a militia, instead gun ownership becomes chaotic and will eventually lead to the left taking those rights away under the pretense of endangering life.



Not if they don't want to get shot.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

I believe that only those who agree to join the militia, conduct exercises and, if necessary, fight for the state should have the right to bear arms. Otherwise, this will lead to the federalization of the state and the deprivation of the right to own weapons in general.


----------



## Flash (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> This is bad because it doesn't help create a militia, instead gun ownership becomes chaotic and will eventually lead to the left taking those rights away under the pretense of endangering life.




You are confused.  No it is not bad.  It is good that it is an individual right.

Criminals will do bad things no matter what stupid laws are passed by deranged Liberals.  It being an individual right allows the people the ability to protect themselves.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

marvin martian said:


> Not if they don't want to get shot.


These are empty words. You're not doing anything against the feds.


----------



## BlindBoo (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Can not be. It's written about the state militia to defend the freedom of the state.



Here is where the Constitution delegate that authority to Congress.

"To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;"





__





						Full Text of the U.S. Constitution | Constitution Center
					

Read and share the complete text of the United States Constitution.



					constitutioncenter.org
				




See the Whiskey Rebellion for the first example of a President using a State Militia against US Citizens in rebellion.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

Flash said:


> You are confused.  No it is not bad.  It is good that it is an individual right.
> 
> Criminals will do bad things no matter what stupid laws are passed by deranged Liberals.  It being an individual right allows the people the ability to protect themselves.


But it also needs to be a defense of the freedom of the state. This state of affairs is not conducive to the freedom of the state from the feds.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

BlindBoo said:


> Here is where the Constitution delegate that authority to Congress.
> 
> "To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
> 
> To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;"


Here we have in mind only the case of using the militia to reinforce the federal forces. No one canceled the main purpose: the protection of the independence of the state.


----------



## marvin martian (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> These are empty words. You're not doing anything against the feds.



King George III said the same thing.


----------



## BlindBoo (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> I believe that only those who agree to join the militia, conduct exercises and, if necessary, fight for the state should have the right to bear arms.


When the document was crafted, most all citizens were required to join their local militia's and provide their own personal weapons.  Things change as times progress, but still the 17-45 year olds are all still considered part of the militia, or cannon fodder for the draft if it is ever necessary.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

marvin martian said:


> King George III said the same thing.


Then the Americans were smarter and more courageous. Now they have same-sex marriages


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

BlindBoo said:


> When the document was crafted, most all citizens were required to join their local militia's and provide their own personal weapons.  Things change as times progress, but still the 17-45 year olds are all still considered part of the militia, or cannon fodder for the draft if it is ever necessary.


This is good for the Republican System. But you need to conduct exercises and have a military doctrine in every state. You need to have a real militia and not a formal one


----------



## Mac-7 (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> What's the difference?


Dont answer a question with a question

you are fooling no one


----------



## BlindBoo (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Here we have in mind only the case of using the militia to reinforce the federal forces. No one canceled the main purpose: the protection of the independence of the state.


No, they were the federal force n that case.  Their main purpose is not to fight against the government of the people.  Citizens have the right to vote out those they disagree with.  Losing one election in not tantamount to a revolutionary change worth dissolving 150 years of compromise and cooperation between Americans.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

Mac-7 said:


> Dont answer a question with a question
> 
> you are fooling no one


I am not obliged to answer any questions, and if I answer, I answer as I see fit.


----------



## Mac-7 (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> I am not obliged to answer any questions, and if I answer, I answer as I see fit.


Thanks for your assistance

now the only question is which foreign country are you posting from?


----------



## Unkotare (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> I believe that only those who agree to join the militia, conduct exercises and, if necessary, fight for the state should have the right to bear arms. ...


What you "believe" means exactly NOTHING here. Go start a thread about the laws and structure of government in your country instead of obsessing over ours.


----------



## BlindBoo (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> This is good for the Republican System. But you need to conduct exercises and have a military doctrine in every state. You need to have a real militia and not a formal one



The Texas Militia are the militia forces of the State of Texas. It currently consists of the Texas Army National Guard, Texas Air National Guard, and Texas State Guard.  That is in addition to the Texas National Guard.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

BlindBoo said:


> No, they were the federal force n that case.  Their main purpose is not to fight against the government of the people.  Citizens have the right to vote out those they disagree with.  Losing one election in not tantamount to a revolutionary change worth dissolving 150 years of compromise and cooperation between Americans.


Then you are on your way to the usual leftist dictatorship. The feds will not leave you free, they will centralize power until they make you slaves


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

BlindBoo said:


> The Texas Militia are the militia forces of the State of Texas. It currently consists of the Texas Army National Guard, Texas Air National Guard, and Texas State Guard.  That is in addition to the Texas National Guard.


It's good practice


----------



## RodISHI (Jan 26, 2022)

"Do Americans need weapons?"​
Yes they absolutely do and laws in every state to protect them from whackjob prosecutors that would try to jail them for defending themselves against invaders?









						Ariz. border situation spirals into chaos
					

As thousands of illegal immigrants pour into the U.S. on a daily basis, residents along the border are sounding the alarm on the dangers they face everyday. One America's Christina Bobb has more from Washington.




					www.brighteon.com


----------



## jwoodie (Jan 26, 2022)

Relative Ethics said:


> RIP over 30,000 people who die by guns in USA every year.
> 
> Weapons are of little use except murder and suicide.


2/3 of gun deaths are suicide, matched by an equal number of non-gun suicides.


----------



## BlindBoo (Jan 26, 2022)

AZrailwhale said:


> Only when called to federal service.


Not really.

"To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;"


----------



## Captain Caveman (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> The idea of the 2nd Amendment is to have weapons to create a militia if necessary and prevent the arbitrariness of the feds. It doesn't work, the feds are constantly getting stronger, and the Americans have already turned into obedient sheep of the left regime. The weapon has become a fetish. The left is not afraid of it.


You should have guns, I think only 4 countries don't.

It's just that American culture needs changed about them. Background checks should be thorough, secure gun cabinets at home with guns secured when not in use, size and type of gun regulated, and no need whatsoever to carry them around in public. Those who breach any of this should be severely fined and jailed.


----------



## hadit (Jan 26, 2022)

Relative Ethics said:


> RIP over 30,000 people who die by guns in USA every year.
> 
> Weapons are of little use except murder and suicide.


And collecting
And shooting targets
And competing
And hunting
And varmint control

Should I go on? It would seem that these are novel concepts to you, so take your time and make sure you can absorb them.


----------



## marvin martian (Jan 26, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> You should have guns, I think only 4 countries don't.
> 
> It's just that American culture needs changed about them. Background checks should be thorough, secure gun cabinets at home with guns secured when not in use, size and type of gun regulated, and no need whatsoever to carry them around in public. Those who breach any of this should be severely fined and jailed.



Spoken like a subject, not a citizen.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> You should have guns, I think only 4 countries don't.
> 
> It's just that American culture needs changed about them. Background checks should be thorough, secure gun cabinets at home with guns secured when not in use, size and type of gun regulated, and no need whatsoever to carry them around in public. Those who breach any of this should be severely fined and jailed.


Do you mean the American states or the countries of the world?

In most countries of the world there is no right to guns (not counting smoothbore), and probably nowhere is there such liberal legislation regarding gun ownership.

I am not against the possession of weapons, the essence of the topic is different. Weapons should protect not only personal but also republican freedoms.


----------



## Captain Caveman (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Do you mean the American states or the countries of the world?
> 
> In most countries of the world there is no right to guns (not counting smoothbore), and probably nowhere is there such liberal legislation regarding gun ownership.
> 
> I am not against the possession of weapons, the essence of the topic is different. Weapons should protect not only personal but also republican freedoms.


Countries as in countries of the world.


----------



## miketx (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Need an adequate policy for organizing the defense of the states.
> It is necessary to hold training camps and exercises


Ole gov don't like it so much when they do that.


----------



## BlindBoo (Jan 26, 2022)

hadit said:


> And collecting
> And shooting targets
> And competing
> And hunting
> ...


Different places need different laws.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Countries as in countries of the world.


No, in most countries it is prohibited or heavily restricted. There are no such freedoms as in the USA, where a special permit for the possession of automatic weapons is not required anywhere.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

BlindBoo said:


> Different places need different laws.


This is a left approach: total bureaucratization. The right approach is for all communities to set rules for themselves that suit them.


----------



## Captain Caveman (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> No, in most countries it is prohibited or heavily restricted. There are no such freedoms as in the USA, where a special permit for the possession of automatic weapons is not required anywhere.


If you're interested in UK guns, watch this. Otherwise you will just just come out with the same rhetoric as the gun nuts.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> If you're interested in UK guns, watch this. Otherwise you will just just come out with the same rhetoric as the gun nuts.


According to Wikipedia, they have no freedom of guns.
By permission only


----------



## Captain Caveman (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> According to Wikipedia, they have no freedom of guns.
> By permission only


Have a look at the video, doesn't take long.

Rights and privileges has never been a concern, not sure if anyone outside on America has wanted to argue that, it's irrelevant. The issue is the violence/deaths from guns. Treating guns and the bigger picture of guns responsibility. Guns being in the wrong hands, guns not secure, guns in public etc.. That's the concern.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Have a look at the video, doesn't take long.


I think it's just left PR

The pistols are generally completely prohibited, as in China.


----------



## Captain Caveman (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> I think it's just left PR
> 
> The pistols are generally completely prohibited, as in China.


The UK had handguns, never a problem. Then the Dunblane massacre of 1996 resulted in them being banned. So they now have to be a certain length, per in the video. I imagine to restrict concealment


----------



## BlindBoo (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> This is a left approach: total bureaucratization. The right approach is for all communities to set rules for themselves that suit them.


So cities like Chicago should be able to impose restrictions on weapons because of the violence?  Whereas rural counties could have few restrictions?


----------



## miketx (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> The idea of the 2nd Amendment is to have weapons to create a militia if necessary and prevent the arbitrariness of the feds. It doesn't work, the feds are constantly getting stronger, and the Americans have already turned into obedient sheep of the left regime. The weapon has become a fetish. The left is not afraid of it.


Come take them.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

BlindBoo said:


> So cities like Chicago should be able to impose restrictions on weapons because of the violence?  Whereas rural counties could have few restrictions?


Everyone must decide this for himself. Every state, county, municipality and so on


----------



## Man of Ethics (Jan 26, 2022)

hadit said:


> And collecting
> And shooting targets
> And competing
> And hunting
> ...


Indeed, guns are expensive toys which claim over 30,000 lives each year in USA alone.


----------



## Man of Ethics (Jan 26, 2022)

jwoodie said:


> 2/3 of gun deaths are suicide, matched by an equal number of non-gun suicides.


Guns enable suicides -- like opioids enable overdose.


----------



## Man of Ethics (Jan 26, 2022)

marvin martian said:


> Translation: I'm scared of guns, so no one should be allowed to own them.
> 
> Fuck off.


I have never held one.


----------



## 1srelluc (Jan 26, 2022)

I bought a old 1910 made Winchester M1906 .22 pump today just for the parts as the bore was bad, and the extractor was broken. I gave $40.00 for it and if I sell the parts I listed I'll make around $350.00 off of it. Gotta fund my "gun habit" some way.


----------



## Batcat (Jan 26, 2022)

Relative Ethics said:


> RIP over 30,000 people who die by guns in USA every year.
> 
> Weapons are of little use except murder and suicide.


My mother and my daughter both used a handgun to stop an attacker. In both cases the attacker ran when he realized his victim was armed and no one was hurt. 

A firearm is a very effective self defense weapon especially for a woman.


----------



## miketx (Jan 26, 2022)

Relative Ethics said:


> RIP over 30,000 people who die by guns in USA every year.
> 
> Weapons are of little use except murder and suicide.


Come take them, liar.


----------



## miketx (Jan 26, 2022)

Mac-7 said:


> What country do you come from?


Hes from serbia.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

Batcat said:


> My mother and my daughter both used a handgun to stop an attacker. In both cases the attacker ran when he realized his victim was armed and no one was hurt.
> 
> A firearm is a very effective self defense weapon especially for a woman.


What law gives women the right to own guns?


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jan 26, 2022)

Relative Ethics said:


> Weapons are of little use except murder and suicide.


Since you know firearms are used for self-defense 10x more often that for murder and 5x more often than to commit suicide, your stateent, above, is a lie.


----------



## Mac-7 (Jan 26, 2022)

miketex said:


> Hes from serbia.


May all rupol2000 ’s goats catch anthrax and die


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jan 26, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> It's just that American culture needs changed about them. Background checks should be thorough, secure gun cabinets at home with guns secured when not in use, size and type of gun regulated, and no need whatsoever to carry them around in public.


You cannot demonstrate the necessity for, and efficacy of, these restrictions.


----------



## marvin martian (Jan 26, 2022)

Relative Ethics said:


> I have never held one.



Yeah, I figured.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jan 26, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> The issue is the violence/deaths from guns.


~423,000,000 guns in the US.
Every year, ~10,000 of them - 0.002364% - are used to commit murder.
This means 99.99764% of them are not.
So...  what's the issue again with guns in the US?


----------



## marvin martian (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> What law gives women the right to own guns?



Damn, what century are you from?


----------



## 1srelluc (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> What law gives women the right to own guns?


As wives were once considered property of their husbands they could arm them and they could even command men at arms left at a estate when Lord Hubby was a away crusading and such.


----------



## miketx (Jan 26, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> You should have guns, I think only 4 countries don't.
> 
> It's just that American culture needs changed about them. Background checks should be thorough, secure gun cabinets at home with guns secured when not in use, size and type of gun regulated, and no need whatsoever to carry them around in public. Those who breach any of this should be severely fined and jailed.


I got three guns not locked up right now. Come take them commie.


Relative Ethics said:


> I have never held one.



How many dicks have you held?


----------



## Captain Caveman (Jan 26, 2022)

miketex said:


> I got three guns not locked up right now. Come take them commie.
> 
> 
> How many dicks have you held?


I held yours by using tweezers, once I whacked the back of the sailors head to knock it out of his mouth.

Do you feel macho with 3 guns out, do you have an erection? Grrr, you hunk. (Pathetic dickhead).


----------



## BasicHumanUnit (Jan 26, 2022)

M14 Shooter said:


> ~423,000,000 guns in the US.
> Every year, ~10,000 of them - 0.002364% - are used to commit murder.
> This means 99.99764% of them are not.
> So...  what's the issue again with guns in the US?



 Few on the Right actually understand the whole Gun Control push by the Left.
They keep scratching their heads and regurgitating statistics, facts about how guns save lives and the obvious.

*NONE OF IT MATTERS*

All that matters to the Left Gun Grabbers is that government gets absolute power.    Yes.  There are millions upon millions of fools who never learn from history and are fooled into thinking (by plutocrats and just plain bad men) that government provides all for all.

So they demand massive, iron-fisted, no compromise authoritarian government control over every aspect of your life.
(They disguise their true demands as Socialist aspirations early on), but that's just to fool the weak minded lemmings.

Naturally, guns can't be tolerated because they symbolize liberation and freedom from government oppression.
So, Guns MUST go.

It's really that simple.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

marvin martian said:


> Damn, what century are you from?


Somewhere I came across information that in the US constitution this applies only to men.


----------



## Batcat (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> What law gives women the right to own guns?


The same laws that allow women to own butcher knives and cleavers.

In passing in the Free State of Florida 29% of the current 2,459,530 valid Concealed Weapons Permits have been issued to females. 

*Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services Division of Licensing
Concealed Weapon or Firearm License Holder Profile As of December 31, 2021*



			https://www.fdacs.gov/content/download/7500/file/cw_holders.pdf


----------



## BasicHumanUnit (Jan 26, 2022)

miketex said:


> I got three guns not locked up right now. Come take them commie.
> How many dicks have you held?



They will.  And you will taste dicks readily when the time comes.   Conservatives have no spine...just ask Broke Loser.
You may think you can be tough when they come to your door, but by then you will have no choice but to drop to your knees, put your hands behind your back and tell them not only where each and every one of your stashes is located, but also that of any and all friends or family you might have.
You'll be surprised how fast you change into compliance when they have a gun shoved up your behind ready to pull the trigger.

You have made no plans.  They have.

We all appreciate that you WANT to think of yourself as tough....but you (and every other conservative or gun owner) WILL comply and that will be that.
You didn't fight the Patriot act.  You didn't fight Civil Forfeiture.   You didn't fight abortion rights.   Heck, you won't even fight for your children.....
but you, Mr. Conservative, want us to believe you will suddenly get brave when they have 20 rifles and a 50cal pointed at you and your family?
Seriously???

If Conservatives are so "tuff"...what are they waiting for?  



BrokeLoser said:


> Easy now...I side with Conservatives, I vote with Conservatives BUT they are the most nutless, spinless, big mouth pieces of shit that ever were. Come on man...they didn’t have the balls to keep heterosexual white Christians cool in a nation founded, built, run and funded by heterosexual white Christians. The Left has owned their sackless asses for decades....Sad but true.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

Batcat said:


> The same laws that allow women to own butcher knives and cleavers.


It doesn't count as a weapon at all.


----------



## ding (Jan 26, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> You should have guns, I think only 4 countries don't.
> 
> It's just that American culture needs changed about them. Background checks should be thorough, secure gun cabinets at home with guns secured when not in use, size and type of gun regulated, and no need whatsoever to carry them around in public. Those who breach any of this should be severely fined and jailed.


Why is that?


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

Batcat said:


> In passing in the Free State of Florida 29% of the current 2,459,530 valid Concealed Weapons Permits have been issued to females.


Maybe it was illegal?


----------



## Flash (Jan 26, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Guns being in the wrong hands, guns not secure, guns in public etc.. That's the concern.


No law will ever keep guns out of the hands of bad guys that want to use them for crime.

There will always be dumbasses that don't secure things in their homes and someone will suffer because of it.  It is not just guns but many other things.

There is nothing wrong with open or concealed carry.  That is the "bear" in the right to keep and bear arms that is a Constitutional right.


----------



## ding (Jan 26, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Have a look at the video, doesn't take long.
> 
> Rights and privileges has never been a concern, not sure if anyone outside on America has wanted to argue that, it's irrelevant. The issue is the violence/deaths from guns. Treating guns and the bigger picture of guns responsibility. Guns being in the wrong hands, guns not secure, guns in public etc.. That's the concern.


Sort of like misusing alcohol by drinking and driving and killing innocent people?  But we don't outlaw alcohol or cars, do we?  We just arrest the ones that misuse them, right?


----------



## Batcat (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Maybe it was illegal?


Perhaps in New York City,  not in Florida.


----------



## Batcat (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> It doesn't count as a weapon at all.


A butcher knife is not a weapon?

Ask the Brits about that. 









						Knife crime in Britain hits record high as offence reported every 11 MINUTES
					

KNIFE crimes in England and Wales has soared to a record high, shocking new figures show today. Offences involving blades rose six per cent, with a crime reported every 11 minutes. Crimes involving…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

Batcat said:


> A butcher knife is not a weapon?
> 
> Ask the Brits about that.


formally it is not considered a weapon


----------



## marvin martian (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Somewhere I came across information that in the US constitution this applies only to men.



You mind sharing that "information"?


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

Batcat said:


> Perhaps in New York City,  not in Florida.


Does Florida have a gun ownership law for women?


----------



## miketx (Jan 26, 2022)

BasicHumanUnit said:


> They will.  And you will taste dicks readily when the time comes.   Conservatives have no spine...just ask Broke Loser.
> You may think you can be tough when they come to your door, but by then you will have no choice but to drop to your knees, put your hands behind your back and tell them not only where each and every one of your stashes is located, but also that of any and all friends or family you might have.
> You'll be surprised how fast you change into compliance when they have a gun shoved up your behind ready to pull the trigger.
> 
> ...


Be sure you wear body armor, cocksucker


----------



## hadit (Jan 26, 2022)

BlindBoo said:


> Different places need different laws.


Pretty obvious. That's why one-size-doesn't-fit-all federal gun control laws are not a good thing. Let the states and cities decide their laws as long as they stay within the bounds of the 2A.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

marvin martian said:


> You mind sharing that "information"?


The "militia" comprised all *males* physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense. The Antifederalists feared that the Federal Government would disarm the people in order to disable this citizens' militia, enabling a politicized standing army or a select militia to rule. The response was to deny Congress power to abridge the ancient right of individuals to keep and bear arms, so that the ideal of a citizens' militia would be preserved. Pp. 22–28.





__





						District of Columbia v. Heller - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

marvin martian
 And at the same time, the right to arms is directly related to the militia





Accordingly, only men are allowed, and men must be in the militia.

A separate amendment is required to allow women to carry weapons.


----------



## Man of Ethics (Jan 26, 2022)

marvin martian said:


> Yeah, I figured.


I never held a gun.  I do not drive a car.

Sadly many other people with mental disability play with guns and drive cars and even motorcycles.


----------



## hadit (Jan 26, 2022)

Relative Ethics said:


> Indeed, guns are expensive toys which claim over 30,000 lives each year in USA alone.


Where does that leave you then on the subject of the uses for guns? You said there were only two, are you now saying there are more? And as far as expense, I would expect any gun I purchase to be made well. A piece of crap gun is likely to blow up in my hands, and that's not good.


----------



## Man of Ethics (Jan 26, 2022)

M14 Shooter said:


> Since you know firearms are used for self-defense 10x more often that for murder and 5x more often than to commit suicide, your stateent, above, is a lie.


Given the fact that there are only 200-300 justifiable homicides per year in USA, I find these studies sort of fishy.


----------



## Man of Ethics (Jan 26, 2022)

hadit said:


> Where does that leave you then on the subject of the uses for guns? You said there were only two, are you now saying there are more? And as far as expense, I would expect any gun I purchase to be made well. A piece of crap gun is likely to blow up in my hands, and that's not good.


Guns are *expensive* in terms of lives lost.  As for money, there are more expensive toys.


----------



## hadit (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> marvin martian
> And at the same time, the right to arms is directly related to the militia
> 
> 
> ...


No, because even IF the 2A was found to be limited to the militia (it's not, per the SC), it would only mean that Congress COULD write laws forbidding women from carrying weapons. Until that would happen, they could because it would not be illegal.


----------



## hadit (Jan 26, 2022)

Relative Ethics said:


> Guns are *expensive* in terms of lives lost.  As for money, there are more expensive toys.


So where does that leave you then on the subject of the uses for guns? You said there were only two, are you now saying there are more?


----------



## Man of Ethics (Jan 26, 2022)

Batcat said:


> My mother and my daughter both used a handgun to stop an attacker. In both cases the attacker ran when he realized his victim was armed and no one was hurt.
> 
> A firearm is a very effective self defense weapon especially for a woman.


I guess sometimes guns are used for self-defense.  But too many lives are lost to guns.


----------



## Man of Ethics (Jan 26, 2022)

hadit said:


> So where does that leave you then on the subject of the uses for guns? You said there were only two, are you now saying there are more?


Even opiates may have benign uses.  But harm outweighs the good.


----------



## miketx (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> marvin martian
> And at the same time, the right to arms is directly related to the militia
> 
> 
> ...


Come take my wifes guns commie.


----------



## BlindBoo (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> marvin martian
> And at the same time, the right to arms is directly related to the militia
> 
> 
> ...



Phony baloney.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

hadit said:


> No, because even IF the 2A was found to be limited to the militia (it's not, per the SC)


This follows from the text of the amendment itself.


hadit said:


> it would only mean that Congress COULD write laws forbidding women from carrying weapons. Until that would happen, they could because it would not be illegal.


No. Congress cannot change what is written in the constitution. And it says that US men as part of the militia have the right to own weapons, and must also have equipment and be organized.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

miketex said:


> Come take my wifes guns commie.


female emancipation is left wing


----------



## BlindBoo (Jan 26, 2022)

Relative Ethics said:


> Even opiates may have benign uses.  But harm outweighs the good.


Sounds brainwashed.  It is one of the greatest pain relievers mother nature put on this earth.  The current war on it's use has added another layer of corruption to an already corrupt war on Americans and done nothing to curb the problem.  In fact their efforts have made the problem worse.


----------



## miketx (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> female emancipation is left wing


Come take them commie.


----------



## Likkmee (Jan 26, 2022)

Relative Ethics said:


> RIP over 30,000 people who die by guns in USA every year.
> 
> Weapons are of little use except murder and suicide.


Se  my alarm off at 2AM and I'll show you the real reason


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

BlindBoo said:


> Sounds brainwashed.  It is one of the greatest pain relievers mother nature put on this earth.  The current war on it's use has added another layer of corruption to an already corrupt war on Americans and done nothing to curb the problem.  In fact their efforts have made the problem worse.


I think that the fight against opiates is a purely leftist initiative. The left has always used alcohol, opiates compete with alcohol.

In left-wing regimes, the ban on opiates is so strict that people go to jail for several years for a single dose, without the fact of trying to sell or distribute. That is, ordinary drug addicts are imprisoned

Opiates, despite the harm of addiction, do not seriously harm health and do not make stupid pigs out of people, this is the problem of the left.


----------



## evenflow1969 (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Somewhere I came across information that in the US constitution this applies only to men.


Lol, keep studying you do not understand our country. Lol  Here our women have the same rights as everyone else. Also most people on what is considered the left here own guns. You say we are not as smart or courageous as we were during the revolution you would be wrong. Invade us pretty much everyone over the age of 11 will be packing. Good luck!


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

miketex said:


> Come take them commie.


Fucking degenerate, communists are leftists.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

evenflow1969 said:


> Lol, keep studying you do not understand our country. Lol  Here our women have the same rights as everyone else. Also most people on what is considered the left here own guns. You say we are not as smart or courageous as we were during the revolution you would be wrong. Invade us pretty much everyone over the age of 11 will be packing. Good luck!


You don't understand your own country. Women in the army and fag in America appeared only a few years ago. America is still an extreme right-wing country, it is a unique country, it is not like any other country in the world in this.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

evenflow1969 said:


> left here own guns



*By the way, this is most likely just a leftist initiative. Liberalization just happened with the arrival of the left, after the bush, somewhere around 2010.

Their plan is in 2 steps:

1) to untie the concept of weapons from the militia. Arm all the idiots and hysterics in order to exacerbate the problem, arrange provocations, deliberate executions.

2) Under the pretext of increasing problems with weapons, to impose a complete ban on the possession of weapons by anyone.


Thus, the feds will have unarmed states that they will easily subdue.*


----------



## hadit (Jan 26, 2022)

Relative Ethics said:


> Even opiates may have benign uses.  But harm outweighs the good.


Okay, you've just classified yourself. You are the debater who will not acknowledge that someone else is correct and posted information you did not think of. See, a simple, "Yeah, there are other uses for guns other than murder and suicide" would have shown that you're actually thinking and debating. What you're doing is desperately trying to avoid admitting that there are other valid uses for guns that you did not think of. And yes, of course, many dangerous substances have benign uses. Botulism is one the deadliest diseases known to man, yet women inject the botulism toxin into their skin as a beauty treatment. 

Honesty and integrity come into play when you concede that saying guns are only useful for murder and suicide is flat out wrong. Let's put it this way. Did you know that the VAST majority of firearms in the US will NEVER harm a human being? Did you know that the majority of LEO don't even draw their weapon in the course of duty, let alone fire it at another human? Consider those when thiinking about the uses of firearms.


----------



## evenflow1969 (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> You don't understand your own country. Women in the army and fag in America appeared only a few years ago. America is still an extreme right-wing country, it is a unique country, it is not like any other country in the world in this.


Lol, women have been serving in the military for a long, long time. In uniform in combat units not as long. In every war since the beginning of our country women have killed for their country just not in uniform. A good percentage of the women here are packing. Our left is likely right of most in your country. I am a hunting and fishing guide. About twenty five percent of my clients are female.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

evenflow1969 said:


> Lol, women have been serving in the military for a long, long time. In uniform in combat units not as long. In every war since the beginning of our country women have killed for their country just not in uniform. A good percentage of the women here are packing. Our left is likely right of most in your country. I am a hunting and fishing guide. About twenty five percent of my clients are female.


there have always been non-combatant women, someone needs to cook food and sew, bandage wounds. Naturally, we are talking about combatants.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

evenflow1969 said:


> I am a hunting and fishing guide. About twenty five percent of my clients are female.


Hunting and fishing are women's activities
There is nothing masculine there, except for especially dangerous species like Lion Safari. Among all the forest savages, it was women for the most part who did this.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

evenflow1969 said:


> Our left is likely right of most in your country.


There are no rights in Europe at all


----------



## evenflow1969 (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> there have always been non-combatant women, someone needs to cook food and sew, bandage wounds. Naturally, we are talking about combatants.


Lol, there have always been female combatants they just were not in uniform.


----------



## evenflow1969 (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Hunting and fishing are women's activities
> There is nothing masculine there, except for especially dangerous species like Lion Safari. Among all the forest savages, it was women for the most part who did this.


Lol, ok shortbus.


----------



## hjmick (Jan 26, 2022)

Relative Ethics said:


> Weapons are very harmful.




So don't get one. 


But don't deny me my Constitutional rights...


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

evenflow1969 said:


> Lol, there have always been female combatants they just were not in uniform.


Yes, in the left world, women were exactly like that. There they even sat on thrones and raped the slaves


----------



## The Sage of Main Street (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> The "militia" comprised all *males* physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense.


*Follow the Money or You'll Be Led by the Nose*

The political elite was too cheap to pay for a standing army, so they came up with this scheme in order to have civilians already trained and armed by themselves, at their own expense.  The Continental Congress, the same people who wrote the anti-democratic Constitution, constantly short-changed George Washington's army, forcing him to extend the war eight long years.

We should have had a permanent draft from 1776 to the present day.  Not having the elitists' gutless unpatriotic sons serve was another motive for relying on state militias. 

It is illogical to think that an army of mostly draftees would be a threat to take over and impose a military dictatorship, which was one of the cheapskates' excuses for not having a standing army.  They used a lot of imaginary threats to impose their elitist tyranny, which they are doing now, too.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

evenflow1969 By the way, in animals like lions and wolves, men don't hunt either.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

The Sage of Main Street said:


> *Follow the Money or You'll Be Led by the Nose*
> 
> The political elite was too cheap to pay for a standing army, so they came up with this scheme in order to have civilians already trained and armed by themselves.  The Continental Congress, the same people who wrote the anti-democratic Constitution, constantly short-changed George Washington's army, forcing him to extend the war eight long years.
> 
> ...


I disagree. Of course, this is not a highly professional army, but the meaning was different there, this is clear from the text of the amendment itself. It's against  the feds.
It was possible to form professional units, probably they were too.

If it weren't for this amendment, there would be no republican system. When the people are disarmed, the federals immediately turn them into slaves and destroy the local authorities.


----------



## konradv (Jan 26, 2022)

marvin martian said:


> It's not excluded now, nothing to add.


You sure? Tried buying any lately?


----------



## evenflow1969 (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> evenflow1969 By the way, in animals like lions and wolves, men don't hunt either.


Lol, ok shortbus. Who knows maybe some day we war with your country and I get to hunt you.


----------



## miketx (Jan 26, 2022)

Relative Ethics said:


> Weapons are very harmful.


How so? Mine have never hurt anyone, LIAR!


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

evenflow1969 said:


> Lol, ok shortbus. Who knows maybe some day we war with your country and I get to hunt you.


Warriors are not hunters, fucking cretin. The best warriors that have ever existed are the Aryans. They've been killing lady shit like you by the thousands to one. They hunted hunters.

Here are the traditional hunters






For these peoples, hunting was the main subsistence.

And traditional Americans didn't hunt, they herded cows, idiot.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

evenflow1969 I've always been amused by people like you, jerks who claim to be "men" on the basis that they can put a worm on a hook. Show me a woman who can't handle it. I never understood if you are real idiots or just fooling around.


----------



## evenflow1969 (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Warriors are not hunters, fucking cretin. The best warriors that have ever existed are the Aryans. They've been killing lady shit like you by the thousands to one. They hunted hunters.
> 
> Here are the traditional hunters
> 
> ...


Lol ok shortbus. Lol proud Aryan that's sits on the couch. What have you ever killed? That chick in that photo would kill ya and clean ya then eat you with a smile on her face. What do you know about blood and guts and the smell. You are not aryan your bitch ass would throw up the first smell of blood and bile.


rupol2000 said:


> evenflow1969 I've always been amused by people like you, jerks who claim to be "men" on the basis that they can put a worm on a hook. Show me a woman who can't handle it. I never understood if you are real idiots or just fooling around.


Lolits funny that a proud Aryan keyboard warrior that know nothing about being out side thinks that's all there is to it. Mean while my 6 ft 1 blonde haired blue eye daughter would gut ya hang you in the garage and clean you like you were nothing. Never hunted either beast nor man and think you would survive either. We got soy boys like you around here and we let them sit in the truck while we go take care of the dirty work.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

evenflow1969 said:


> Lol ok shortbus. Lol proud Aryan that's sits on the couch. What have you ever killed? That chick in that photo would kill ya and clean ya then eat you with a smile on her face. What do you know about blood and guts and the smell. You are not aryan your bitch ass would throw up the first smell of blood and bile.


I didn’t kill anyone, but once I hit one fag, with one of my blows he tore his whole face and lay in the hospital for 2 weeks. It had approximately 110 kilograms of muscle mass.

I had a neighbor who I fucked, one day we had an argument, and she hit me in the chest. I didn't feel a thing, and she hurt her wrist. I used to lift her with one hand, her hand was 3 times smaller than mine, and I could crush her like a tangerine. She is an avid hunter. 99% of hunters and fishermen are cowardly, flabby half-men who have never fought in their lives. They have been weaklings and cowards all their lives. Half of them are alcoholics.

You're really pathetic when you try to pass off cruelty as courage. You act like a woman.


----------



## Batcat (Jan 26, 2022)

Relative Ethics said:


> I guess sometimes guns are used for self-defense.  But too many lives are lost to guns.


Guns are frequently used for self defense. Most incidents where a firearm Is used to stop an attack are not recorded in any data base as often no one was hurt and no one was caught. 

So we end up with estimates from 500,000 times to several million times. Somewhere in the middle is the right number but even 500,000 attacks stopped because the victim was armed is not peanuts. 









						Data Visualization | Defensive Gun Uses in the U.S. | The Heritage Foundation
					

According to almost every major study on the issue, Americans use their firearms defensively between 500,000 and 3 million times each year. From @HeritageDataViz




					datavisualizations.heritage.org
				




***snip***

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, almost every major study on defensive gun use has found that Americans use their firearms defensively between 500,000 and 3 million times each year. There’s good reason to believe that most defensive gun uses are never reported to law enforcement, much less picked up by local or national media outlets.


----------



## miketx (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> I didn’t kill anyone, but once I hit one fag, with one of my blows he tore his whole face and lay in the hospital for 2 weeks. It had approximately 110 kilograms of muscle mass.
> 
> I had a neighbor who I fucked, one day we had an argument, and she hit me in the chest. I didn't feel a thing, and she hurt her wrist. I used to lift her with one hand, her hand was 3 times smaller than mine, and I could crush her like a tangerine. She is an avid hunter. 99% of hunters and fishermen are cowardly, flabby half-men who have never fought in their lives. They have been weaklings and cowards all their lives. Half of them are alcoholics.
> 
> You're really pathetic when you try to pass off cruelty as courage. You act like a woman.


You trying to get a date with him?


----------



## night_son (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> The idea of the 2nd Amendment is to have weapons to create a militia if necessary and prevent the arbitrariness of the feds. It doesn't work, the feds are constantly getting stronger, and the Americans have already turned into obedient sheep of the left regime. The weapon has become a fetish. The left is not afraid of it.



An armed citizenry fails to intimidate our federal government because We the People have been compartmentalized into thousands of microscopic bureaucratic cattle pens; each pen easily kept in good working order by local, county, state governments. Our government at large has divided us, penned us in, ringed us into thousands of tiny razor wire cages from which we cannot break free to unite in any actionable numbers. That being said, if ever our government decides to come at us from the front, in the light of day, they'd better first ramp up body bag production.


----------



## hjmick (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> I didn’t kill anyone, but once I hit one fag, with one of my blows he tore his whole face and lay in the hospital for 2 weeks. It had approximately 110 kilograms of muscle mass.
> 
> I had a neighbor who I fucked, one day we had an argument, and she hit me in the chest. I didn't feel a thing, and she hurt her wrist. I used to lift her with one hand, her hand was 3 times smaller than mine, and I could crush her like a tangerine. She is an avid hunter. 99% of hunters and fishermen are cowardly, flabby half-men who have never fought in their lives. They have been weaklings and cowards all their lives. Half of them are alcoholics.
> 
> You're really pathetic when you try to pass off cruelty as courage. You act like a woman.




Yeah, sure...


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

evenflow1969 said:


> Lolits funny that a proud Aryan keyboard warrior that know nothing about being out side thinks that's all there is to it. Mean while my 6 ft 1 blonde haired blue eye daughter would


By the way, aryans have never been like this, this is a pure lie


----------



## Unkotare (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> I didn’t kill anyone, but once I hit one fag, with one of my blows he tore his whole face and lay in the hospital for 2 weeks. It had approximately 110 kilograms of muscle mass.
> 
> I had a neighbor who I fucked, one day we had an argument, and she hit me in the chest. I didn't feel a thing, and she hurt her wrist. I used to lift her with one hand, her hand was 3 times smaller than mine, and I could crush her like a tangerine. She is an avid hunter. 99% of hunters and fishermen are cowardly, flabby half-men who have never fought in their lives. They have been weaklings and cowards all their lives. Half of them are alcoholics.
> 
> You're really pathetic when you try to pass off cruelty as courage. You act like a woman.


Pathetic loser post on so many levels.


----------



## Batcat (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Does Florida have a gun ownership law for women?


The Free State of Florida is not a Muslim state. There are no urgent enforced laws prohibiting only women from doing what men can that I know of. 

However Florida does have sone outdated laws on the books such as …
_Unmarried women are prohibited from parachuting on Sunday under possible punishment of arrest, fine, and/or jailing._









						Not Many People Realize That These 15 Things Are Actually Illegal In Florida
					

Chances are you've broken one - or a few - of these weird laws in Florida.




					www.onlyinyourstate.com


----------



## evenflow1969 (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> I didn’t kill anyone, but once I hit one fag, with one of my blows he tore his whole face and lay in the hospital for 2 weeks. It had approximately 110 kilograms of muscle mass.
> 
> I had a neighbor who I fucked, one day we had an argument, and she hit me in the chest. I didn't feel a thing, and she hurt her wrist. I used to lift her with one hand, her hand was 3 times smaller than mine, and I could crush her like a tangerine. She is an avid hunter. 99% of hunters and fishermen are cowardly, flabby half-men who have never fought in their lives. They have been weaklings and cowards all their lives. Half of them are alcoholics.
> 
> You're really pathetic when you try to pass off cruelty as courage. You act like a woman.


Lil, so you can beat flags and women. Hilarious 😀😀😀😀😀😀😀😀 Yep proud Aryan. try that shit here both would have been armed and would have blown your head off. Lol mommy must be proud. Did mommy make ya some strudel to celebrate her big big boy afterwards?


----------



## AZrailwhale (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> I believe that only those who agree to join the militia, conduct exercises and, if necessary, fight for the state should have the right to bear arms. Otherwise, this will lead to the federalization of the state and the deprivation of the right to own weapons in general.


That's very Russian of you.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

hjmick said:


> Yeah, sure...


That is, you also think that there is something masculine in the hunter and fisherman?

What exactly?

Do you understand that masculine qualities are something that is difficult or inaccessible for most women? A simple example: in ordinary life, a woman, as a rule, will not lift a box weighing 50 kilograms. Therefore strength is a masculine quality. Is it logical?


----------



## evenflow1969 (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> By the way, aryans have never been like this, this is a pure lie


Lol, what's the pure lie? That you are Aryan?


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

AZrailwhale said:


> That's very Russian of you.


Oh no. Russia is a left centralized country, it's the exact opposite


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

evenflow1969 said:


> Lol, what's the pure lie? That you are Aryan?


No, the tales of the Germans about their Aryan origin.


----------



## hjmick (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> That is, you also think that there is something masculine in the hunter and fisherman?
> 
> What exactly?
> 
> Do you understand that masculine qualities are something that is difficult or inaccessible for most women? A simple example: in ordinary life, a woman, as a rule, will not lift a box weighing 50 kilograms. Therefore strength is a masculine quality. Is it logical?



Whatever... I was referring to your fantasy about hitting someone and having sex with  a neighbor... that shit is funny...



Fucking loser...


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

hjmick said:


> Whatever... I was referring to your fantasy about hitting someone and having sex with  a neighbor... that shit is funny...
> 
> 
> 
> Fucking loser...


lol


----------



## evenflow1969 (Jan 26, 2022)

hjmick said:


> Whatever... I was referring to your fantasy about hitting someone and having sex with  a neighbor... that shit is funny...
> 
> 
> 
> Fucking loser...


Lol, this guy is a riot!


----------



## evenflow1969 (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> That is, you also think that there is something masculine in the hunter and fisherman?
> 
> What exactly?
> 
> Do you understand that masculine qualities are something that is difficult or inaccessible for most women? A simple example: in ordinary life, a woman, as a rule, will not lift a box weighing 50 kilograms. Therefore strength is a masculine quality. Is it logical?


Lol so you can load the truck while the warriors go fight.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

By the way, Brezhnev was an avid hunter. Does he look like a man? 











Most hunters are just such "cowboys" and "machos", there are strong guys, but there is no dependence here.

I don't see anything masculine in this.

Whoever goes for adrenaline, with a horn on a bear, is of course a man, but there are only a few of them. Usually they just shoot guns and drink vodka, only cretins can see something "masculine" in this.

Peoples whose traditional occupations are hunting and fishing, such as the Yakut Evenki and the Saami, are usually below average in height and have thin bones.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

evenflow1969 said:


> Lol so you can load the truck while the warriors go fight.


Нere, too, you are wrong. Physically, the warrior needed explosive qualities, as in classical athletics and gymnastics, equestrian sports. Hunters don't have any of that. They are slow, weak, they drive victims, set traps, and use weapons. It never requires military qualities.

Once again, women do it just as well as men. You fucking nerds who don't believe reality. It's in front of your eyes.


----------



## evenflow1969 (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Нere, too, you are wrong. Physically, the warrior needed explosive qualities, as in classical athletics and gymnastics, equestrian sports. Hunters don't have any of that. They are slow, weak, they drive victims, set traps, and use weapons. It never requires military qualities.
> 
> Once again, women do it just as well as men. You fucking nerds who don't believe reality. It's in front of your eyes.


Lol if brains were gold you would be the poorest person on earth.


----------



## Man of Ethics (Jan 26, 2022)

hjmick said:


> So don't get one.
> 
> 
> But don't deny me my Constitutional rights...


As long as guns are available, those who misuse them will be able to obtain them.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

In the lion pride, only females hunt. Males never hunt.
Goddess of the hunt Diana - woman

Etc.


----------



## Unkotare (Jan 26, 2022)

Batcat said:


> ...
> 
> However Florida does have sone outdated laws on the books such as …
> _Unmarried women are prohibited from parachuting on Sunday under possible punishment of arrest, fine, and/or jailing._
> ...


That law is unenforced in Autumn.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

evenflow1969 said:


> Lol if brains were gold you would be the poorest person on earth.


You say phrases without content.
You won't impress anyone with this. You are probably hysterical

If I shattered your illusions about being a man, I'm sorry. Go to a psychoanalyst.


----------



## hadit (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Hunting and fishing are women's activities
> There is nothing masculine there, except for especially dangerous species like Lion Safari. Among all the forest savages, it was women for the most part who did this.


I would like to see your evidence for this. Please present your evidence that, for example, the Amazonian jungle tribes send their women out to do the hunting.


----------



## evenflow1969 (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> You say phrases without content.
> You won't impress anyone with this. You are probably hysterical
> 
> If I shattered your illusions about being a man, I'm sorry. Go to a psychoanalyst.


Lol, ok shortbus. Some where in your country there are real warriors the kind that dig graves in the quiet of the night. Go find some and tell them your views and report back. Lol


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

hadit said:


> I would like to see your evidence for this. Please present your evidence that, for example, the Amazonian jungle tribes send their women out to do the hunting.


Above, I posted a Yakut huntress. You have to be a complete idiot to ask such questions, everyone knows that. back off


----------



## hjmick (Jan 26, 2022)

Relative Ethics said:


> As long as guns are available, those who misuse them will be able to obtain them.



Yes. Your point?


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

evenflow1969 said:


> Lol, ok shortbus. Some where in your country there are real warriors the kind that dig graves in the quiet of the night. Go find some and tell them your views and report back. Lol


I didn't say that we are fine with it. We have more morons like you. Many people think that a man is the one who knows how to iron his pants.

But in general, in the 90s there were men, there were men's concepts. Apparently Eastern culture was still alive. In those days, the guys, except for fisticuffs, did not recognize anything as proof of courage.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

evenflow1969

Your mentality is generally typical for modern Russians. Many Russian women consider simple cleanliness to be signs of man. If someone was in the army (and most of us serve), they automatically consider themselves men, regardless of what they can do as military men. And since the army is not professional, no one can do anything special there, they just march along the parade ground and jog, and any soldier can get in the face from a schoolboy.
In addition, there is a lot of submission and servility. Nevertheless, there is such a belief that if someone served in the army, he became a man.


----------



## hadit (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Above, I posted a Yakut huntress. You have to be a complete idiot to ask such questions, everyone knows that. back off


You posted a modern photograph of one woman with what is presumably the game she hunted. Woop-de-freakin-do. Tell us, how do the forest dwellers manage to send the best sources of nourishment for their children into the forest to hunt, some of them pregnant and large with child, while the men stay in the village and do what, exactly, throw dice all day? And you know very little about me if you think a random internet keyboard jockey is going to scare me off. No, hunting is long been the realm of men, you should know that. Oh, wait, did you go to government school? That might explain it.


----------



## evenflow1969 (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> evenflow1969
> 
> Your mentality is generally typical for modern Russians. Many Russian women consider simple cleanliness to be signs of man. If someone was in the army (and most of us serve), they automatically consider themselves men, regardless of what they can do as military men. And since the army is not professional, no one can do anything special there, they just march along the parade ground and jog, and any soldier can get in the face from a schoolboy.
> In addition, there is a lot of submission and servility. Nevertheless, there is such a belief that if someone served in the army, he became a man.


Lol, I don't know who brought your dumb fucking ass up but a man does what needs to be done when it needs to be done. You wanna run around being a fucking idiot with no skills what so ever then go ahead and do it. Head out into the woods alone for a week and tell me how it goes for ya.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

hadit said:


> You posted a modern photograph of one woman with what is presumably the game she hunted. Woop-de-freakin-do. Tell us, how do the forest dwellers manage to send the best sources of nourishment for their children into the forest to hunt, some of them pregnant and large with child, while the men stay in the village and do what, exactly, throw dice all day? And you know very little about me if you think a random internet keyboard jockey is going to scare me off. No, hunting is long been the realm of men, you should know that. Oh, wait, did you go to government school? That might explain it.


Think what you want, I don't care. if you believe that a woman cannot set a trap, set a dog or put a worm on a hook, this is not for me, but for a psychiatrist.

All males in hunting nations are smaller than average, they are usually even smaller than a European woman. They write that the average height of the Tungus is 162 cm


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

*I'm tired of these fools. Nowadays, in any case, it is no longer clear what a man is, they wear lace panties and marry men. So the belief that hunting is a male occupation is not the limit of stupidity*


----------



## 1stNickD (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> The idea of the 2nd Amendment is to have weapons to create a militia if necessary and prevent the arbitrariness of the feds. It doesn't work, the feds are constantly getting stronger, and the Americans have already turned into obedient sheep of the left regime. The weapon has become a fetish. The left is not afraid of it.


Maybe you can use some of your free money to go to the dollar store and buy a clue... You need one.


----------



## Unkotare (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> *...... Nowadays, in any case, it is no longer clear what a man is, ...*


Pretty clear it's not YOU, loon.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

evenflow1969 said:


> Head out into the woods alone for a week and tell me how it goes for ya.


You can go even further on the "way of a man" go to the homeless and sleep for a month in a trash can, eating waste, then tell us how to survive in extreme conditions, what skills you have.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

evenflow1969
Another option: Russians often measured courage in the amount of alcohol they drank. In the days of Brezhnev, there was such an image of a man: if you drank a liter and crap, then slept under the fence, then you are a real man. I mean this seriously. It still remains, though less. These men completely obaed to their wives. They gave them their entire salary. It was considered a sign of masculinity. If a person was not an infantile alcoholic, he could be told that he was not a real man. I am not kidding.

Did you have something similar among alcoholics in the USA?


----------



## evenflow1969 (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> You can go even further on the "way of a man" go to the homeless and sleep for a month in a trash can, eating waste, then tell us how to survive in extreme conditions, what skills you have.


Lol, I don't have to eat waist. I can , hunt, fish, grow crops. You will be eating waist not me. You can only lift a box and run your mouth. Since you are from Russia and your shit you are pulling the odds may be better than I thought that I get to hunt you. Yep I will trap, push and victimize you. Likely I never even have to waist a bullet. You will walk right into a claymore and take your buddies out with you. We live stupid people in war they get themselves and their buddy killed.


----------



## miketx (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> *I'm tired of these fools. Nowadays, in any case, it is no longer clear what a man is, they wear lace panties and marry men. So the belief that hunting is a male occupation is not the limit of stupidity*


I haven't married any men and don't wear panties. My guns stay with me.


----------



## Unkotare (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> You can go even further on the "way of a man" go to the homeless and sleep for a month in a trash can, eating waste, then tell us how to survive in extreme conditions, what skills you have.


Looney idiot.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

evenflow1969 said:


> Lol, I don't have to eat waist. I can , hunt, fish, grow crops. You will be eating waist not me. You can only lift a box and run your mouth. Since you are from Russia and your shit you are pulling the odds may be better than I thought that I get to hunt you. Yep I will trap, push and victimize you. Likely I never even have to waist a bullet. You will walk right into a claymore and take your buddies out with you. We live stupid people in war they get themselves and their buddy killed.


In general, I think Americans are smart people. But this is clearly not about you. Your concepts are exactly like those of Ivan the Fool. Typical reasoning of an alcoholic from the times of Stagnation. they constantly gathered in garages, drank cheap alcohol and boasted to each other about hunting, fishing and the amount of alcohol they had drunk. If someone drank industrial alcohol, it was more honorable. And their wives hunted for them themselves, taking away the bottles.


----------



## evenflow1969 (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> In general, I think Americans are smart people. But this is clearly not about you. Your concepts are exactly like those of Ivan the Fool. Typical reasoning of an alcoholic from the times of Stagnation. they constantly gathered in garages, drank cheap alcohol and boasted to each other about hunting, fishing and the amount of alcohol they had drunk. If someone drank industrial alcohol, it was more honorable. And their wives hunted for them themselves, taking away the bottles.


Lol, said the guy with no skills. Looking forward to hunting you.


----------



## Colin norris (Jan 26, 2022)

JustAGuy1 said:


> They/You should only fear if you're going to try and take away Rights. Make no mistake, we will use them.


No you won't.  When Obama was there you called him a terrorist, Muslim and tyrannical yet you never fired a shot. You haven't the guts Rambo. 
If the government come for your guns, you would evacuate your bowels before you did the house. 
What would you do? Shoot them? that puts you in jail.  Take on the military? In your dreams. 

You'd do nothing.  You've got no guts.


----------



## 1stNickD (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> This is bad because it doesn't help create a militia, instead gun ownership becomes chaotic and will eventually lead to the left taking those rights away under the pretense of endangering life.


The left will suffer unrecoverable losses if they try to take my right of self-defense, my right to target shoot or to hunt. Most gun violence in America is done by people who are either leftists or are sympathetic to their causes.  smash and grab my place and the ONLY thing anyone will get is a toe tag.   

Promise.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

evenflow1969 By the way, many hunters and fishermen go there just to hide from their wife. As a rule, such people have a wife who is the head of the family and she puts pressure on the man. This is a known fact.


----------



## 1stNickD (Jan 26, 2022)

Colin norris said:


> No you won't.  When Obama was there you called him a terrorist, Muslim and tyrannical yet you never fired a shot. You haven't the guts Rambo.
> If the government come for your guns, you would evacuate your bowels before you did the house.
> What would you do? Shoot them? that puts you in jail.  Take on the military? In your dreams.
> 
> You'd do nothing.  You've got no guts.


So you say you will use the military to destroy our constitution and remove our rights. Go eff yourself and get out of this free country.


----------



## 1stNickD (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> evenflow1969 By the way, many hunters and fishermen go there just to hide from their wife. As a rule, such people have a wife who is the head of the family and she puts pressure on the man. This is a known fact.


twit.


----------



## evenflow1969 (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> evenflow1969 By the way, many hunters and fishermen go there just to hide from their wife. As a rule, such people have a wife who is the head of the family and she puts pressure on the man. This is a known fact.


Lol, you don't know anything. You talk about things you have never done and think you know. You are a fool . No experience and no will to learn you are fucked  lift your box have a coke and a smile and shut the fuck up


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

evenflow1969 said:


> Lol, said the guy with no skills. Looking forward to hunting you.


I have some skills, for example, I can kick a hunter's head with my foot. In general, I love military training, I do crossfit. I'm good at running 100 meters. Not a single hunter can run away from me, because they are flabby and slow like Brezhnev.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

evenflow1969 said:


> Lol, you don't know anything. You talk about things you have never done


Yes, I do not drink and do not obey my wife.


----------



## miketx (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> I have some skills, for example, I can kick a hunter's head with my foot. In general, I love military training, I do crossfit. I'm good at running 100 meters. Not a single hunter can run away from me, because they are flabby and slow like Brezhnev.


lmao


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

evenflow1969 said:


> with no skills


I was hunting and in the army, I shot from a machine gun, from a hunting rifle, I fished, I set nets. I don't like it, but I used to do it  with my friends. What is there to know? What fucking skills are you talking about? I even threw a spear at the fish, there is no fucking special. Of course, those who spend a lot of time there know more, but strippers also know better how to dance near a pole, idiot. Each profession has its own skills, and your hunting skills are no different.

Not everyone can be a cowboy and ride a mustang, participate in a rodeo, you have to be a man there, but you can train a monkey or child to do such garbage as fishing and anyone could do it. Don't you see the difference?


----------



## 52ndStreet (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> The idea of the 2nd Amendment is to have weapons to create a militia if necessary and prevent the arbitrariness of the feds. It doesn't work, the feds are constantly getting stronger, and the Americans have already turned into obedient sheep of the left regime. The weapon has become a fetish. The left is not afraid of it.


Rupal2000 tell the people in the Ukraine they don't need  weapons, with thousands of AK-47 armed 
Russian soldiers right outside their borders. What about the unarmed civilians in Myanmar, being shoot and killed by that countries military. If were not for weapons America would not exist.
Yes we need weapons in America, now more than ever.!!

Yes we need weapons. We need the 2nd Amendment


----------



## BlindBoo (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> I think that the fight against opiates is a purely leftist initiative. The left has always used alcohol, opiates compete with alcohol.
> 
> In left-wing regimes, the ban on opiates is so strict that people go to jail for several years for a single dose, without the fact of trying to sell or distribute. That is, ordinary drug addicts are imprisoned
> 
> Opiates, despite the harm of addiction, do not seriously harm health and do not make stupid pigs out of people, this is the problem of the left.



I think both parties are complicit in Nanny Statism.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

evenflow1969 And the funny thing is that it is not yet a fact that it is the hunter who is more likely to "survive" in the forest. Recently there was a case when a hunter's gun jammed, and he was killed by a wild boar, at which he was aiming. If he didn't have cellulite on his ass, he could climb a tree or handle a boar


----------



## BlindBoo (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> In the lion pride, only females hunt. Males never hunt.
> Goddess of the hunt Diana - woman
> 
> Etc.


We didn't evolve from cats, although we share a lot of DNA with them.   Think Apes.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 26, 2022)

evenflow1969 
*The hunter has a female mindset. The hunter must be cunning, he must hunt down the beast, lure him, set a trap, he must know his psychology, be able to manipulate it. These are the feminine qualities. Women often try to trick and manipulate men if they have ambitions. The male approach is a straightforward brutal fight. This is diametrically opposed to what is required of a hunter or a woman.*


----------



## whitehall (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> The idea of the 2nd Amendment is to have weapons to create a militia if necessary and prevent the arbitrariness of the feds. It doesn't work, the feds are constantly getting stronger, and the Americans have already turned into obedient sheep of the left regime. The weapon has become a fetish. The left is not afraid of it.


 You could make a case that the 1st Amendment freedom of religion clause is no no longer an issue since late 16 century British puritian  refugees are no longer in danger of persecution. The point is moot since a hundred years of Supreme Court reviews have upheld the Bill of Rights


----------



## hadit (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Think what you want, I don't care. if you believe that a woman cannot set a trap, set a dog or put a worm on a hook, this is not for me, but for a psychiatrist.
> 
> All males in hunting nations are smaller than average, they are usually even smaller than a European woman. They write that the average height of the Tungus is 162 cm


There's a big difference between an occupation being dominated by men and claiming that women cannot do something, a difference sane people can and do understand. Apparently, you do not understand it. And what does it matter if men in jungle tribes are shorter than men in first world countries with good hygiene, good nutrition and easy living? You do know, don't you, that at one time virtually all of humanity was sending their men out to hunt while the women stayed at home caring for the children?


----------



## hadit (Jan 26, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> evenflow1969
> *The hunter has a female mindset. The hunter must be cunning, he must hunt down the beast, lure him, set a trap, he must know his psychology, be able to manipulate it. These are the feminine qualities. Women often try to trick and manipulate men if they have ambitions. The male approach is a straightforward brutal fight. This is diametrically opposed to what is required of a hunter or a woman.*


You don't know much, do you?


----------



## MarcATL (Jan 27, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> The idea of the 2nd Amendment is to have weapons to create a militia if necessary and prevent the arbitrariness of the feds. It doesn't work, the feds are constantly getting stronger, and the Americans have already turned into obedient sheep of the left regime. The weapon has become a fetish. The left is not afraid of it.


God is my Protector. Nothing can stand against Him. Therefore, no weapon formed against me shall prosper.


----------



## evenflow1969 (Jan 27, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> evenflow1969
> *The hunter has a female mindset. The hunter must be cunning, he must hunt down the beast, lure him, set a trap, he must know his psychology, be able to manipulate it. These are the feminine qualities. Women often try to trick and manipulate men if they have ambitions. The male approach is a straightforward brutal fight. This is diametrically opposed to what is required of a hunter or a woman.*


Lol, you are one of those involuntarily celebrate people aren't you.


----------



## The Sage of Main Street (Jan 27, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> If it weren't for this amendment, there would be no republican system. When the people are disarmed, the federals immediately turn them into slaves and destroy the local authorities.


*What Something Is in Theory Has No Place in Reality*

As of now, with 300 million guns, we are fully armed.  But we are still slaves and States' Rights have no effect.


----------



## The Sage of Main Street (Jan 27, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> No, the tales of the Germans about their Aryan origin.


*This Is the Truth Behind Dumb-Blonde Jokes*

Prehistoric Old European Neanderthal hybrids were easily conquered by a few Aryans around 4,000 BC.  The German language has too many non-Aryan etymologies.  As we know from listening to foreigners trying to speak English, the Germanic change in consonants is a sign of learning a second language, which Aryan (Indo-European) was to these indigenees.

Besides writing fairy tales, the Brothers Grimm were into proto-Naziism and linguistics.  Their claim that the German pronunciation evolved over the centuries from an original pure Aryan pronunciation is unrealistic, as are all claims about a Master Race above all other White races.


----------



## TheParser (Jan 27, 2022)

With every passing decade, Americans (sadly) will increasingly  need something with which to defend themselves.

Just turn on your local TV station for the news, and you see that the bad guys (no need to be specific) are *totally out of control* -- thanks to the bleeding hearts of the Democratic Party.

As they say: Wake up & smell the coffee.


----------



## The Sage of Main Street (Jan 27, 2022)

hadit said:


> You posted a modern photograph of one woman with what is presumably the game she hunted. Woop-de-freakin-do. Tell us, how do the forest dwellers manage to send the best sources of nourishment for their children into the forest to hunt, some of them pregnant and large with child, while the men stay in the village and do what, exactly, throw dice all day? And you know very little about me if you think a random internet keyboard jockey is going to scare me off. No, hunting is long been the realm of men, you should know that. Oh, wait, did you go to government school? That might explain it.


*Without Dogs, Early Man Would Have Starved and Gone Extinct*

rupol2000 doesn't like dogs either.  By the way the word _dog_ means 
"pointer," as used in hunting, so their is a connection between the decadent and frightened hatred of hunting and not loving dogs. The word is a cognate of Latin _digitus_, meaning "finger" and the Greek _deigma_, as in _paradigm_, as an example, showing, and basically something pointed to as a controlling factor making a set.


----------



## The Sage of Main Street (Jan 27, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> evenflow1969
> *The hunter has a female mindset. The hunter must be cunning, he must hunt down the beast, lure him, set a trap, he must know his psychology, be able to manipulate it. These are the feminine qualities. Women often try to trick and manipulate men if they have ambitions. The male approach is a straightforward brutal fight. This is diametrically opposed to what is required of a hunter or a woman.*


*VP Ho*

You've described Kamala Harris, not normal women.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 28, 2022)

The Sage of Main Street said:


> *Without Dogs, Early Man Would Have Starved and Gone Extinct*
> 
> rupol2000 doesn't like dogs either.  By the way the word _dog_ means
> "pointer," as used in hunting, so their is a connection between the decadent and frightened hatred of hunting and not loving dogs. The word is a cognate of Latin _digitus_, meaning "finger" and the Greek _deigma_, as in _paradigm_, as an example, showing, and basically something pointed to as a controlling factor making a set.


There the connection is even more direct. A dog is a domesticated wolf, and a wolf is a pack hunter. Forest savages adopted wolf habits, there are many myths about how wolves fucked women and peoples came from this. Many peoples really believe that they are descended from the wolf.

Among the noble peoples, the wolf and the dog were considered shameful animals.


----------



## Woodznutz (Jan 28, 2022)

The Sage of Main Street said:


> *VP Ho*
> 
> You've described Kamala Harris, not normal women.


I'm sure that most women don't mean to be manipulative, it's just their nature. Likely because they don't have the physical strength to impose their will or meet their needs.


----------



## Woodznutz (Jan 28, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> There the connection is even more direct. A dog is a domesticated wolf, and a wolf is a pack hunter. Forest savages adopted wolf habits, there are many myths about how wolves fucked women and peoples came from this. Many peoples really believe that they are descended from the wolf.
> 
> Among the noble peoples, the wolf and the dog were considered shameful animals.


Last I read dogs are a different species from wolves. Makes sense.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 28, 2022)

The Sage of Main Street said:


> *This Is the Truth Behind Dumb-Blonde Jokes*
> 
> Prehistoric Old European Neanderthal hybrids were easily conquered by a few Aryans around 4,000 BC.  The German language has too many non-Aryan etymologies.  As we know from listening to foreigners trying to speak English, the Germanic change in consonants is a sign of learning a second language, which Aryan (Indo-European) was to these indigenees.
> 
> Besides writing fairy tales, the Brothers Grimm were into proto-Naziism and linguistics.  Their claim that the German pronunciation evolved over the centuries from an original pure Aryan pronunciation is unrealistic, as are all claims about a Master Race above all other White races.


The modern Germanic language, like the peoples in Germany, is a mixture of different peoples and languages. Germany consists of Celts and Huns, and only a small part of the inhabitants of Germany comes from the Germans. Most likely, the original Germanic was a pre-Indo-European language, and the closest to it were the Baltic ones. The Balts are a variety of Germans, they came from the same Corded Ware culture.

The Celts and Huns apparently descended from the Aryans. Therefore, a significant part of Germany is indeed Aryan, but this is not the race that called itself the "white race"

Haplogroup I is generally considered to be Germanic


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 28, 2022)

Woodznutz said:


> I'm sure that most women don't mean to be manipulative, it's just their nature. Likely because they don't have the physical strength to impose their will or meet their needs.


The same goes for hunters. One is connected to the other. This is their way of survival.

Actually, not all women are like that. In a patriarchal society, women simply obeyed and were under the protection of men. Therefore, many women are infantile and do not try to manipulate men. This applies only to some women.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 28, 2022)

Woodznutz said:


> Last I read dogs are a different species from wolves. Makes sense.


I'm not sure that I'm using English terminology correctly. A species is a group that interbreeds and produces viable offspring. Dog, wolf, jackal, fox, coyote are one species
A dog is a domesticated wolf. Its Latin name translates to domestic wolf.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 28, 2022)

The Sage of Main Street said:


> *What Something Is in Theory Has No Place in Reality*
> 
> As of now, with 300 million guns, we are fully armed.  But we are still slaves and States' Rights have no effect.


This is precisely due to the fact that weapons are scattered randomly, there is no systematic organization of militias, which is mentioned in the 2nd amendment.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 28, 2022)

Although the US police are essentially a militia. The US Police is not a federal service, and this seems to be unique in the US.
 But it deals only with the internal affairs of the state.
The militia can be organized on the base of the police.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 28, 2022)

hadit said:


> You do know, don't you, that at one time virtually all of humanity was sending their men out to hunt while the women stayed at home caring for the children?


These are empty words. Modern women of hunting peoples are engaged in hunting and fishing, these are their old traditions.

There is no evidence that all peoples were engaged in hunting, this is just politicized nonsense, which is based on nothing. Since ancient times, the peoples of the steppes have been pastoralists, some were gatherers, our closest relatives, primates, do not hunt. Everything speaks against it.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 28, 2022)

whitehall said:


> You could make a case that the 1st Amendment freedom of religion clause is no no longer an issue since late 16 century British puritian  refugees are no longer in danger of persecution. The point is moot since a hundred years of Supreme Court reviews have upheld the Bill of Rights


I didn't say that gun ownership should be abolished. It must be streamlined and clearly linked to the state's right to form a militia. The mere right to individual self-defense does not fully implement the 2nd Amendment, it also includes the right to be protected from the feds.


----------



## Deplorable Yankee (Jan 28, 2022)

Until I can buy a brand new fully automatic military grade weapon my civil rights are being shit on ...

I'll also need grenade launchers ......for hunting


----------



## Woodznutz (Jan 28, 2022)

Woodznutz said:


> Last I read dogs are a different species from wolves. Makes sense.





rupol2000 said:


> I'm not sure that I'm using English terminology correctly. A species is a group that interbreeds and produces viable offspring. Dog, wolf, jackal, fox, coyote are one species
> A dog is a domesticated wolf. Its Latin name translates to domestic wolf.











						Are Dogs Descended From Wolves (Myth or Fact)?
					

Are dogs descended from wolves? Is "man's best friend" really a wolf dressed up like a dog? Here's an inside look...




					trainthatpooch.com


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 28, 2022)

Woodznutz 
There is another version that these are tamed jackals.
Apparently both of these things happened.


----------



## hadit (Jan 28, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> These are empty words. Modern women of hunting peoples are engaged in hunting and fishing, these are their old traditions.
> 
> There is no evidence that all peoples were engaged in hunting, this is just politicized nonsense, which is based on nothing. Since ancient times, the peoples of the steppes have been pastoralists, some were gatherers, our closest relatives, primates, do not hunt. Everything speaks against it.


That is false. Some primates hunt. Next time, do a little research.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 29, 2022)

hadit said:


> That is false. Some primates hunt. Next time, do a little research.


Some ancient people also hunted. Mostly forest savages who, for some reason, were driven back to hungry areas of the earth. They did this even 4,000 years after humans built observatories. Used stone axes 10 thousand years after people mastered metallurgy.
By the way, they hunted not only animals, but also people.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 29, 2022)

In the Vedas, these "people" were called flesheaters(krov'yadi).


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 29, 2022)

HYMN XXXVI​A charm against fiends, human enemies, and other pests​1Endowed with true strength, let the Bull, Agni Vaisvānara, burn
   them up.
  Him who would pain and injure us, him who would treat us as
a foe. p. a146
2Him who, unharmed, would injure us, and him who, harmed,
   would do us harm,
  I lay between the doubled fangs of Agni, of Vaisvānara.
3Those who, what time the moon is dark, hunt with loud cry and
   answering shout,
  Flesh-eaters, others who would harm,—all these I overcome with
   might.
4I conquer the Pisāchas with my power, and take their wealth
   away.





__





						Atharva Veda: Book 4: Hymn 36: A charm against fiends, human enemies, and other pests
					

Hymns of the Atharva Veda [1895], full text etext at sacred-texts.com



					www.sacred-texts.com


----------



## armadei (Jan 29, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> The idea of the 2nd Amendment is to have weapons to create a militia if necessary and prevent the arbitrariness of the feds. It doesn't work, the feds are constantly getting stronger, and the Americans have already turned into obedient sheep of the left regime. The weapon has become a fetish. The left is not afraid of it.



This is so horribly wrong I'm not sure where to begin. 

Let me just put it this way: No jackboot leftist authoritarian thug will be kicking down my door without dealing with a hail of lead. Period. 

They don't want this fight. They KNOW they don't want this fight.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 29, 2022)

armadei said:


> This is so horribly wrong I'm not sure where to begin.
> 
> Let me just put it this way: No jackboot leftist authoritarian thug will be kicking down my door without dealing with a hail of lead. Period.
> 
> They don't want this fight. They KNOW they don't want this fight.



They will hire their left agent Trump for this


----------



## armadei (Jan 29, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> They will hire their left agent Trump for this



What are you even talking about?


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 29, 2022)

armadei said:


> What are you even talking about?


Nevermind
The Republican idea is the commonwealth of states where the feds don't stick their noses in. Just defending your ass with a gun won't advance Republican politics, that's a sham.


----------



## Maxnovax (Jan 29, 2022)

Relative Ethics said:


> RIP over 30,000 people who die by guns in USA every year.
> 
> Weapons are of little use except murder and suicide.


Guns save over 300 thousand lives a year


----------



## armadei (Jan 29, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Nevermind
> The Republican idea is the commonwealth of states where the feds don't stick their noses in.



Ummm... that's literally what the country was founded upon but ok....


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 29, 2022)

armadei said:


> Ummm... that's literally what the country was founded upon but ok....


But now this system is under threat from the left.


----------



## The Sage of Main Street (Jan 29, 2022)

Woodznutz said:


> I'm sure that most women don't mean to be manipulative, it's just their nature. Likely because they don't have the physical strength to impose their will or meet their needs.


*Eggheads Get Hen-Pecked*

Men have been weakened by the heiristocracy's aggressive Feminism and are easy prey.  Predatory women go after white-collar workers not only because they are rich but because they are college graduates who, because they couldn't afford to date at a critical age, are desperately horny, inexperienced, and immature.  This is another reason the graduate's reward is not worth the sacrifice, the fact that college is for teenagers who are afraid to grow up.  The movie showed that, except that a dork like Dustin Hoffman would have never gotten to first base with anyone as attractive as Katharine Ross.

This must be familiar if you dare think about it:  One of my friends, who had never had a girlfriend until he graduated and got a high-paying job, was an easy mark for a two-time divorcée with two kids.  Anybody with normal experience would have avoided that Cruella.  Naturally, she dumped him, too, and got rich on alimony.


----------



## The Sage of Main Street (Jan 29, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> This is precisely due to the fact that weapons are scattered randomly, there is no systematic organization of militias, which is mentioned in the 2nd amendment.


*Mow Down Looters and There Will Be No More False-Victimization Riots*

Let's hope that Rittenhouse inspires that.  Just as in our defeats overseas, Rules of Engagement are also making us sure losers in the war at home against feral minorities.


----------



## Ringel05 (Jan 29, 2022)

Yup, Rupol is either a narcissistic troll (with no valid reason to be narcissistic) who thinks he/she's "getting it over" on everyone or is seriously locked into Confirmation Bias to the nth degree.  Best response is to point and laugh.


----------



## The Sage of Main Street (Jan 29, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> These are empty words. Modern women of hunting peoples are engaged in hunting and fishing, these are their old traditions.
> 
> There is no evidence that all peoples were engaged in hunting, this is just politicized nonsense, which is based on nothing. Since ancient times, the peoples of the steppes have been pastoralists, some were gatherers, our closest relatives, primates, do not hunt. Everything speaks against it.


* Nature Is a Crime Against Humanity.  Only Subhumans Submit to It.*

Before the degenerate slumming feralphiles took over in the 1960s, anthropologists had realized that the modern savages they studied had not evolved precisely because they were not at all like our ancient ancestors had been.  So the people you use as reference can tell us nothing about ourselves.


----------



## Noel Long (Jan 29, 2022)

60% from suicide, 37% homicide, 3% accidents.


----------



## Wyatt earp (Jan 29, 2022)

Otis Mayfield said:


> "Der taken r guns!"
> 
> They haven't "taken ur guns" for over 245 years. Don't hold your breath.


Ignorant of recent history in chicago, you fool?


----------



## WinterBorn (Jan 29, 2022)

Relative Ethics said:


> RIP over 30,000 people who die by guns in USA every year.
> 
> Weapons are of little use except murder and suicide.



The only way you get 30k gun deaths a year is to include the 20,000+ suicides by gun.    And the only thing we know about every gun suicide is that they truly wanted to die.  If someone truly wants to die, not having a gun won't stop them.    Japan has some of the strictest gun laws in the world, and a suicide rate that is the 2nd highest among G7 nations.


----------



## WinterBorn (Jan 29, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> You need to be ready for everything.
> Those problems that you listed are due to the fact that people forget why they need weapons. It will sober them up.
> 
> If you have a weapon, you should be in the reserve of the militia. It's written in the second amendment. Carrying a weapon makes a man liable for military service.



Our Supreme Court has consistently held that the 2nd amendment is not connected to any military service and is, in fact, and individual right.


----------



## WinterBorn (Jan 29, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Can not be. It's written about the state militia to defend the freedom of the state.



No, it is not.   The US Supreme Court has rules it is not connected to military service and is an individual right.


----------



## WinterBorn (Jan 29, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Then the Americans were smarter and more courageous. Now they have same-sex marriages



LMAO!!!!    You bring up same sex marriages in a 2nd amendment debate?     That is pathetic.

But neither your ignorance of the US Constitution, nor your fear of homosexuals will prevail.


----------



## WinterBorn (Jan 29, 2022)

Mac-7 said:


> Thanks for your assistance
> 
> now the only question is which foreign country are you posting from?



He is in India.  You know, Caste Systems, antiquated social rules, and some of the direst poverty in the world?


----------



## WinterBorn (Jan 29, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> What law gives women the right to own guns?



The US Constitution protects the rights of all citizens.   Women here have all the rights enjoyed by men.


----------



## WinterBorn (Jan 29, 2022)

Relative Ethics said:


> Given the fact that there are only 200-300 justifiable homicides per year in USA, I find these studies sort of fishy.



Nothing fishy about them at all.    They only seem fishy when you expect every private gun owner to kill someone to stop a crime, every time.

Often just knowing someone is armed is a deterrent for the criminal.


----------



## WinterBorn (Jan 29, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> female emancipation is left wing



Treating women as equals is the right way for a gov't to be.     Some day your country will get there too.


----------



## WinterBorn (Jan 29, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> You don't understand your own country. Women in the army and fag in America appeared only a few years ago. America is still an extreme right-wing country, it is a unique country, it is not like any other country in the world in this.



You think the US is unique in having women in the military??     LMAO!!    You need to do more research.


----------



## hadit (Jan 29, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Some ancient people also hunted. Mostly forest savages who, for some reason, were driven back to hungry areas of the earth. They did this even 4,000 years after humans built observatories. Used stone axes 10 thousand years after people mastered metallurgy.
> By the way, they hunted not only animals, but also people.


And it was their men that did the hunting.


----------



## Woodznutz (Jan 29, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> Our Supreme Court has consistently held that the 2nd amendment is not connected to any military service and is, in fact, and individual right.


They read it correctly.


----------



## WinterBorn (Jan 29, 2022)

hadit said:


> And it was their men that did the hunting.



In many ancient cultures the men did all the hunting.    In the primitive cultures where women hunted, it was both genders doing it.   I cannot recall any ancient cultures in which only the women hunted, as rupol claims.

But then, he has a rather warped sense of the truth.


----------



## Woodznutz (Jan 29, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> No, it is not.   The US Supreme Court has rules it is not connected to military service and is an individual right.


The subject of the amendment is the _right to bear arms_, not the militia.

It was a pragmatic decision by the government. Without the free possession of firearms the Federal government would be responsible for the defense of every citizen. England took away their citizens gun rights and the resulting mayhem forced them to restore those rights, even insisting that the citizens so arm themselves. 

Those who oppose gun rights are actually interested in the downfall of the republic, not protecting us from ourselves. In my state alone there are 600,000 individuals that own weaponry capable of killing a deer at 200 yards. Does anyone think that the anti-gun nuts would stop with handguns. It's their long range plan to eliminate long guns so the citizenry would be completely defenseless by eliminating the very weapons suggested in the 2nd Amendment.


----------



## hadit (Jan 29, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> In many ancient cultures the men did all the hunting.    In the primitive cultures where women hunted, it was both genders doing it.   I cannot recall any ancient cultures in which only the women hunted, as rupol claims.
> 
> But then, he has a rather warped sense of the truth.


Reading his posts is like looking at the world in a funhouse mirror.


----------



## Man of Ethics (Jan 29, 2022)

Maxnovax said:


> Guns save over 300 thousand lives a year


I find it absolutely unbelievable.  Such studies may exist, but they do not reflect reality.


----------



## Man of Ethics (Jan 29, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> The only way you get 30k gun deaths a year is to include the 20,000+ suicides by gun.    And the only thing we know about every gun suicide is that they truly wanted to die.  If someone truly wants to die, not having a gun won't stop them.    Japan has some of the strictest gun laws in the world, and a suicide rate that is the 2nd highest among G7 nations.


1)  Most suicides without guns are unsuccessful.

2)  The main problem with Japan is that they do not view Suicide as a sin.


----------



## Man of Ethics (Jan 29, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> female emancipation is left wing


*In USA, men suffer a lot of severe discrimination. * Men are viewed as the class of oppressors.  Hundreds of thousands of men lose their careers due to unfounded accusations of Sexual Harassment.  Men get 63% more time in prison for the same offense.  American Penal System is an order of magnitude harsher then Russian Penal System.


----------



## Man of Ethics (Jan 29, 2022)

evenflow1969 said:


> Lol, keep studying you do not understand our country. Lol  Here our women have the same rights as everyone else.


Actually much more rights then men -- especially in divorce.


----------



## hadit (Jan 30, 2022)

Relative Ethics said:


> I find it absolutely unbelievable.  Such studies may exist, but they do not reflect reality.


The studies are there, you just don't believe them? Do you have anything substantial to counter them?


----------



## Blues Man (Jan 30, 2022)

Americans need foreigners to stop telling them what they need.


----------



## evenflow1969 (Jan 30, 2022)

Relative Ethics said:


> Actually much more rights then men -- especially in divorce.


Lol, tell me about it.my divorce was final in April of last year and ya big hit on the old wallet. Oh well in a few years she will spend all that money. I can make it again. He who laughs last laughs best.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 30, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> Our Supreme Court has consistently held that the 2nd amendment is not connected to any military service and is, in fact, and individual right.


But this is a lie. The Second Amendment states the right to bear arms along with the right to militia and rebel against the feds. These things are related


----------



## WinterBorn (Jan 30, 2022)

Both of my divorces were expensive.    But because I gave them almost everything.

You know why divorces are so expensive, right?    Because it is worth it.


----------



## WinterBorn (Jan 30, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> But this is a lie. The Second Amendment states the right to bear arms along with the right to militia and rebel against the feds. These things are related



You say it is a lie.    But our highest court has consistently ruled that the 2nd amendment is an individual right, not a collective one.   And that it is not connected to any requirement for military or militia service.

So it is the word of 9 judges who are constitutional scholars against what you say.    I know which prevails.


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 30, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> You say it is a lie.    But our highest court has consistently ruled that the 2nd amendment is an individual right, not a collective one.   And that it is not connected to any requirement for military or militia service.
> 
> So it is the word of 9 judges who are constitutional scholars against what you say.    I know which prevails.






This is a political decision that is against the constitution.


----------



## WinterBorn (Jan 30, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> View attachment 594919
> 
> This is a political decision that is against the constitution.



I am fully aware of what the 2nd Amendment says.

The first part of the sentence, "_A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state,_" does speak to a need for a militia.    But, as history and many other documents show, this militia would be armed citizens in time of need.   Not a standing army.

The second part is not dependent on the first part.   The statement "_*...the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.*_"


----------



## rupol2000 (Jan 30, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> The first part of the sentence, "_A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state,_" does speak to a need for a militia. But, as history and many other documents show, this militia would be armed citizens in time of need. Not a standing army.


Nobody talked about the regular army, but it must be organized and trained



WinterBorn said:


> The second part is not dependent on the first part.




nonsense


----------



## Stryder50 (Jan 31, 2022)

What those ignorant of history  (such as OP?) fail to realize is that in the period from first settlement in North America by Europeans up to only the past century or so, those living in rural areas had to deal with both four legged and two legged varmints.

Four legged could include bear, wolf, large cat(puma), and even none legged such as rattle snake. Arms(weapons) of one sort or another helped increase one's chance of survivng an attack.

Two legged sorts could be the occasional roving criminal sorts and on occasions also tribes/war bands of local natives~"first peoples"~Indians, ... Again arms(weapons) would prove helpful in defense.  Local militias were often "organized" to deal with these potential threats, and later also for a more military purpose.  At time of the War of Independence, many local militias were left over from a couple decades prior and their use in the French and Indian Wars.

There was no "9-1-1" to call for help in 1775.


----------



## Stryder50 (Jan 31, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Nobody talked about the regular army, but it must be organized and trained
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Define your concept of "organized and trained" in context of 1775, please.


----------



## The Sage of Main Street (Jan 31, 2022)

Stryder50 said:


> What those ignorant of history  (such as OP?) fail to realize is that in the period from first settlement in North America by Europeans up to only the past century or so, those living in rural areas had to deal with both four legged and two legged varmints.
> 
> Four legged could include bear, wolf, large cat(puma), and even none legged such as rattle snake. Arms(weapons) of one sort or another helped increase one's chance of survivng an attack.
> 
> ...


*The Second Amendment Means We Have a Duty to Eliminate Looters and Gangs With Hunting Rifles*

The reason the Battles of Lexington, Concord, and Bunker Hill were so bloody for the British was the superior marksmanship of the Patriots, who had hunted all their lives.  That shooting-gallery nightmare paralyzed British offense for the next eight years.


----------



## Woodznutz (Jan 31, 2022)

Relative Ethics said:


> 1)  Most suicides without guns are unsuccessful.
> 
> 2)  The main problem with Japan is that they do not view Suicide as a sin.



1. Most choose guns because they are so successful (even women).

2. Suicide isn't a sin.


----------



## hadit (Jan 31, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> But this is a lie. The Second Amendment states the right to bear arms along with the right to militia and rebel against the feds. These things are related


Where did you get your law degree?


----------



## Woodznutz (Jan 31, 2022)

The Sage of Main Street said:


> *The Second Amendment Means We Have a Duty to Eliminate Looters and Gangs With Hunting Rifles*
> 
> The reason the Battles of Lexington, Concord, and Bunker Hill were so bloody for the British was the superior marksmanship of the Patriots, who had hunted all their lives.  That shooting-gallery nightmare paralyzed British offense for the next eight years.


The British were told to "fire at will".  Unfortunately they couldn't tell who Will was so they got their butts shot off.


----------



## Otis Mayfield (Jan 31, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> Both of my divorces were expensive.    But because I gave them almost everything.
> 
> You know why divorces are so expensive, right?    Because it is worth it.



Psychologists say PTSD from divorce is the worst. 

I believe it.


----------



## The Sage of Main Street (Feb 1, 2022)

Woodznutz said:


> The British were told to "fire at will".  Unfortunately they couldn't tell who Will was so they got their butts shot off.


*Good Will Hunting*

Patriots won't fire until Whites have eyes.  There are things behind the scenes that Americans are not allowed to see.


----------



## Atticus Finch (Feb 1, 2022)

I need all 22 of my weapons.The reasons are because #1 it is a right guaranteed by the 2A and #2 it's nobody's business.


----------



## Open Bolt (Apr 3, 2022)

Relative Ethics said:


> Weapons are of little use except murder and suicide.


Nonsense.  They are used for hunting, self defense, and competition sport.




Relative Ethics said:


> Firearms are very dangerous and unnecessary toys.


Yes.  Just like seatbelts and fire extinguishers.




Relative Ethics said:


> I guess sometimes guns are used for self-defense.  But too many lives are lost to guns.


If you want to set up a system where suicidal people can _temporarily_ and _voluntarily_ hand over their guns for safekeeping until they get better, that might be worth pursuing.

But people have the right to have guns regardless.


----------



## Leweman (Apr 3, 2022)

Of course.


----------



## miketx (Apr 3, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> But this is a lie. The Second Amendment states the right to bear arms along with the right to militia and rebel against the feds. These things are related


No, you are a liar.


----------



## Orangecat (Apr 3, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Do Americans need weapons?​


Do Americans need free speech?
Do they need freedom of religion?
Do they need the right to vote?
Silly premise, kid. 
The Bill of Rights isn't about what you need, it's about preventing government control over the individual.


----------



## Open Bolt (Apr 3, 2022)

miketx said:


> No, you are a liar.


This term "lie" is really overused on the internet.

An untrue statement could be an honest mistake instead of a lie.


----------



## Open Bolt (Apr 3, 2022)

Otis Mayfield said:


> "Der taken r guns!"
> They haven't "taken ur guns" for over 245 years. Don't hold your breath.


It's not for lack of trying.

Progressives keep failing to take our guns because the NRA keeps defeating them.


-----------------------------------------------------


BasicHumanUnit said:


> They will.  And you will taste dicks readily when the time comes.   Conservatives have no spine...just ask Broke Loser.
> You may think you can be tough when they come to your door, but by then you will have no choice but to drop to your knees, put your hands behind your back and tell them not only where each and every one of your stashes is located, but also that of any and all friends or family you might have.
> You'll be surprised how fast you change into compliance when they have a gun shoved up your behind ready to pull the trigger.


If they ask me where my guns are, I will tell them that I lost them all in an unfortunate boating accident.

If they try to take my guns I will fight them in court.


-----------------------------------------------------


Colin norris said:


> No you won't.  When Obama was there you called him a terrorist, Muslim and tyrannical yet you never fired a shot. You haven't the guts Rambo.
> If the government come for your guns, you would evacuate your bowels before you did the house.
> What would you do? Shoot them? that puts you in jail.  Take on the military? In your dreams.
> You'd do nothing.  You've got no guts.


I'd challenge them in court, and win.


----------



## Open Bolt (Apr 3, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> size and type of gun regulated, and no need whatsoever to carry them around in public.


Unconstitutional.  We have the right to have enough firepower for effective self defense.  We also have the right to any kind of gun that there is no justification for banning.

We also have the right to defend ourselves while out in public.




Captain Caveman said:


> If you're interested in UK guns, watch this.


The lack of freedom in the UK is heartbreaking.




Captain Caveman said:


> Rights and privileges has never been a concern, not sure if anyone outside on America has wanted to argue that, it's irrelevant.


Americans have never felt that freedom is irrelevant.




Captain Caveman said:


> The issue is the violence/deaths from guns.


Murder victims are just as dead when they are killed with a different kind of weapon.




Captain Caveman said:


> The UK had handguns, never a problem. Then the Dunblane massacre of 1996 resulted in them being banned. So they now have to be a certain length, per in the video. I imagine to restrict concealment


Handguns that have to be as long as a rifle are not exactly handguns anymore.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 3, 2022)

Open Bolt said:


> Unconstitutional.  We have the right to have enough firepower for effective self defense.  We also have the right to any kind of gun that there is no justification for banning.



Totally agree!  Every American should have access to any and all "arms".  No limits.  Including nuclear.



Open Bolt said:


> We also have the right to defend ourselves while out in public.



I know that when I go to the grocery store or the church or even to see a movie I am TERRIFIED that evil-doers will be around every corner.  That's one of the best parts of living in America today.  You know there's baddies out there doing evil things.  



Open Bolt said:


> The lack of freedom in the UK is heartbreaking.



Don't feel too bad for them.  They suffer from having a much lower gun homicide rate than we do and I bet that makes them feel sad.



Open Bolt said:


> Murder victims are just as dead when they are killed with a different kind of weapon.



I once heard about someone being killed with a hammer.  I guess if we didn't have guns that kill quickly and efficiently we'd still have a weekly mass hammering.  A lot more work but I'm sure it can achieve the same body count.


----------



## Open Bolt (Apr 3, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> If you have a weapon, you should be in the reserve of the militia. It's written in the second amendment. Carrying a weapon makes a man liable for military service.


That is incorrect.  People have the right to keep and bear arms even if they are not a member of any military organization.




rupol2000 said:


> This is bad because it doesn't help create a militia, instead gun ownership becomes chaotic and will eventually lead to the left taking those rights away under the pretense of endangering life.


Upholding our rights is never bad.

The left will never be allowed to take our rights away (although the failure of the left will certainly not be for a lack of trying).




rupol2000 said:


> I believe that only those who agree to join the militia, conduct exercises and, if necessary, fight for the state should have the right to bear arms.


The Constitution disagrees with you.  Everyone has the right to keep and bear arms.




rupol2000 said:


> Otherwise, this will lead to the federalization of the state and the deprivation of the right to own weapons in general.


The NRA will always protect our rights.




rupol2000 said:


> What law gives women the right to own guns?


Let's start with the ancient right to keep and bear arms.




rupol2000 said:


> And at the same time, the right to arms is directly related to the militia
> Accordingly, only men are allowed, and men must be in the militia.


That is incorrect.  The entire people have the right to keep and bear arms, not just members of a military body, and certainly not just men.




rupol2000 said:


> This follows from the text of the amendment itself.
> No. Congress cannot change what is written in the constitution. And it says that US men as part of the militia have the right to own weapons, and must also have equipment and be organized.


That is incorrect.  It says nothing of the sort.

It says that the right to keep and bear arms is held by the people.




rupol2000 said:


> I didn't say that gun ownership should be abolished. It must be streamlined and clearly linked to the state's right to form a militia.


There is no such requirement.




rupol2000 said:


> The mere right to individual self-defense does not fully implement the 2nd Amendment, it also includes the right to be protected from the feds.


True.  But having guns for private self defense is one part of it.

It's great that you want to restore the militia.  But this should not be done at the expense of our self defense rights.




rupol2000 said:


> nonsense


Not nonsense.  The two parts of the Second Amendment are independent from each other.


----------



## Open Bolt (Apr 3, 2022)

PV System said:


> Don't feel too bad for them.  They suffer from having a much lower gun homicide rate than we do and I bet that makes them feel sad.


Having murder victims be killed with a different kind of weapon is not much consolation for losing your freedom.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 3, 2022)

Open Bolt said:


> Having murder victims be killed with a different kind of weapon is not much consolation for losing your freedom.



The difference is a matter of "efficiency".  But I'm sure that there are entire armies around the world armed only with hammers.


----------



## Open Bolt (Apr 3, 2022)

PV System said:


> The difference is a matter of "efficiency".


A person who is killed with a less efficient weapon is just as dead as a person who is killed with a more efficient weapon.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 3, 2022)

Open Bolt said:


> A person who is killed with a less efficient weapon is just as dead as a person who is killed with a more efficient weapon.



Correct.  But a gun can make MORE of those dead people in a minute than a hammer.


----------



## miketx (Apr 3, 2022)

Open Bolt said:


> This term "lie" is really overused on the internet.
> 
> An untrue statement could be an honest mistake instead of a lie.


Fake news.


----------



## Open Bolt (Apr 3, 2022)

PV System said:


> Correct.  But a gun can make MORE of those dead people in a minute than a hammer.


Most homicides are close range events with few victims.  The greater efficiency of guns doesn't make much difference in those situations.

That's why gun availability has little impact on homicide rates.


----------



## miketx (Apr 3, 2022)

Open Bolt said:


> Most homicides are close range events with few victims.  The greater efficiency of guns doesn't make much difference in those situations.
> 
> That's why gun availability has little impact on homicide rates.


Chicago jigs differ.


----------



## 1stNickD (Apr 3, 2022)

Stryder50 said:


> What those ignorant of history  (such as OP?) fail to realize is that in the period from first settlement in North America by Europeans up to only the past century or so, those living in rural areas had to deal with both four legged and two legged varmints.
> 
> Four legged could include bear, wolf, large cat(puma), and even none legged such as rattle snake. Arms(weapons) of one sort or another helped increase one's chance of survivng an attack.
> 
> ...


Even today it sometimes takes 15 minutes just to get a 911 operator to pick up your call. Rigor Mortis will set in before the first reponder arrives.


----------



## Woodznutz (Apr 3, 2022)

Relative Ethics said:


> 1) Most suicides without guns are unsuccessful.


That's why guns are often the weapon of choice.


Relative Ethics said:


> 2) The main problem with Japan is that they do not view Suicide as a sin.


That's actually a healthy attitude.


----------



## Rigby5 (Apr 4, 2022)

konradv said:


> Time to add rocket artillery to the second.



The 2nd amendment always implied artillery.
During the American Revolution, most of the cannon used by the Continental Army was privately owned.
But modern warfare is likely best done with stealth, as guerilla warfare, so does not need heavy weapons like planes, tanks, or artillery.


----------



## Rigby5 (Apr 4, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> You need to be ready for everything.
> Those problems that you listed are due to the fact that people forget why they need weapons. It will sober them up.
> 
> If you have a weapon, you should be in the reserve of the militia. It's written in the second amendment. Carrying a weapon makes a man liable for military service.



Being a citizen makes one liable for miliary service, but you will be much more effective if you have your own arms and experience.


----------



## Rigby5 (Apr 4, 2022)

Relative Ethics said:


> I do not think there will be a civil war anytime soon.
> 
> Perhaps economic division between Republicans and Democrats, but not a war.
> 
> Weapons are very harmful.



Weapons can be very harmful, but also essential for defensive purposes.


----------



## Rigby5 (Apr 4, 2022)

Relative Ethics said:


> Firearms are very dangerous and unnecessary toys.



So then the first thing we should to is disarm all the police and military, since they have the history of murdering innocent people.
It is the average people who I trust with firearms a lot more than I trust paid mercenaries like the police or the military.


----------



## Rigby5 (Apr 4, 2022)

BlindBoo said:


> It had nothing to do with the people revolting against the government of the people.   Congress had the authority to establish and regulate the various state militias.



Not quite.
What congress is authorized to do is call up militias from the various state, if the emergency arises.
Congress has no authority over the state or local militias when there is no emergency.


----------



## Rigby5 (Apr 4, 2022)

PV System said:


> Totally agree!  Every American should have access to any and all "arms".  No limits.  Including nuclear.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The biggest mass murders have been done with arson, second is explosives.
Firearms are down below poison.
The main reason firearms are almost impossible to use for mass murder is that the noise is so loud that it gives you away.
With something more stealthy, like arson, explosives, or poison, no one can easily tell who did it, so you can keep repeating it over and over.

But the reason England has a lower murder rate is that they do not have the crazy War on Drugs like the US does.
That is what causes all the gun violence.


----------



## 2aguy (Apr 5, 2022)

Relative Ethics said:


> RIP over 30,000 people who die by guns in USA every year.
> 
> Weapons are of little use except murder and suicide.



23,000 of those are suicides which is why you won’t mention that fact. Of the rest, the majority are criminals murdering criminals murdering criminals, which is another fact you won’t state.

Also, law abiding Americans use their legal guns 1.1 million times a year to stop rapes, robberies, murders, beatings and stabbings…..according to the Centers for Disease Control.

So do Americans need guns?  Absolutely…….


----------



## 2aguy (Apr 5, 2022)

Relative Ethics said:


> 1)  Most suicides without guns are unsuccessful.
> 
> 2)  The main problem with Japan is that they do not view Suicide as a sin.



It doesn’t matter why Japanese commit suicide what
Matters in this thread is that without access to guns they commit suicide more than we do with guns


----------



## Osiris-ODS (Apr 5, 2022)

Relative Ethics said:


> RIP over 30,000 people who die by guns in USA every year.
> 
> Weapons are of little use except murder and suicide.



Tell that to the 1-million-plus people who use firearms defensively every year in the US. "Relative Ethics" lol


----------



## Man of Ethics (Apr 6, 2022)

Osiris-ODS said:


> Tell that to the 1-million-plus people who use firearms defensively every year in the US. "Relative Ethics" lol


As I have said before, justifiable homicide happens about 200-300 times per year in USA.  These statistics seem fishy.


----------



## Man of Ethics (Apr 6, 2022)

2aguy said:


> 23,000 of those are suicides which is why you won’t mention that fact.


Suicide is a sin worse then murder.

Enabling suicide is also very very bad.


----------



## Man of Ethics (Apr 6, 2022)

Rigby5 said:


> So then the first thing we should to is disarm all the police and military, since they have the history of murdering innocent people.
> It is the average people who I trust with firearms a lot more than I trust paid mercenaries like the police or the military.


They still need firearms.  Are police officers armed in UK?


----------



## Man of Ethics (Apr 6, 2022)

Rigby5 said:


> Weapons can be very harmful, but also essential for defensive purposes.


Each year in USA there are 200-300 justifiable homicides, over 10,000 criminal homicides, and over 20,000 suicides.  Mostly by guns.


----------



## Open Bolt (Apr 6, 2022)

Relative Ethics said:


> They still need firearms.


Civilians in America have the same right to defend themselves that the police have.




Relative Ethics said:


> Each year in USA there are 200-300 justifiable homicides,


And countless other defensive gun uses that do not involve death.




Relative Ethics said:


> over 10,000 criminal homicides, and over 20,000 suicides.  Mostly by guns.


Murder victims would be just as dead if they were killed by a different kind of weapon.


----------



## Man of Ethics (Apr 7, 2022)

Open Bolt said:


> Murder victims would be just as dead if they were killed by a different kind of weapon.



Killing someone with a knife is very difficult.  Most knife attacks are not fatal.


----------



## Open Bolt (Apr 7, 2022)

Relative Ethics said:


> Killing someone with a knife is very difficult.  Most knife attacks are not fatal.


Statistics don't seem to agree.  They show little correlation between gun availability and homicide rates.








						Everybody's Lying About the Link Between Gun Ownership and Homicide
					

Revealing how the media lies with graphs to further an anti-gun agenda.




					hwfo.substack.com


----------



## Man of Ethics (Apr 7, 2022)

Open Bolt said:


> Statistics don't seem to agree.  They show little correlation between gun availability and homicide rates.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I can not review all the variables used in that study.

Common sense tells me that most knife attacks are not lethal.


----------



## Blues Man (Apr 7, 2022)

Relative Ethics said:


> As I have said before, justifiable homicide happens about 200-300 times per year in USA.  These statistics seem fishy.


You don't seem to understand that you don't have to kill a person when you use a gun defensively.  Most times the mere drawing of a firearm will stop a criminal


----------



## Blues Man (Apr 7, 2022)

Relative Ethics said:


> Each year in USA there are 200-300 justifiable homicides, over 10,000 criminal homicides, and over 20,000 suicides.  Mostly by guns.


And yet more people in the US are killed annually by knives than by all types of rifles combined

And suicide is a choice not a crime . Everyone has the absolute right to choose whether they live or die.


----------



## Cellblock2429 (Apr 7, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> The idea of the 2nd Amendment is to have weapons to create a militia if necessary and prevent the arbitrariness of the feds. It doesn't work, the feds are constantly getting stronger, and the Americans have already turned into obedient sheep of the left regime. The weapon has become a fetish. The left is not afraid of it.


/----/ Any yet your meme character is holding a weapon to defend himself against a much larger, dangerous foe who is clearly not afraid of him . How ironic and  hypocritical of you. BWHAHAHAHAHA


----------



## BlackSand (Apr 7, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> The idea of the 2nd Amendment is to have weapons to create a militia if necessary and prevent the arbitrariness of the feds. It doesn't work, the feds are constantly getting stronger, and the Americans have already turned into obedient sheep of the left regime. The weapon has become a fetish. The left is not afraid of it.


.

Fortunately ... I am not obligated to care what you, or this particular dead feral hog,
thinks about the Second Amendment or Militias.






Look at that hole over the shoulder, behind the ear, and from an elevated shooting position ...
She was quartering forward and to my right ... That poor bitch never knew I was there and didn't kick twice ... 

.​


----------



## 2aguy (Apr 7, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> You don't seem to understand that you don't have to kill a person when you use a gun defensively.  Most times the mere drawing of a firearm will stop a criminal



He knows…..he is simply acting like a leftist….refusing to acknowledge the truth, facts and reality.


----------



## Blues Man (Apr 7, 2022)

2aguy said:


> He knows…..he is simply acting like a leftist….refusing to acknowledge the truth, facts and reality.


you are giving this guy far too much credit


----------



## badbob85037 (Apr 7, 2022)

Relative Ethics said:


> RIP over 30,000 people who die by guns in USA every year.
> 
> Weapons are of little use except murder and suicide.


Try taking them away and find out what they are used for. We aren't British or from down under


----------



## Failzero (Apr 7, 2022)

As a Militia Sergeant ( California State Militia / Ultra Conservative Shasta County Resident ) I can honestly say 2A/RTKBA purists make me wanna puke . ( I think that there should be "Prohibited Persons" like Illegals & Escaped Convicts & Terrorists who mean harm to the Country and even Prisoners let out over Covid or Overcrowding or let out early by activist judiciary , or folks who have Mental Issues that are being treated ( Like the guy who shot Chris Kyle ) ...


----------



## Open Bolt (Apr 7, 2022)

Failzero said:


> As a Militia Sergeant ( California State Militia / Ultra Conservative Shasta County Resident ) I can honestly say 2A/RTKBA purists make me wanna puke .


If you ever find your rights being violated, you will develop a newfound appreciation for the defenders of civil liberties.




Failzero said:


> ( I think that there should be "Prohibited Persons" like Illegals & Escaped Convicts & Terrorists who mean harm to the Country and even Prisoners let out over Covid or Overcrowding or let out early by activist judiciary , or folks who have Mental Issues that are being treated ( Like the guy who shot Chris Kyle ) ...


Are you under the impression that Second Amendment supporters object to denying arms to such people??

I don't know anyone who thinks that escaped convicts should be allowed to buy guns.


----------



## Failzero (Apr 7, 2022)

Open Bolt said:


> If you ever find your rights being violated, you will develop a newfound appreciation for the defenders of civil liberties.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


California CCW since 2011 ( Carry 2 spare mags and a Tourniquet ) and a Purist would reply to you "What part of Shall not be infringed did you miss ?"


----------



## Open Bolt (Apr 7, 2022)

Failzero said:


> California CCW since 2011 ( Carry 2 spare mags and a Tourniquet ) and a Purist would reply to you "What part of Shall not be infringed did you miss ?"


I've been regarded as an anti-gunner before by someone who was more of a Second Amendment hardliner than I am.  I found it kind of bemusing.


----------



## Man of Ethics (Apr 7, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> You don't seem to understand that you don't have to kill a person when you use a gun defensively.  Most times the mere drawing of a firearm will stop a criminal


Definitely.  But given justifiable homicide numbers being so low, gun self-defense numbers are probably also low.


----------



## Open Bolt (Apr 7, 2022)

Relative Ethics said:


> Definitely.  But given justifiable homicide numbers being so low, gun self-defense numbers are probably also low.


Statistics show that the numbers are quite high.  Criminals often back off when there is a show of force.


----------



## miketx (Apr 7, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> The idea of the 2nd Amendment is to have weapons to create a militia if necessary and prevent the arbitrariness of the feds. It doesn't work, the feds are constantly getting stronger, and the Americans have already turned into obedient sheep of the left regime. The weapon has become a fetish. The left is not afraid of it.


You are wrong. We don't have weapons to create militia. The militia is there and always has been. If they aren't afraid of guns being used then they are stupid.


----------



## miketx (Apr 7, 2022)

Open Bolt said:


> Statistics show that the numbers are quite high.  Criminals often back off when there is a show of force.


Those who don't back off back off involuntarily.


----------



## Blues Man (Apr 8, 2022)

Relative Ethics said:


> Definitely.  But given justifiable homicide numbers being so low, gun self-defense numbers are probably also low.


Not necessarily.

That's just an assumption on your part


----------



## miketx (Apr 8, 2022)

Relative Ethics said:


> Definitely.  But given justifiable homicide numbers being so low, gun self-defense numbers are probably also low.


As your lying media wants you simple minded fools to believe.


----------



## Blues Man (Apr 8, 2022)

miketx said:


> As your lying media wants you simple minded fools to believe.


The reality is that law abiding gun owners exhibit incredible restraint in the use of deadly force.  This is the reason the number of fatal self defense shootings are so low.

Despite the insistence of anti gunners the vast majority of gun owners have no desire to kill anyone.


----------



## hadit (Apr 8, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> The reality is that law abiding gun owners exhibit incredible restraint in the use of deadly force.  This is the reason the number of fatal self defense shootings are so low.
> 
> Despite the insistence of anti gunners the vast majority of gun owners have no desire to kill anyone.


That is the correct motorcycle.


----------



## miketx (Apr 8, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> The reality is that law abiding gun owners exhibit incredible restraint in the use of deadly force.  This is the reason the number of fatal self defense shootings are so low.
> 
> Despite the insistence of anti gunners the vast majority of gun owners have no desire to kill anyone.


Yup, every time a situation even looks suspicious I go the other way. One time in walmart  saw a guy shop lift a box cutter. Then he slid up his sleeve with the blade end open hidden by his palm. He then started wandering around the store so I left, got to my car and called the police and told them and described him. Never saw them show. But I got out.


----------



## Failzero (Apr 8, 2022)

miketx said:


> Yup, every time a situation even looks suspicious I go the other way. One time in walmart  saw a guy shop lift a box cutter. Then he slid up his sleeve with the blade end open hidden by his palm. He then started wandering around the store so I left, got to my car and called the police and told them and described him. Never saw them show. But I got out.


I've carried daily since 2011 ( In Beverly Hills ,Irvine , Catalina Island, Sacramento , Bay Area, Santa Cruz , Coranado ,Mount Shasta ,Venice ...) and not once even been close to pullin my EDC  but at least it's there


----------



## miketx (Apr 8, 2022)

Failzero said:


> I've carried daily since 2011 ( In Beverly Hills ,Irvine , Catalina Island, Sacramento , Bay Area, Santa Cruz , Coranado ,Mount Shasta ,Venice ...) and not once even been close to pullin my EDC  but at least it's there


How do you carry in Cali where it's against the law?


----------



## Failzero (Apr 8, 2022)

miketx said:


> How do you carry in Cali where it's against the law?


California CCW holder since 2011


----------



## miketx (Apr 8, 2022)

Failzero said:


> California CCW holder since 2011


Typical, still won't answer the question.


----------



## Failzero (Apr 8, 2022)

miketx said:


> Typical, still won't answer the question.


I carry a Gen 3 Glock 19  IWB @ almost 6:00 (Really Deep back there )


----------



## Failzero (Apr 8, 2022)

miketx said:


> How do you carry in Cali where it's against the law?


My guess is there are almost 150k People with Current Valid California CCWs


----------



## Captain Caveman (Apr 14, 2022)

2aguy said:


> It doesn’t matter why Japanese commit suicide what
> Matters in this thread is that without access to guns they commit suicide more than we do with guns


Japanese culture is different, you're stuck in the US with blinkers and no knowledge of other countries. The Japanese are brought up to respect their country and people, if they fail, say in business, they feel they've let their country down and thus commit suicide. So if you want any comparison between the US and Japan for suicides, you're an idiot.

Secondly, you gun nuts bash on, idiotically, that you need guns for self defence, but in the same breath, claim most gun deaths/incidents is suicide. So you've just undermined your own argument that you need guns for self defence. Self defence is just a guise, nothing more and nothing less, and you just backed that up.


----------



## Open Bolt (Apr 14, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> you gun nuts bash on, idiotically, that you need guns for self defence, but in the same breath, claim most gun deaths/incidents is suicide. So you've just undermined your own argument that you need guns for self defence. Self defence is just a guise, nothing more and nothing less, and you just backed that up.


You Freedom Haters just don't get it.  We don't say that we need guns for any reason at all.  We offer no justification for having guns other than we choose to have guns.

Now, someone may well choose to have guns because they want to be able to defend themselves.  But if they do, that is their business, and they certainly don't have to justify themselves about any "need".

So there is not any "we need guns for self defense" argument here to even be undermined to begin with.

However, if there had been such an argument here, the existence of suicides certainly would not have undermined it.  That's just plain bad logic on your part.


----------



## 2aguy (Apr 14, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Japanese culture is different, you're stuck in the US with blinkers and no knowledge of other countries. The Japanese are brought up to respect their country and people, if they fail, say in business, they feel they've let their country down and thus commit suicide. So if you want any comparison between the US and Japan for suicides, you're an idiot.
> 
> Secondly, you gun nuts bash on, idiotically, that you need guns for self defence, but in the same breath, claim most gun deaths/incidents is suicide. So you've just undermined your own argument that you need guns for self defence. Self defence is just a guise, nothing more and nothing less, and you just backed that up.




Wrong......we aren't discussing the culture of suicide or the practice of suicide...you guys always try to hide your failure in those fake issues...

It doesn't matter why they do it.......it only matters that you say guns are the issue....they are not.

Japan has extreme gun control....only cops and criminals have easy access to guns.....

Therefore.....the fact that they succeed in killing themselves more often than Americans do, shows you are wrong about guns and suicide...

Americans use guns 1.1 million times a year to stop rapes, robberies, murders, stabbings, and beatings......that people also use them for sucide has no meaning on owning and carrying guns...since again, guns are not the issue in suicide, and those who want to commit suicide will do so with or without a gun....ask the South Koreans, Japanese, Scots, Norwegians and all the other countries with higher suicide rates than we have...


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 14, 2022)

2aguy said:


> It doesn't matter why they do it.......it only matters that you say guns are the issue....they are not.



Except when they are.









						Handgun ownership associated with much higher suicide risk
					

Men who own handguns are eight times more likely to die of gun suicides than men who don’t own handguns, and women who own handguns are 35 times more likely than women who don’t.




					med.stanford.edu
				







2aguy said:


> Americans use guns 1.1 million times a year to stop rapes, robberies, murders, stabbings, and beatings



AND to open fire in subway cars.  Or theaters.  Or workplaces.  Or schools.  Or on the street.  Or in a restaurant.


----------



## Failzero (Apr 14, 2022)

8 out of every 10 Mass shootings ( more than 4 victims ) in last 20 years have been carried out by Liberals ( When Liberals attack incidents ) or people of Cover ( Islamists ) or Color ( minorities )


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 14, 2022)

Failzero said:


> 8 out of every 10 Mass shootings ( more than 4 victims ) in last 20 years have been carried out by Liberals ( When Liberals attack incidents ) or people of Cover ( Islamists ) or Color ( minorities )



Can you cite the source of this interesting information?


----------



## 2aguy (Apr 14, 2022)

PV System said:


> Except when they are.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




That link, is crap.   You have to explain how it is that South Korea and Japan have higher suicide rates than we do......you have to do that....you can't.

I get it....you can't defend your position....so you keep pretending you have a point.....


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 14, 2022)

2aguy said:


> That link, is crap.



I'm surprised you disagree with science.



2aguy said:


> I get it....you can't defend your position....so you keep pretending you have a point.....



I get it.  You ignore the bad stuff because you like your guns.  

America has world-leading levels of gun homicides (certainly among developed first world nations).  So I guess the gun advocates have won.  They've made America "great".  And our greatness is off-the-charts gun homicide rates.

Good for us.


----------



## 2aguy (Apr 14, 2022)

PV System said:


> Except when they are.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




How many mass public shootings?

In 2021?

6

Total killed?

43

We have over 330 million Americans in the United States.....6 committed mass public shootings in 2021....

You have no point...

Deer kill 200 people a year

Lawn mowers kill between 90-100 people a year

ladders kill 300 people a year

bathtubs kill 350 people a year

Cars kill over 39,000

You have no point.....

Americans, again, according to the Centers for Disease control, use their legal guns 1.1 million times a year to save lives.....the Department of Justice puts that number at 1.5 million....

Sooooo, you have nothing...


----------



## 2aguy (Apr 14, 2022)

PV System said:


> I'm surprised you disagree with science.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Japan....South Korea....no guns, more suicide deaths...you link is crap....

Science?

Fact Check, Gun Control and Suicide

*There is no relation between suicide rate and gun ownership rates around the world. *

 According to the 2016 World Health Statistics report, (2) suicide rates in the four countries cited as having restrictive gun control laws have suicide rates that are comparable to that in the U. S.:  Australia, 11.6, Canada, 11.4, France, 15.8, UK, 7.0, and USA 13.7 suicides/100,000.  By comparison, Japan has among the highest suicide rates in the world, 23.1/100,000, but gun ownership is extremely rare, 0.6 guns/100 people.   
Suicide is a mental health issue.  If guns are not available other means are used.  Poisoning, in fact, is the most common method of suicide for U. S. females according to the _Washington Post_ (34 % of suicides), and suffocation the second most common method for males (27%). 
Secondly, gun ownership rates in France and Canada are not low, as is implied in the _Post _article.  The rate of gun ownership in the U. S. is indeed high at 88.8 guns/100 residents, but gun ownership rates are also among the world’s highest in the other countries cited.  Gun ownership rates in these countries are are as follows:  Australia, 15, Canada, 30.8, France, 31.2, and UK 6.2 per 100 residents. (3,4) Gun ownership rates in Saudia Arabia are comparable to that in Canada and France, with 37.8 guns per 100 Saudi residents, yet the lowest suicide rate in the world is in Saudia Arabia (0.3 suicides per 100,000).
Third, recent statistics in the state of Florida show that nearly one third of the guns used in suicides are obtained illegally, putting these firearm deaths beyond control through gun laws.(5)
Fourth, the primary factors affecting suicide rates are personal stresses, cultural, economic, religious factors and demographics.  According to the WHO statistics, the highest rates of suicide in the world are in the Republic of Korea, with 36.8 suicides per 100,000, but India, Japan, Russia, and Hungary all have rates above 20 per 100,000; roughly twice as high as the U.S. and the four countries that are the basis for the _Post_’s calculation that gun control would reduce U.S. suicide rates by 20 to 38 percent.  Lebanon, Oman, and Iraq all have suicide rates below 1.1 per 100,000 people--less than 1/10 the suicide rate in the U. S., and Afghanistan, Algeria, Jamaica, Haiti, and Egypt have low suicide rates that are below 4 per 100,000 in contrast to 13.7 suicides/100,000 in the U. S. 
========


----------



## 2aguy (Apr 14, 2022)

PV System said:


> I'm surprised you disagree with science.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




I don't ignore bad stuff, you don't want to admit that guns are a net good for society.....you could as 15 million Europeans about this...but after they gave up their guns......the governments of Europe allowed them to be murdered by the German socialists.......

Guns save lives every single day, and keep government mass murder from happening.


----------



## Open Bolt (Apr 14, 2022)

PV System said:


> America has world-leading levels of gun homicides (certainly among developed first world nations).  So I guess the gun advocates have won.  They've made America "great".  And our greatness is off-the-charts gun homicide rates.


The victims would be just as dead if they were killed with a different kind of weapon.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 14, 2022)

2aguy said:


> I don't ignore bad stuff, you don't want to admit that guns are a net good for society



With the exception of RECORD BREAKING gun homicide rates we enjoy!



2aguy said:


> .....you could as 15 million Europeans about this...but after they gave up their guns......the governments of Europe allowed them to be murdered by the German socialists.......



"Following Germany's defeat in World War I, the Weimar Republic passed very strict gun control laws in an attempt both to stabilize the country and to comply with the Versailles Treaty of 1919 – laws that in fact required the surrender of all guns to the government. These laws remained in effect until 1928, when the German parliament relaxed gun restrictions and put into effect a strict firearm-licensing scheme. These strict licensing regulations foreshadowed Hitler's rise to power.

"If you read the 1938 Nazi gun laws closely and compare them to earlier 1928 Weimar gun legislation – as a straightforward exercise of statutory interpretation – several conclusions become clear. First, with regard to possession and carrying of firearms, *the Nazi regime relaxed the gun laws that were in place in Germany at the time the Nazis seized power*. Second, the Nazi gun laws of 1938 specifically banned Jewish persons from obtaining a license to manufacture firearms or ammunition. Third, approximately eight months after enacting the 1938 Nazi gun laws, Hitler imposed regulations prohibiting Jewish persons from possessing any dangerous weapons, including firearms." (SOURCE)

Now, granted he did limit Jews abilities to get guns.  So at least part of your argument holds a bit of water.




2aguy said:


> Guns save lives every single day, and keep government mass murder from happening.



If the government wanted to "murder" you you would be very likely murdered.  Unless you think you can hold out with the guns you buy from WalMart against the American military.

(*Oh and make sure to mention Afghanistan!  Yeah, those folks were armed with .22 and small handguns...oh, no, sorry, they were armed with leftover Soviet and American military munitions.  PLUS they had grown accustomed to living in utter squalor for most of their lives, unlike America's Gravy Seals who couldn't hold out in their defense of democracy against a "stolen election" more than 4 hours before they had to get home for the "Dukes of Hazard" reruns)


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 14, 2022)

Open Bolt said:


> The victims would be just as dead if they were killed with a different kind of weapon.



Well, THOSE THINGS EXIST in every other developed first world nation and yet America still leads!

Go figure.


----------



## hadit (Apr 14, 2022)

The bottom line remains, no one has to justify owning a gun. It's a right to do so, and there's no need to justify it, so don't play that game with the grabbers, it's irrelevant.


----------



## 2aguy (Apr 14, 2022)

PV System said:


> With the exception of RECORD BREAKING gun homicide rates we enjoy!
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You dipshits always use that quote and highlight the exact wrong parts....you idiot....

They registered guns in Germany, and the rest of Europe also banned and confiscated guns..........then, the German socialists used the registration lists to what?

Take guns away from the very people they planned on murdering....you doofus...

*The part you should have highlighted...

Third, approximately eight months after enacting the 1938 Nazi gun laws, Hitler imposed regulations prohibiting Jewish persons from possessing any dangerous weapons, including firearms."

You know, the 6 million Jews they murdered in Germany, then they went on to the other countries that took guns away from their citizens and murdered a grand total of 15 million people....*

*They also took guns away from the rest of their political enemies...they relaxed gun ownership for their party members, in particular their blm/antifa......er....I mean their brownshirts...you doofus...

You idiots keep using that quote, not understanding that it undermines your very point...*

NAZI GENOCIDE AND MASS MURDER



German socialists

*By genocide, the murder of hostages, reprisal raids, forced labor, "euthanasia," starvation, exposure, medical experiments, and terror bombing, and in the concentration and death camps, the Nazis murdered from 15,003,000 to 31,595,000 people, most likely 20,946,000 men, women, handicapped, aged, sick, prisoners of war, forced laborers, camp inmates, critics, homosexuals, Jews, Slavs, Serbs, Germans, Czechs, Italians, Poles, French, Ukrainians, and many others. Among them 1,000,000 were children under eighteen years of age.1 *

*And none of these monstrous figures even include civilian and military combat or war-deaths*

http://[URL='http://hawaii.edu/powe...]http://hawaii.edu/powerkills/NAZIS.CHAP1.HTM[/URL]


----------



## 2aguy (Apr 14, 2022)

PV System said:


> With the exception of RECORD BREAKING gun homicide rates we enjoy!
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Moron........

France, the Nazis, and Gun Control

*In 1935, French prime minister Pierre Laval, who later served in the Vichy government during the Nazis' four-year occupation of France, commanded French citizens to surrender their firearms.

 Laval and France's ruling parties feared social revolution and banned "war" weapons, instituting strict gun registration policies. 

They believed that repressive limits on civilian gun ownership were necessary at a time of Depression-sparked unrest and ongoing conflicts among various political factions. Strict time limits for firearms registration and harsh penalties for noncompliance, including forfeiture, fines, and imprisonment, were put in place. Laval's government did not foresee the impact these restrictive measures would have on a Nazi-conquered France just five years later, when firearms surrender would be required under threat of death.

In Gun Control in Nazi-Occupied France: Tyranny and Resistance, attorney Stephen P. Halbrook explores the impact and efficacy of gun control measures on Wehrmacht-controlled France and how these measures hindered the French Resistance's fight against Nazi tyranny. The author asserts that Laval's 1935 gun control efforts left the French people vulnerable to the Nazi invaders and ill equipped to deal with the Nazi invasion of 1940, plus simplified the Nazi efforts to confiscate firearms and impede a French resistance.



And then they did this....

The Holocaust in France was the persecution, deportation, and annihilation of Jews and Roma between 1940 and 1944 in occupied France, metropolitan Vichy France, and in Vichy-controlled French North Africa, during World War II. The persecution began in 1940, and culminated in deportations of Jews from France to Nazi concentration camps in Nazi Germany and Nazi-occupied Poland. The deportation started in 1942 and lasted until July 1944. Of the 340,000 Jews living in metropolitan/continental France in 1940, more than 75,000 were deported to death camps, where about 72,500 were murdered. The government of Vichy France and the French police organized and implemented the roundups of Jews.[1] Although most deported Jews were killed, the survival rate of the Jewish population in France was up to 75%, which is one of the highest survival rates in Europe.[2][3]









						The Holocaust in France - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				



*


----------



## 2aguy (Apr 14, 2022)

PV System said:


> With the exception of RECORD BREAKING gun homicide rates we enjoy!
> 
> 
> 
> ...




And the other side?

THE SWISS WERE PREPARED TO FIGHT FACISM TO THE BITTER END | FRONTLINE | PBS

*That is why the Nazis despised Switzerland. Joseph Goebbels called Switzerland "this stinking little state" where "sentiment has turned very much against us." Adolf Hitler decided that "all the rubbish of small nations still existing in Europe must be liquidated," even if it meant he would later "be attacked as the 'Butcher of the Swiss.'"*

*The 1940 Nazi invasion plan, Operation Tannenbaum, was not executed, and SS Oberst Hermann Bohme's 1943 memorandum warned that an invasion of Switzerland would be too costly because every man was armed and trained to shoot. This did not stop the Gestapo from preparing lists of Swiss to be liquidated once the Nazis overran the country.*

*The other European nations were easily toppled and had little means to wage a partisan war against the occupation. Once their standing armies were defeated, the governments capitulated and the populaces were defenseless.*
*
Only in Switzerland was the entire populace armed and prepared to wage a relentless guerrilla war against an invader. When the war began in 1939, Switzerland mobilized 435,000 citizen soldiers out of a population of 4.2 million. Production figures for Swiss service rifles, which had firepower equal to those of the Germans, demonstrate an ample supply of small arms. Swiss militiamen were instructed to disregard any alleged "official" surrender as enemy propaganda and, if necessary, to fight individually. This meant that a nation of sharpshooters would be sniping at German soldiers at long ranges from every mountain.
*
*While neutral, Switzerland was prepared to fight a Nazi invasion to the end. The celebrated Swiss Gen. Henri Guisan developed the strategy known as defense du reduit--an initial opposition followed by a retreat into the Alps, where a relentless war to the death would be waged. Most Swiss strongly opposed Nazism. Death sentences were issued for fifth-column activities, and proclamations against anti-Semitism were passed at various official levels. There was no Holocaust on Swiss soil, something that can not be said for France, the Netherlands, Poland or most of Europe.*


----------



## 2aguy (Apr 14, 2022)

PV System said:


> With the exception of RECORD BREAKING gun homicide rates we enjoy!
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Moron......we have over 20 million AR-15 rifles alone, not including all the other rifle types.....so you have no fucking point.....a better educated population........you have no idea what you are talking about...

Had Ukraine been better armed as a populace, Russia wouldn't have been able to invade........18,000 rifles handed out as Russia invaded was too little too late, you doofus...


----------



## Captain Caveman (Apr 15, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Wrong......we aren't discussing the culture of suicide or the practice of suicide...you guys always try to hide your failure in those fake issues...
> 
> It doesn't matter why they do it.......it only matters that you say guns are the issue....they are not.
> 
> ...


You claim guns and criminals, but you also claim the bulk of gun deaths is suicide, so your argument that you need a gun for self defence against criminals is vastly reduced. Thank you for clarifying the self defence fallacy. The 2 Amendment would appear it increases suicides in the US.


----------



## Batcat (Apr 15, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> You don't seem to understand that you don't have to kill a person when you use a gun defensively.  Most times the mere drawing of a firearm will stop a criminal


Plus keep in mind if medical care arrives quickly for a person shot with a handgun it can often save a life. Handguns are far less deadly than rifles or shotguns. They are more of a defensive weapon, perhaps a last chance defensive weapon. Real life is not like the movies. 

A coworker of mine was shot in the femoral artery during a car robbery attempt. A hospital was located just up the street and he received care in time to save his life. He did lose a considerable amount of blood. When he came back to work he showed me the the 9mm bullet that almost cost him his life. 









						Can you survive a gunshot wound to the femoral artery? - Answers
					

The survivability of a bullet wound to the femoral artery is dependent on many factors. The most important factors are the severity and location of the bleeding and the availability of advanced medical care. The size of the victim, the possibility of infection, and the activity of the victim...




					www.answers.com
				












						Bullet Stopping Power From a Doctor's Point of View - The Truth About Guns
					

I’m not sure what would happen if there were no more internet discussions about “stopping power” as applied to handguns. What would we talk about? I am sure that it would be a better world, and there would be lots more available bandwidth.




					www.thetruthaboutguns.com


----------



## Blues Man (Apr 15, 2022)

Batcat said:


> Plus keep in mind if medical care arrives quickly for a person shot with a handgun it can often save a life. Handguns are far less deadly than rifles or shotguns. They are more of a defensive weapon, perhaps a last chance defensive weapon. Real life is not like the movies.
> 
> A coworker of mine was shot in the femoral artery during a car robbery attempt. A hospital was located just up the street and he received care in time to save his life. He did lose a considerable amount of blood. When he came back to work he showed me the the 9mm bullet that almost cost him his life.
> 
> ...


The survivability of a GSW is irrelevant to the use of forearms for self defense.

And most murders where guns are involved are committed with handguns.  









						Homicides by murder weapon in the U.S. 2021 | Statista
					

Handguns are by far the most common murder weapon used in the United States, accounting for 6,012 homicides in 2021.




					www.statista.com


----------



## 2aguy (Apr 15, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> You claim guns and criminals, but you also claim the bulk of gun deaths is suicide, so your argument that you need a gun for self defence against criminals is vastly reduced. Thank you for clarifying the self defence fallacy. The 2 Amendment would appear it increases suicides in the US.



Are you dumb…..your posts reveal the answer……

Japan and Sourh Korea have higher rates of successful suicide you idiot…….guns aren’t the issue.  Americans use their legal guns 1.1 million times a year to stop rapes, robberies, murders, beatings and stabbings…..according to the centers for disease control…….can you tell which number is bigger?


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 15, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Moron......we have over 20 million AR-15 rifles alone, not including all the other rifle types.....so you have no fucking point.....a better educated population........you have no idea what you are talking about...



Your posts drip with education.


----------



## hadit (Apr 15, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> You claim guns and criminals, but you also claim the bulk of gun deaths is suicide, so your argument that you need a gun for self defence against criminals is vastly reduced. Thank you for clarifying the self defence fallacy. The 2 Amendment would appear it increases suicides in the US.


There is no need to justify gun ownership in the US. The Constitution allows it, the end.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 15, 2022)

hadit said:


> There is no need to justify gun ownership in the US. The Constitution allows it, the end.



The Constitution is NOT a suicide pact.

Right now the 2A is being leveraged well beyond it's rational original intent.  America has the highest gun ownership rate of any developed nation on earth and we have along with it the highest gun homicide rate.

At some point we need to re-equilibrate our "rights" when countless thousands die every year.

The Constitution was NOT written by God in stone.  It has, built into it, the ability to change or alter its content.

THAT'S the true power of the Constitution.


----------



## hadit (Apr 15, 2022)

PV System said:


> The Constitution is NOT a suicide pact.
> 
> Right now the 2A is being leveraged well beyond it's rational original intent.  America has the highest gun ownership rate of any developed nation on earth and we have along with it the highest gun homicide rate.
> 
> ...


Right, so get a new amendment ratified that cancels the 2nd. For now, there's no need for anyone to justify owning a firearm in the United States, but the fact that murder rates have gone down while gun ownership has gone up indicates that something other than just guns is a factor.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 15, 2022)

hadit said:


> Right, so get a new amendment ratified that cancels the 2nd.



How about one that simply clarifies some limitations on the second?



hadit said:


> For now, there's no need for anyone to justify owning a firearm in the United States, but the fact that murder rates have gone down while gun ownership has gone up indicates that something other than just guns is a factor.



Murder rates going down in America is kind of like being proud of being the skinniest kid at fat camp.  (Old joke)

America patting itself on its back because *record breaking murder rates are slightly less than they were a few years back *is not really an impressive feat.  It's actually kind of sick.


----------



## hadit (Apr 15, 2022)

PV System said:


> How about one that simply clarifies some limitations on the second?


Whatever. That's how you do something about the 2nd, but you have to convince an awful lot of people to agree with you.


PV System said:


> Murder rates going down in America is kind of like being proud of being the skinniest kid at fat camp.  (Old joke)
> 
> America patting itself on its back because *record breaking murder rates are slightly less than they were a few years back *is not really an impressive feat.  It's actually kind of sick.


You're missing the point, which is that a LOT more guns was met with LOWER murder rates. Using gun-grabber logic, it should have gone UP, not DOWN. Basically, the right people got the guns, which is kind of the point, after all.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 15, 2022)

hadit said:


> You're missing the point, which is that a LOT more guns was met with LOWER murder rates.



But again, that's laughable.  America has the highest gun homicide rate of any developed first world nation *by far!  Sometimes orders of magnitude higher*.

If this argument of More Guns = Less Murder held ANY water it would mean that Japan and Belgium and the UK would be piled high with corpses.  It's absurd on its face.


----------



## hadit (Apr 15, 2022)

PV System said:


> But again, that's laughable.  America has the highest gun homicide rate of any developed first world nation *by far!  Sometimes orders of magnitude higher*.
> 
> If this argument of More Guns = Less Murder held ANY water it would mean that Japan and Belgium and the UK would be piled high with corpses.  It's absurd on its face.


The stats are what they are. We added a lot more guns and had less murder. The bottom line is, you can't just blame guns as the driving force behind murder.


----------



## 2aguy (Apr 15, 2022)

PV System said:


> The Constitution is NOT a suicide pact.
> 
> Right now the 2A is being leveraged well beyond it's rational original intent.  America has the highest gun ownership rate of any developed nation on earth and we have along with it the highest gun homicide rate.
> 
> ...




No, actually it isn't...

Americans own some 600 million guns, and use them 1.1 million times a year to save lives from rape, robbery, murder, beatings and stabbings.....

You, of course, include suicide, since you are a dishonest, anti-gun fascist.......

Of the criminal murder rate in the U.S., the majority of the victims are criminals...murdered by other criminals......of the rest, the majority are the friends and family of criminals living in democrat party controlled cities, where the major cause of these murders is the democrat party war on police, and the democrat party policy of releasing violent gun criminals over and over again, no matter how many times they commit gun crimes....

The Constitution and Bill of Rights were written to remind us that loony tunes, anti-gun fascists like you, can't take away Rights, simply because you have feelings....


----------



## 2aguy (Apr 15, 2022)

PV System said:


> But again, that's laughable.  America has the highest gun homicide rate of any developed first world nation *by far!  Sometimes orders of magnitude higher*.
> 
> If this argument of More Guns = Less Murder held ANY water it would mean that Japan and Belgium and the UK would be piled high with corpses.  It's absurd on its face.




We have more murders because we have a political party that creates and supports gun crime......the democrat party attacks the police, then releases repeat gun offenders....

Meanwhile, the "other countries," around the world have had more murder than we have had because their governments turned on their citizens and murdered 15 million of them in Europe.....more people murdered in 6 years than in 82 years......and if you throw in Russia and China and their government murder, our murder rate would never match theirs......no matter how hard our criminals tried.....

More guns = less gun murder, less gun crime, less violent crime.....

Over  27 years,  from 1993  to the year 2015, we went from 200 million guns in private hands in the 1990s and 4.7 million people carrying guns for self defense in 1997...to close to 400-600 million guns in private hands and over 19.4 million people carrying guns for self defense in 2019...guess what happened...

New Concealed Carry Report For 2020: 19.48 Million Permit Holders, 820,000 More Than Last Year despite many states shutting down issuing permits because of the Coronavirus - Crime Prevention Research Center


-- gun murder down 49%

--gun crime down 75%

--violent crime down 72%

Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware

*Compared with 1993, the peak of U.S. gun homicides, the firearm homicide rate was 49% lower in 2010, and there were fewer deaths, even though the nation’s population grew. The victimization rate for other violent crimes with a firearm—assaults, robberies and sex crimes—was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993. Violent non-fatal crime victimization overall (with or without a firearm) also is down markedly (72%) over two decades.*


----------



## 2aguy (Apr 15, 2022)

PV System said:


> But again, that's laughable.  America has the highest gun homicide rate of any developed first world nation *by far!  Sometimes orders of magnitude higher*.
> 
> If this argument of More Guns = Less Murder held ANY water it would mean that Japan and Belgium and the UK would be piled high with corpses.  It's absurd on its face.




More gun ownership?

Does not equal more gun murder.....you idiot...

*Another statistical qualification is that while the raw numbers of gun deaths in 2020 represent new records, the rates do not, because there are many more Americans now. But given recent trends, those records might not stand for long.

The 6.2 gun murders per 100,000 people in 2020 is a full percentage point below the 7.2 per 100,000 recorded in 1974 and the seven gun suicides per 100,000 is below the 7.7 rate recorded in 1977. But the rate of gun murders has been climbing steeply since 2015 while the rate of gun suicides has been climbing more gradually.*









						Gun Deaths Increase As Gun Laws Are Loosened in Ohio and Other States
					

Incidents of gun violence have increased while Ohio lawmakers create legislation to loosen firearm restrictions.




					www.citybeat.com
				





2015?

What happened?

1) The democrat party went to war against our police.

2) The democrat party decided to increase the number of violent gun criminals they released from prison, over and over again.

3) The democrat party unleashed their brown shirts, blm/antifa, to burn, loot and murder for 7 months, in primarily black neighborhoods, and ordered the police to stand down and not stop the burning, looting and killing.......


----------



## Captain Caveman (Apr 15, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Are you dumb…..your posts reveal the answer……
> 
> Japan and Sourh Korea have higher rates of successful suicide you idiot…….guns aren’t the issue.  Americans use their legal guns 1.1 million times a year to stop rapes, robberies, murders, beatings and stabbings…..according to the centers for disease control…….can you tell which number is bigger?


I'm not interested in other countries. Your argument is that a major reason for the 2nd Amendment was having firearms for self defence, yet you now claim the bulk of gun incidents are down to suicides. Now you stated that thicko, you blew your own balls off with that. I've told you all along, the self defence argument was just a guise, and you've confirmed it. So if you want to call anyone dumb, then start with yourself, dummy.

So allowing everyone to freely obtain a gun without infringing their rights for self defence is an utter load of bollox, and you've just confirmed it.


----------



## Captain Caveman (Apr 15, 2022)

hadit said:


> There is no need to justify gun ownership in the US. The Constitution allows it, the end.


But to have a debate, you have to get beyond the Rinse, Wash, Repeat statements. So forget the 2A, we all know it's there, it's discussing the topic beyond that. I would say gun nuts won't/don't because they know their argument is weak to piss poor.


----------



## hadit (Apr 15, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> But to have a debate, you have to get beyond the Rinse, Wash, Repeat statements. So forget the 2A, we all know it's there, it's discussing the topic beyond that. I would say gun nuts won't/don't because they know their argument is weak to piss poor.


Remember the mindset of the people who wrote the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Their intent was for the population to be able to fight back against a corrupt government. Those who insist we would need nukes and F-15s to fight the US military forget that a very large percentage of the military would not only refuse to take up arms against their fellow citizens but would make those weapons available for use by them, and as we have seen in other countries an armed populace can make even a heavily armed military presence very costly. So fine, put the 2nd aside for a moment. Everyone needs to decide if the illusion of safety brought by law-abiding citizens having no guns is worth being completely helpless against armed intruders, either foreign or domestic.

The bottom line is, freedom is messy, chaotic, dangerous and requires people to act like adults to maintain it. It's also preferable to the alternative.


----------



## 2aguy (Apr 15, 2022)

2aguy said:


> More gun ownership?
> 
> Does not equal more gun murder.....you idiot...
> 
> ...




Again....


Captain Caveman said:


> I'm not interested in other countries. Your argument is that a major reason for the 2nd Amendment was having firearms for self defence, yet you now claim the bulk of gun incidents are down to suicides. Now you stated that thicko, you blew your own balls off with that. I've told you all along, the self defence argument was just a guise, and you've confirmed it. So if you want to call anyone dumb, then start with yourself, dummy.
> 
> So allowing everyone to freely obtain a gun without infringing their rights for self defence is an utter load of bollox, and you've just confirmed it.




Yes....suicides, which would be done with other tools if they didn't have guns....which you see in Japan, China, South Korea and a lot of European countries with extreme gun control..

Moron.....what part of my quoting 1.1 million times a year that guns are used by normal people for self defense "blew my own balls off..." you idiot....

You really are stupid...

Which is a bigger number...1.1 million or the number of suicides by gun...you moron.....


----------



## Open Bolt (Apr 15, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> You claim guns and criminals, but you also claim the bulk of gun deaths is suicide, so your argument that you need a gun for self defence against criminals is vastly reduced. Thank you for clarifying the self defence fallacy.


First, this "need" nonsense is, well, nonsense.  Free people don't bother to justify that we have a need for a weapon.  If we choose to have a gun, we go buy that gun.

Second you are exercising very poor logic.  The existence of suicides does not change the fact that some Americans choose to have guns for self defense.




Captain Caveman said:


> The 2 Amendment would appear it increases suicides in the US.


I am in favor of setting up a system where suicidal people can _voluntarily_ and _temporarily_ hand in their guns for safekeeping until they are better.




Captain Caveman said:


> Your argument is that a major reason for the 2nd Amendment was having firearms for self defence, yet you now claim the bulk of gun incidents are down to suicides. Now you stated that thicko, you blew your own balls off with that.


The existence of suicides does not change the reality that some Americans choose to have guns for self defense.




Captain Caveman said:


> I've told you all along, the self defence argument was just a guise, and you've confirmed it.


He has confirmed no such thing.  Some Americans do choose to have guns for self defense.




Captain Caveman said:


> So allowing everyone to freely obtain a gun without infringing their rights for self defence is an utter load of bollox, and you've just confirmed it.


That is incorrect.  Some Americans do choose to have guns for self defense.

Nothing that he said confirms the opposite.




Captain Caveman said:


> But to have a debate, you have to get beyond the Rinse, Wash, Repeat statements. So forget the 2A, we all know it's there, it's discussing the topic beyond that. I would say gun nuts won't/don't because they know their argument is weak to piss poor.


No.  It's only the Freedom Haters who have bad arguments.


----------



## Open Bolt (Apr 15, 2022)

PV System said:


> The Constitution is NOT a suicide pact.


The Second Amendment causes no harm to the American people.




PV System said:


> Right now the 2A is being leveraged well beyond it's rational original intent.


That is incorrect.  Currently it is barely being enforced at all.

The original intent of the Second Amendment is that the American people have weapons like grenades, bazookas, and full-auto weapons.

The Heller ruling only gives us semi-autos with large magazines.




PV System said:


> America has the highest gun ownership rate of any developed nation on earth and we have along with it the highest gun homicide rate.


So what?  Who cares whether a murder victim is killed with a gun versus killed with some other sort of weapon?




PV System said:


> At some point we need to re-equilibrate our "rights" when countless thousands die every year.


No we don't.

Even if our rights did increase the number of homicides, freedom would be more important than saving lives.

And as it happens, our rights have no impact on the number of homicides.  Homicide victims are just as dead no matter what kind of weapon is used to kill them.




PV System said:


> The Constitution was NOT written by God in stone.  It has, built into it, the ability to change or alter its content.
> THAT'S the true power of the Constitution.


True.  If you want to amend the Constitution to abolish freedom in America, you have the right to try to do that.




PV System said:


> How about one that simply clarifies some limitations on the second?


No.  The Second Amendment is fine as it is.  The meaning is already clear.

The only people who pretend that it isn't clear are those who want to violate what it says.




PV System said:


> But again, that's laughable.  America has the highest gun homicide rate of any developed first world nation *by far!  Sometimes orders of magnitude higher*.
> If this argument of More Guns = Less Murder held ANY water it would mean that Japan and Belgium and the UK would be piled high with corpses.  It's absurd on its face.


He was not arguing that guns reduce murders.  He was pointing out that guns do not increase murders.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 15, 2022)

Open Bolt said:


> The Second Amendment causes no harm to the American people.



The way Americans act with it would indicate otherwise.  Certainly the SCIENCE disagrees with you.



Open Bolt said:


> That is incorrect.  Currently it is barely being enforced at all.



Oh, wah, wah, wah.  You gun fetishists always scream and moan about your 2A rights as if ANYONE is really doing anything against you.  LOL.  

If you guys are that scared all the time over nothing, imagine how many bodies you'll have to drop when something scary DOES happen.



Open Bolt said:


> The original intent of the Second Amendment is that the American people have weapons like grenades, bazookas, and full-auto weapons.



Well, I can understand that.  Which is why the blather about the 2A is a joke because even YOU 2A fetishists understand that there are RATIONAL LIMITS.  You just like to have the NRA push it to the point that we are over the line.



Open Bolt said:


> So what?  Who cares whether a murder victim is killed with a gun versus killed with some other sort of weapon?



Oh so you don't know anything about guns?  Well, let me inform you:  *guns are exceptionally efficient killing machines that can act a LONG DISTANCES.  This is why mass shooters, drug gangs and "evil doers of all sorts" USE GUNS.*



Open Bolt said:


> Even if our rights did increase the number of homicides, freedom would be more important than saving lives.



That's truly psychopathic.


Open Bolt said:


> The only people who pretend that it isn't clear are those who want to violate what it says.



Don't forget *Supreme Court Justices*.  But I'm sure you think they don't know what they are talking about in relation to the Constitution either.

LOL.


----------



## JoeBlow (Apr 15, 2022)

Relative Ethics said:


> RIP over 30,000 people who die by guns in USA every year.
> 
> Weapons are of little use except murder and suicide.


What about protecting your stash?


----------



## koshergrl (Apr 15, 2022)

Relative Ethics said:


> RIP over 30,000 people who die by guns in USA every year.
> 
> Weapons are of little use except murder and suicide.


Most of whom die at the hands of criminals who don't give two shits for gun laws.
And that number doesn't seem real.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 15, 2022)

koshergrl said:


> Most of whom die at the hands of criminals who don't give two shits for gun laws.



Where do you think the evil doers get their guns?  

If you have a nation in which there are sufficient guns in circulation such that every man, woman and child could have one it means that there is a much higher _*probability*_ that guns will be stolen or misplaced or otherwise get into the hands of people who want to do harm.

This is why the sheer number of guns in our society becomes a problem.  MORE GUNS = higher probability of guns making it into the hands of those who wish to do harm.

As for people being able to defend themselves:  well that's a noble ideal and certainly one that would be nice.  But the fact of the matter is study after study after study shows that guns kept in the home _are far more likely to be used against people in that same home_ (murders, suicides, etc.) and few guns are actually utilized in terms of "self defense"


From THIS SOURCE:
*9-10. Few criminals are shot by decent law-abiding citizens*
_
Using data from surveys of detainees in six jails from around the nation, we worked with a prison physician to determine whether criminals seek hospital medical care when they are shot.  Criminals almost always go to the hospital when they are shot.  To believe fully the claims of millions of self-defense gun uses each year would mean believing that decent law-abiding citizens shot hundreds of thousands of criminals.  But the data from emergency departments belie this claim, unless hundreds of thousands of wounded criminals are afraid to seek medical care.  But virtually all criminals who have been shot went to the hospital, and can describe in detail what happened there.

May, John P*; Hemenway, David*. Oen, Roger; Pitts, Khalid R.  Medical Care Solicitation by Criminals with Gunshot Wound Injuries: A Survey of Washington DC Jail Detainees.  Journal of Trauma.  2000; 48:130-132.

May, John P; *Hemenway, David.*  Do Criminals Go to the Hospital When They are Shot?  Injury Prevention.  2002; 8:236-238.
_


*11. Self-defense gun use is rare and not more effective at preventing injury than other protective actions*
_
Victims use guns in less than 1% of contact crimes, and women never use guns to protect themselves against sexual assault (in more than 300 cases).  Victims using a gun were no less likely to be injured after taking protective action than victims using other forms of protective action.  Compared to other protective actions, the National Crime Victimization Surveys provide little evidence that self-defense gun use is uniquely beneficial in reducing the likelihood of injury or property loss.

This article helps provide accurate information concerning self-defense gun use.   It shows that many of the claims about the benefits of gun ownership are largely myths.

*Hemenway D*, Solnick SJ.  The epidemiology of self-defense gun use: Evidence from the National Crime Victimization Surveys 2007-2011.  Preventive Medicine.  2015; 79: 22-27._


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Apr 15, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> The idea of the 2nd Amendment is to have weapons to create a militia if necessary and prevent the arbitrariness of the feds. It doesn't work, the feds are constantly getting stronger, and the Americans have already turned into obedient sheep of the left regime. The weapon has become a fetish. The left is not afraid of it.


It's not the Bill of Needs it's the Bill of Rights.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Apr 15, 2022)

PV System said:


> Where do you think the evil doers get their guns?
> 
> If you have a nation in which there are sufficient guns in circulation such that every man, woman and child could have one it means that there is a much higher _*probability*_ that guns will be stolen or misplaced or otherwise get into the hands of people who want to do harm.
> 
> ...


Everything you wrote is a lie


----------



## Failzero (Apr 15, 2022)

An Armed Society is a Polite society


----------



## Open Bolt (Apr 15, 2022)

PV System said:


> The way Americans act with it would indicate otherwise.


That is incorrect.  There are no such indications.




PV System said:


> Certainly the SCIENCE disagrees with you.


That is incorrect.  Science backs me up 100%.




PV System said:


> Oh, wah, wah, wah.  You gun fetishists always scream and moan about your 2A rights as if ANYONE is really doing anything against you.  LOL.


Your contempt for civil liberties is appalling.




PV System said:


> If you guys are that scared all the time over nothing, imagine how many bodies you'll have to drop when something scary DOES happen.


Who said anything about being scared?




PV System said:


> Well, I can understand that.  Which is why the blather about the 2A is a joke because even YOU 2A fetishists understand that there are RATIONAL LIMITS.


Our civil liberties are not a joke.




PV System said:


> You just like to have the NRA push it to the point that we are over the line.


We do no such thing.  And neither does the NRA.




PV System said:


> Oh so you don't know anything about guns?  Well, let me inform you:  *guns are exceptionally efficient killing machines that can act a LONG DISTANCES.  This is why mass shooters, drug gangs and "evil doers of all sorts" USE GUNS.*


I know quite a bit about guns.

Nothing that you just said addresses the questions:  So what?  Who cares whether a murder victim is killed with a gun versus killed with some other sort of weapon?




PV System said:


> That's truly psychopathic.


Spare me the melodrama.




PV System said:


> Don't forget *Supreme Court Justices*.  But I'm sure you think they don't know what they are talking about in relation to the Constitution either.
> LOL.


No.  But progressive justices do lie about it.




PV System said:


> As for people being able to defend themselves:  well that's a noble ideal and certainly one that would be nice.  But the fact of the matter is study after study after study shows that guns kept in the home _are far more likely to be used against people in that same home_ (murders, suicides, etc.)


That's nothing to do with guns.

That's because domestic violence is more common than home invasions.

Gun-free homes are equally more likely to experience domestic violence than experience a home invasion.




PV System said:


> and few guns are actually utilized in terms of "self defense"


That is incorrect.  Studies show quite a few cases of guns being used defensively.




PV System said:


> From THIS SOURCE:
> *9-10. Few criminals are shot by decent law-abiding citizens*
> 
> _Using data from surveys of detainees in six jails from around the nation, we worked with a prison physician to determine whether criminals seek hospital medical care when they are shot.  Criminals almost always go to the hospital when they are shot.  To believe fully the claims of millions of self-defense gun uses each year would mean believing that decent law-abiding citizens shot hundreds of thousands of criminals.  But the data from emergency departments belie this claim, unless hundreds of thousands of wounded criminals are afraid to seek medical care.  But virtually all criminals who have been shot went to the hospital, and can describe in detail what happened there.
> ...


Most defensive gun uses do not involve gunfire.

Most criminals are looking for easy victims and will flee from a show of force.




PV System said:


> *11. Self-defense gun use is rare and not more effective at preventing injury than other protective actions*
> 
> _Victims use guns in less than 1% of contact crimes, and women never use guns to protect themselves against sexual assault (in more than 300 cases).  Victims using a gun were no less likely to be injured after taking protective action than victims using other forms of protective action.  Compared to other protective actions, the National Crime Victimization Surveys provide little evidence that self-defense gun use is uniquely beneficial in reducing the likelihood of injury or property loss.
> 
> ...


At least a half-million defensive gun uses a year is not what I would call rare.  And many other studies show far more defensive gun uses than that.

Note that it really doesn't matter if self defense is effective or not.  Free people have the right to have guns for self defense if they choose to do so.  However, stats do show that it is effective.


----------



## 2aguy (Apr 15, 2022)

PV System said:


> Where do you think the evil doers get their guns?
> 
> If you have a nation in which there are sufficient guns in circulation such that every man, woman and child could have one it means that there is a much higher _*probability*_ that guns will be stolen or misplaced or otherwise get into the hands of people who want to do harm.
> 
> ...



You idiot….hememway is a left wing anti-gun fanatic……

What is it with you morons and not understanding that most self defense with a gun doesn’t end in the civilian having to shoot the criminal…….that is what Hemingway lies about to get morons like you to go along with him……you idiot

And as far as women and rape….for decades women were the group with the lowest rate of gun ownership…you moron…..so they didn’t have as many guns for the chance to stop rapes……..you uninformed doofus……..

And yet, I have news stories of women using guns to stop assholes attacking them….and they stopped the attack with their guns…..the guy didn’t get the chance to pull his pants down so likely it wasn’t called attempted rape….

Do you really think that a woman is better off during a violent sexual assault not having a gun?  Really?  Are you this stupid?


----------



## 2aguy (Apr 15, 2022)

PV System said:


> Where do you think the evil doers get their guns?
> 
> If you have a nation in which there are sufficient guns in circulation such that every man, woman and child could have one it means that there is a much higher _*probability*_ that guns will be stolen or misplaced or otherwise get into the hands of people who want to do harm.
> 
> ...




You moron..........do you think these count?


http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2016...-gun-violence-awareness-day.html?intcmp=hpbt4
Lancaster Woman Scares Off Bat-Wielding Attackers By Pulling Gun On Them

*LANCASTER, Ohio - It happened along a walking path in Lancaster.

Dinah Burns is licensed to carry a concealed gun, but she'd only recently started taking her weapon while walking her dog.

Based on what happened, it looks like she'll make a point of carrying from now on.

"I think if they'd gotten any closer, I probably would have fired,” said Burns.

It was Monday when Burns was on a footpath near Sanderson Elementary School.

"Two gentlemen came out of the woods, one holding a baseball bat, and said 'You're coming with us'."

The men weren't deterred by Dinah's dog Gracie.

"I said, 'Well, what do you want?,' and as I was saying that I reached in to my pocket and slipped my gun out, slipped the safety off as I pulled it out. As I was doing that the other gentleman came toward me and raised the baseball bat. And, I pointed the gun at them and said, 'I have this and I'm not afraid to use it.'"

The men took off and so far have eluded police. Dinah posted about the incident on Facebook to alert friends and neighbors, to criticism by some.

"Most of the males' opinion was, 'Why didn't you shoot them?'"

Easy to second-guess a decision made under pressure, based on her concealed carry training, and police agree.

"To get out of a situation, back out, get out of it as much as you can without having to discharge your firearm."

"I will say it's a good thing to go from a place of danger to a place of safety, however you get that done,” said Sgt. Matt Chambers, Lancaster Police.

"Very thankful that it turned out the way it did, and hope it doesn't happen again, but I will be prepared."
========
What I want you to know on Gun Violence Awareness Day | Fox News*
*
What I want you to know on Gun Violence Awareness Day

I correctly listened to my instincts; I had a feeling that my life was in danger in that elevator and prepared myself mentally for what was potentially to come.

I ran to my car in an attempt to escape and, before I could even get my entire body in my car, I was tackled by my attacker.

This man quickly overpowered me, stabbed at me with a knife, clamped his hand over my mouth multiple times, and repeatedly tried forcing me in the passenger seat of my car while telling me, “We’re going.”

The entire time this was happening, a rusted, serrated knife was being stabbed towards my abdomen and held at my face. 

I had been hit in the face, thrown over my driver’s side console, and had rips in my tights from his hands trying to force my legs up and over into the passenger seat.

There are some individuals that think gun owners are “trigger happy” and wanting to pull their weapons out at the first opportunity. There is nothing further from the truth.

The night I was attacked, I fought like hell for my life before reaching for my gun. I kicked, I screamed, I had all ten fingernails ripped off and bloodied from scratching and trying to fight my way out of a literal life and death situation.

Ultimately, I accessed my gun, shot my attacker multiple times, and saved my life. He will be spending years in prison for what he did to me.

Using a gun in self-protection is not a decision one makes lightly; in fact, I never dreamed that I would be forced into a situation where I would have to do so. However, I also never imagined such evil existing in the world so that I would be powerless, wounded, on my back and unable to physically force my attacker off of me.

I owned a gun and had been trained on how to use it. I know how to safely carry and that a gun is a serious and significant weapon; it is not to be used carelessly. Naysayers and people with opposing opinions may try to undermine my situation with hypotheticals. I cannot answer these questions. All I can do is tell the facts of my story and the true account of how I saved my own life.

What I want you to know on Gun Awareness Day is that a gun in the hands of a potential victim is not improperly placed; it can be the only thing keeping her from being brutally raped and murdered. 

Without my gun, I would not be alive today.


Guns are not the problem in America; men like my attacker -- who are willing to violently change one person’s life for no reason except for pure evil – are the problem.

Be safe at all times. Be aware of your surroundings. Trust your instincts. Always be able to protect yourself. Refuse to be a victim, and instead be a fighter and a survivor. Live to tell your tale and make a criminal regret the day he chose you as a “soft target.” My gun saved my life, and one could save yours too.
===============

Waking up to an armed intruder in your house would be any home owner’s worst nightmare. If you’re a single mother with two young kids in the house, finding a man wielding a machete in your bedroom closet immediately kicks you into “momma bear” mode.

That’s what happened to a California woman who woke up to the sound of a man rummaging through her walk-in closet. The thief — Ocean Burger (his name, not a restaurant) — was armed with a number of knives and a machete when the un-named woman grabbed a handgun and confronted him.

From ksbw.com . . .


[Investigators] say Burger ignored orders to leave and when the homeowner fired several warning shots he allegedly advanced towards her, that’s when the mother fired at the accused burglar hitting him in the leg. And California law may be on her side.

Warning shots are never a good idea and could even put you in legal jeopardy in many jurisdictions. In this case, they not only wasted perfectly good (and expensive) ammunition, but probably led Burger to believe she wasn’t serious about actually shooting him.

After advancing on the woman, the round in his leg apparently convinced Burger that he was wrong.

The good news is California actually has a castle doctrine law on the books. The woman had no duty to retreat and was legally justified in using deadly force to defend herself and her children.

“There is a presumption that favors the homeowner they’re presumed that the person is in imminent fear of either death or great bodily injury,” said Ellen Campos, assistant district attorney for San Benito county. …

California Woman Shoots Machete-Wielding Burglar She Found in Her Closet - The Truth About Guns*
_*=============*_


----------



## 2aguy (Apr 15, 2022)

PV System said:


> Where do you think the evil doers get their guns?
> 
> If you have a nation in which there are sufficient guns in circulation such that every man, woman and child could have one it means that there is a much higher _*probability*_ that guns will be stolen or misplaced or otherwise get into the hands of people who want to do harm.
> 
> ...




You idiot....

*And here we have studies that show that guns are the most effective way to stop a rape.....*

Guns Effective Defense Against Rape

A woman using a gun is less likely to be raped and less likely to be injured during the attack....

Guns Effective Defense Against Rape


However, most recent studies with improved methodology are consistently showing that the more forceful the resistance, the lower the risk of a completed rape, with no increase in physical injury. Sarah Ullman's original research (Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 1998) and critical review of past studies (Criminal Justice and Behavior, 1997) are especially valuable in solidifying this conclusion.

I wish to single out one particular subtype of physical resistance: Use of a weapon, and especially a firearm, is statistically a woman's best means of resistance, greatly enhancing her odds of escaping both rape and injury, compared to any other strategy of physical or verbal resistance. This conclusion is drawn from four types of information.

*First,* a 1989 study (Furby, Journal of Interpersonal Violence) found that both male and female survey respondents judged a gun to be the most effective means that a potential rape victim could use to fend off the assault. Rape "experts" considered it a close second, after eye-gouging.

*Second,* raw data from the 1979-1985 installments of the Justice Department's annual National Crime Victim Survey show that when a woman resists a stranger rape with a gun, the probability of completion was 0.1 percent and of victim injury 0.0 percent, compared to 31 percent and 40 percent, respectively, for all stranger rapes (Kleck, Social Problems, 1990).

*Third,* a recent paper (Southwick, Journal of Criminal Justice, 2000) analyzed victim resistance to violent crimes generally, with robbery, aggravated assault and rape considered together. Women who resisted with a gun were 2.5 times more likely to escape without injury than those who did not resist and 4 times more likely to escape uninjured than those who resisted with any means other than a gun. Similarly, their property losses in a robbery were reduced more than six-fold and almost three-fold, respectively, compared to the other categories of resistance strategy.


*Fourth,* we have two studies in the last 20 years that directly address the outcomes of women who resist attempted rape with a weapon. (Lizotte, Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 1986; Kleck, Social Problems, 1990.) The former concludes,"Further, women who resist rape with a gun or knife dramatically decrease their probability of completion." (Lizotte did not analyze victim injuries apart from the rape itself.) The latter concludes that "resistance with a gun or knife is the most effective form of resistance for preventing completion of a rape"; this is accomplished "without creating any significant additional risk of other injury."

The best conclusion from available scientific data, then, is when avoidance of rape has failed and one must choose between being raped and resisting, a woman's best option is to resist with a gun in her hands.

*The only reason Hemmingway uses the Natiional Crime Victimization Survey is it is the only survey that doesn't actually research gun self defense....you idiot..........that should tell you all you need to know about his "research," on this topic, and it should explain that he is an anti-gun fanatic pretending to do research...*


----------



## 2aguy (Apr 15, 2022)

PV System said:


> Where do you think the evil doers get their guns?
> 
> If you have a nation in which there are sufficient guns in circulation such that every man, woman and child could have one it means that there is a much higher _*probability*_ that guns will be stolen or misplaced or otherwise get into the hands of people who want to do harm.
> 
> ...




Look doofus....do you know why Hemenway uses the National Crime Victimization Survey?

It is the only crime study that he says counts gun defensive use...that doesn't have the word "Gun" in it.....it does not ask respondents if they have used a gun for self defense, you moron.......

Here.......from the Daily Kos no less....

The Daily Kos on why the NCVS is wrong...

Defensive Gun Use Part III - The National Crime Victimization Study

The disadvantages of this study design are:
*1) the study is not specifically designed to measure DGUs;*

*2) the study does not track every type of crime;

3) the study does not ask every interviewee about episodes of DGU;

4) interviewees are not specifically asked about defending themselves with a gun; *

*5) follow-up studies have demonstrated that the incidence of assault (and especially assaults by relatives and non-strangers) in the NCVS is under-reported, and if crime is under-reported then so too will DGUs be under-reported;*

*6) respondents’ anonymity is not preserved, and some interviewees may therefore feel wary or unwilling to discuss gun use with federal government employees.*


----------



## 2aguy (Apr 15, 2022)

PV System said:


> Where do you think the evil doers get their guns?
> 
> If you have a nation in which there are sufficient guns in circulation such that every man, woman and child could have one it means that there is a much higher _*probability*_ that guns will be stolen or misplaced or otherwise get into the hands of people who want to do harm.
> 
> ...




Hey.....moron.....the 18 gun self defense studies that hemenway chooses to ignore....

A quick guide to the studies and the numbers.....the full lay out of what was studied by each study is in the links....

The name of the group doing the study, the year of the study, the number of defensive gun uses and if police and military defensive gun uses are included.....notice the bill clinton and obama defensive gun use research is highlighted.....

GunCite-Gun Control-How Often Are Guns Used in Self-Defense 

GunCite Frequency of Defensive Gun Use in Previous Surveys

Field...1976....3,052,717 ( no cops, no military)

DMIa 1978...2,141,512 ( no cops, no military)

L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,68 ( no cops, no military)

Kleck......1994...2.5 million ( no cops, no military)

2021 national firearm survey, Prof. William English, PhD. designed by Deborah Azrael of Harvard T. Chan School of public policy, and  Mathew Miller, Northeastern university.......1.67 million defensive uses annually.

CDC...1996-1998... 1.1 million  averaged over  those years.( no cops, no military)

Obama's CDC....2013....500,000--3million

--------------------


Bordua...1977...1,414,544

DMIb...1978...1,098,409 ( no cops, no military)

Hart...1981...1.797,461 ( no cops, no military)

Mauser...1990...1,487,342 ( no cops,no military)

Gallup...1993...1,621,377 ( no cops, no military)

DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million ( the bill clinton study)

Journal of Quantitative Criminology--- 989,883 times per year."

(Based on survey data from a 2000 study published in the _Journal of Quantitative Criminology_,[17] U.S. civilians use guns to defend themselves and others from crime at least 989,883 times per year.[18])

Paper: "Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment." By David McDowall and others. _Journal of Quantitative Criminology_, March 2000. Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment - Springer


-------------------------------------------

Ohio...1982...771,043

Gallup...1991...777,152

Tarrance... 1994... 764,036 (no cops, no military)

Lawerence Southwich Jr. 400,000 fewer violent crimes and at least 800,000 violent crimes deterred..

*2021 national firearms survey..*

The survey was designed by Deborah Azrael of the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, and Matthew Miller of Northeastern University,
----
The survey further finds that approximately a third of gun owners (31.1%) have used a firearm to defend themselves or their property, often on more than one occasion, and it estimates that guns are used defensively by firearms owners in approximately 1.67 million incidents per year. Handguns are the most common firearm employed for self-defense (used in 65.9% of defensive incidents), and in most defensive incidents (81.9%) no shot was fired. Approximately a quarter (25.2%) of defensive incidents occurred within the gun owner's home, and approximately half (53.9%) occurred outside their home, but on their property. About one out of ten (9.1%) defensive gun uses occurred in public, and about one out of twenty (4.8%) occurred at work.


----------



## 2aguy (Apr 15, 2022)

PV System said:


> Where do you think the evil doers get their guns?
> 
> If you have a nation in which there are sufficient guns in circulation such that every man, woman and child could have one it means that there is a much higher _*probability*_ that guns will be stolen or misplaced or otherwise get into the hands of people who want to do harm.
> 
> ...




Here....Hemmenway said

*Victims use guns in less than 1% of contact crimes, and women never use guns to protect themselves against sexual assault (in more than 300 cases).  Victims using a gun were no less likely to be injured after taking protective action than victims using other forms of protective action. 

From the Southwick, actual study on gun self defense.....you doofus...

The next step was to look at the serious injuries which occurred. Victims received more injuries if they took some other action than if they used a gun or did nothing. Their attackers caused the lowest rate of injury if they did not use a weapon but caused the highest rate of injury if they used a weapon other than a gun. Thus, it followed that the best choice for the victim is to use a gun and for the money-motivated attacker is either to use a gun or to use no weapon.
------*

*The final step in the analysis was to look at what the results in terms of both losses and injuries would have been in both data sets if more of the victims had been armed. It was found that potential victims who choose to carry guns provide an external benefit to the class of potential victims. *

*They reduce the prob- ability that the attacker will get anything from a particular crime and therefore reduce the attractive- ness of that crime to the criminal. Further, they reduce the amount of gain that can be expected from that crime. Since there are costs to the potential victim in carrying a gun, it follows that too few guns will be carried for a social optimum.*






__





						Loading…
					





					www.hoplofobia.info


----------



## koshergrl (Apr 15, 2022)

PV System said:


> Where do you think the evil doers get their guns?
> 
> If you have a nation in which there are sufficient guns in circulation such that every man, woman and child could have one it means that there is a much higher _*probability*_ that guns will be stolen or misplaced or otherwise get into the hands of people who want to do harm.
> 
> ...


We aren’t giving up our guns just because our justice system refuses to leave criminals in prison where they belong. It will NEVER happen.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 16, 2022)

koshergrl said:


> We aren’t giving up our guns just because our justice system refuses to leave criminals in prison where they belong. It will NEVER happen.



Then you missed the point of my post.  I will try to make it clearer for you.

*This is a probabilistic game*.  If you increase the number of legal guns owned by perfectly good people _*you increase the probability that there will be guns that are stolen or otherwise make it into the hands of the bad people*._

That's just basic statistics.  Thefts happen, even good people sell guns to people who may not be as good.


In reality no one is going to ask you to give up all your guns (except maybe Jesus, but you'd have to take that up with Him), but you may be asked to either have limited guns or have more oversight of you guns for the general public safety.

Cookies are good, but you can't make your entire diet cookies.  Guns have a value but you can't flood your population with guns and expect the outcome to be great.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 16, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Hey.....moron.....



There's a bridge somewhere missing you.


----------



## Open Bolt (Apr 16, 2022)

PV System said:


> you may be asked to either have limited guns or have more oversight of you guns for the general public safety.


It's hard to give a specific answer without knowing the details of the limits or the oversight, but the answer to such requests will likely be "no".


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 16, 2022)

Open Bolt said:


> It's hard to give a specific answer without knowing the details of the limits or the oversight, but the answer to such requests will likely be "no".



Actually it is NEVER hard to answer that question.  The answer is always "no" regardless.

In all reality America is stuck with its gun issues.  The 2A rules supreme and that's the way we want it.  We watch week after week as mass-shootings happen and people get on subway cars and open fire.  And we clutch our pearls for a few minutes and we mouth the mealy-mouth fake compassion of "thotz-n-prayerz".  

We watched as little kids were mowed down in Connecticut and we hmmed and hawwed for a few months, but in the end we didn't do anything meaningful.

We actually seem to LIKE this state of affairs.  

So we're always going to be like this.  The cost of "freedom" in the world's richest nation is a simple cost, the cost of knowing that if you go to the store or church or theater today you might not make it back alive.

You guys won.  Enjoy the victory!  Don't rub it in by playing "martyr" over imaginary gun limitations.  You don't need to worry.  You have it all.  You won fair and square (thanks to NRA money which you gave them, Wayne L.P. would like to thank you a LOT).


----------



## Open Bolt (Apr 16, 2022)

PV System said:


> Actually it is NEVER hard to answer that question.  The answer is always "no" regardless.


Not necessarily.  I'd like to see a system set up where suicidal people could _voluntarily_ and _temporarily_ hand in their guns for safekeeping until they are better.




PV System said:


> In all reality America is stuck with its gun issues.  The 2A rules supreme and that's the way we want it.  We watch week after week as mass-shootings happen and people get on subway cars and open fire.


Those people would be just as dead if they were killed with a bomb, or with fire, or with a truck driven at high speed.




PV System said:


> And we clutch our pearls for a few minutes and we mouth the mealy-mouth fake compassion of "thotz-n-prayerz".


My thoughts and prayers stopped when these people started using their victimhood as a weapon to try to violate my rights.




PV System said:


> We watched as little kids were mowed down in Connecticut and we hmmed and hawwed for a few months, but in the end we didn't do anything meaningful.
> We actually seem to LIKE this state of affairs.


It's more that there really isn't much that we can do to prevent murderers from murdering.




PV System said:


> So we're always going to be like this.  The cost of "freedom" in the world's richest nation is a simple cost, the cost of knowing that if you go to the store or church or theater today you might not make it back alive.


It would be just the same if we were not free.  The weapons would be different, but the deaths would be the same.




PV System said:


> You guys won.  Enjoy the victory!  Don't rub it in by playing "martyr" over imaginary gun limitations.


When the left tries to violate my rights, the attempt may be doomed to fail, but the attempt isn't imaginary.




PV System said:


> You don't need to worry.  You have it all.  You won fair and square (thanks to NRA money which you gave them, Wayne L.P. would like to thank you a LOT).


It's not money that won it for us.  It's votes.  Rural voters always vote anti-gun politicians out of office, and both parties need rural districts in order to hold the House of Representatives.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 16, 2022)

Open Bolt said:


> Not necessarily.  I'd like to see a system set up where suicidal people could _voluntarily_ and _temporarily_ hand in their guns for safekeeping until they are better.



They can already do it.



Open Bolt said:


> Those people would be just as dead if they were killed with a bomb, or with fire, or with a truck driven at high speed.



Good thing we limit people's access to bombs.



Open Bolt said:


> My thoughts and prayers stopped when these people started using their victimhood as a weapon to try to violate my rights.



Yeah, people with dead children tend to be a real drag.  Your compassion is noted.  Maybe someday you'll be lucky enough to be in their shoes and you can show them how it SHOULD be done.



Open Bolt said:


> When the left tries to violate my rights, the attempt may be doomed to fail, but the attempt isn't imaginary.



It's imaginary.  No one is going to take your precious guns.  You won.  Stop being a sore winner.



Open Bolt said:


> It's not money that won it for us.



Ummm, you know how lobbying works, right?



Open Bolt said:


> It's votes.



Uh huh.

Is that why the NRA spends MILLIONS OF DOLLARS every year lobbying congress?


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Apr 16, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> The idea of the 2nd Amendment is to have weapons to create a militia if necessary and prevent the arbitrariness of the feds. It doesn't work, the feds are constantly getting stronger, and the Americans have already turned into obedient sheep of the left regime. The weapon has become a fetish. The left is not afraid of it.



Oh, of course they're not afraid of it.  That's why they spend so much time trying to eradicate the Second Amendment and private gun ownership:  because everyone knows you obsess over defeating things you're not afraid of.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Apr 16, 2022)

Relative Ethics said:


> RIP over 30,000 people who die by guns in USA every year.
> 
> Weapons are of little use except murder and suicide.



Long life and happiness to the 2 million+ people whose lives are saved by guns every year.  Seems like they found quite an important use for weapons "except murder and suicide".


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 16, 2022)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Oh, of course they're not afraid of it.  That's why they spend so much time trying to eradicate the Second Amendment and private gun ownership



You gun fetishists are the loudest whiners imaginable.  Worse that toddlers who didn't get as many sprinkles on their ice cream as they wanted.

YOU WON!  You have as many guns as you want!  You guys have turned America into the leading first world gun ownership capital!

STOP BEING SORE WINNERS!



Cecilie1200 said:


> :  because everyone knows you obsess over defeating things you're not afraid of.



You guys are the MOST PITIFUL martyrs I've seen.  And my mom was a world-class martyr, so I've seen the master at work.  You guys STILL WIN THE TITLE.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Apr 16, 2022)

Otis Mayfield said:


> "Der taken r guns!"
> 
> They haven't "taken ur guns" for over 245 years. Don't hold your breath.



"We haven't succeeded in our goals yet, so that means you should pretend our goals don't exist!  Be as stupid and gullible as I am, damn it!"

Uh huh.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Apr 16, 2022)

Relative Ethics said:


> Firearms are very dangerous and unnecessary toys.



Based on what?  Your ability to assert that it's true REALLY, REALLY firmly?


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Apr 16, 2022)

PV System said:


> You gun fetishists are the loudest whiners imaginable.  Worse that toddlers who didn't get as many sprinkles on their ice cream as they wanted.
> 
> YOU WON!  You have as many guns as you want!  You guys have turned America into the leading first world gun ownership capital!
> 
> ...



"Someone disagreed with me!  Quick, run to a label before I hear something other than the voices in my head!"

Begone, troll.  If you ever stop thinking past your memes, perhaps I'll be generous enough to re-consider whether you might be thought of as a person.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 16, 2022)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Begone, troll.



OH NO!  SOMEONE DISAGREED WITH YOU!  Call them a name!  (See what I did there?)



Cecilie1200 said:


> If you ever stop thinking past your memes, perhaps I'll be generous enough to re-consider whether you might be thought of as a person.



Actually I'm hoping people like YOU never consider me a person.  I don't respect your type so I need NOTHING from you.  Just stay away.  Polish your guns in your closet and enjoy yourself.  Rub-a-dub-dub.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Apr 16, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> I believe that only those who agree to join the militia, conduct exercises and, if necessary, fight for the state should have the right to bear arms. Otherwise, this will lead to the federalization of the state and the deprivation of the right to own weapons in general.



I believe that your beliefs about a country that isn't yours are the height of irrelevance.  Put bluntly, no one asked you, and now that you've felt compelled to "advise" us anyway, we value your opinion even less.


----------



## koshergrl (Apr 16, 2022)

PV System said:


> Then you missed the point of my post.  I will try to make it clearer for you.
> 
> *This is a probabilistic game*.  If you increase the number of legal guns owned by perfectly good people _*you increase the probability that there will be guns that are stolen or otherwise make it into the hands of the bad people*._
> 
> ...


You can blather all you like. We have a right to be well armed. The point is to be as well armed as the military. We will NEVER surrender that right.  Ever.


----------



## 2aguy (Apr 16, 2022)

PV System said:


> Then you missed the point of my post.  I will try to make it clearer for you.
> 
> *This is a probabilistic game*.  If you increase the number of legal guns owned by perfectly good people _*you increase the probability that there will be guns that are stolen or otherwise make it into the hands of the bad people*._
> 
> ...




That is just a stupid way to think about this.......so, if we just didn't allow people to have cars, we wouldn't have car theft, or car crashes......

Again, I know you are an idiot, you do not curtail the Rights of people based on the illegal actions of other people....you moron.

You arrest the people who steal the guns and you don't just let them go......what we currently have are democrat party judges who are releasing violent repeat offenders over and over again....

Punish the people who steal guns and you reduce the number of people who steal guns, you moron...


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 16, 2022)

2aguy said:


> That is just a stupid way to think about this.



If you don't understand probabilities I can guess why you'd say that.



2aguy said:


> ......so, if we just didn't allow people to have cars, we wouldn't have car theft, or car crashes......



Pretty much, yeah.  That's why we put so many hurdles between people and drivers licenses.




2aguy said:


> Again, I know you are an idiot,



I'm sure you know a lot of things.  Or you tell yourself you do.




2aguy said:


> you do not curtail the Rights of people based on the illegal actions of other people....you moron.



You actually DO that very thing.  Take the first amendment as but one example.  There are limits imposed on EVERYONE precisely because of the actions of a few bad actors.



2aguy said:


> You arrest the people who steal the guns and you don't just let them go



America has the highest per capita incarceration rate in the world.  So your theory fails at the outset.


2aguy said:


> Punish the people who steal guns and you reduce the number of people who steal guns, you moron...



It is really getting wearying hearing a clown call me a moron.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 16, 2022)

koshergrl said:


> You can blather all you like.



I understand.  A lot of heavy math there and you don't understand it.  




koshergrl said:


> We have a right to be well armed. The point is to be as well armed as the military. We will NEVER surrender that right.  Ever.



You martyrs are all alike.  You just want everyone to feel bad for your "victimhood mentality".

Sorry, I don't spare much compassion for those who tell me explicitly they don't want compassion.

Grow up.  Your guns are safe.

Now go polish your halo with Jesus.  Talk to him about your guns.


----------



## 2aguy (Apr 16, 2022)

PV System said:


> If you don't understand probabilities I can guess why you'd say that.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




No....you can't break the law with the First Amendment....you can't use a gun to rape, rob or murder...that is the "curtailment," allowed under the Right to own guns.....you don't ban or confiscate guns from normal people who do not commit a crime, simply because others do commit crimes......that is what fascists do.....

*America has the highest per capita incarceration rate in the world. 

*
What about that statement is so hard for morons like you to understand.....the democrat party now has an active policy of releasing the most violent criminals, the ones who are using illegal guns for rape, robbery and murder, over and over again.......often releasing these violent criminals within hours or days of being captured for violent gun crimes...

It doesn't matter how many violent criminals are temporarily detained in prison, if the democrats let them out over and over again no matter how many felonies they commit....

You doofus...


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Apr 16, 2022)

PV System said:


> OH NO!  SOMEONE DISAGREED WITH YOU!  Call them a name!  (See what I did there?)
> 
> 
> 
> Actually I'm hoping people like YOU never consider me a person.  I don't respect your type so I need NOTHING from you.  Just stay away.  Polish your guns in your closet and enjoy yourself.  Rub-a-dub-dub.



Yes, I see what you did there:  tried lamely to be clever, and failed miserably.  Run along and bother someone who has time for your ignorance.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Apr 16, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Then you are on your way to the usual leftist dictatorship. The feds will not leave you free, they will centralize power until they make you slaves



Is that what happened in your lame-ass country, to make you try to deal yourself into ours in an attempt to feel important?


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 16, 2022)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Is that what happened in your lame-ass country, to make you try to deal yourself into ours in an attempt to feel important?



It's so sad when people like you can't handle someone with a different opinion.


----------



## Open Bolt (Apr 16, 2022)

PV System said:


> It's so sad when people like you can't handle someone with a different opinion.


Keep in mind that opinions on this issue are effectively opinions about whether Americans get to remain free or not.

It is natural for people to get upset when someone tries to take away their freedom.




PV System said:


> They can already do it.


That is incorrect.  Currently there is no system in place for suicidal people to _voluntarily_ and _temporarily_ hand in their guns until they are better.




PV System said:


> Good thing we limit people's access to bombs.


Bombs are trivially easy to make.

So are incendiaries if a murderer wants to use fire.

Trucks are easy to steal if a murderer wants to plow one into a crowd at high speed.




PV System said:


> Yeah, people with dead children tend to be a real drag.  Your compassion is noted.  Maybe someday you'll be lucky enough to be in their shoes and you can show them how it SHOULD be done.


I know one thing, if I ever suffer a tragedy I won't use that as a weapon to try to violate the civil liberties of innocent people.




PV System said:


> It's imaginary.  No one is going to take your precious guns.  You won.  Stop being a sore winner.


It's not imaginary.  The left is still trying to violate my civil liberties.

It's like Japan at the end of WWII.  We may have effectively won the war, but they were still refusing to surrender.




PV System said:


> Ummm, you know how lobbying works, right?


I have a pretty good idea how it works.




PV System said:


> Uh huh.
> Is that why the NRA spends MILLIONS OF DOLLARS every year lobbying congress?


The money isn't nearly as important as our ability to vote people out of office in rural districts.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 16, 2022)

Open Bolt said:


> Keep in mind that opinions on this issue are effectively opinions about whether Americans get to remain free or not.



That's overly dramatic.

1. No one is taking your guns.  In fact there is NO MAJOR POLITICAL PARTY WHO SAYS THEY WILL.

2. Your personal guns have never been used to maintain freedom.  And it is EXTREMELY unlikely you would be able to do so if your freedom were at risk.  Look at Ruby Ridge.  Look at Waco.  Look at Malheur.



Open Bolt said:


> That is incorrect.  Currently there is no system in place for suicidal people to _voluntarily_ and _temporarily_ hand in their guns until they are better.



You have GOT to be joking.  No one is REQUIRED to keep their guns.



Open Bolt said:


> Bombs are trivially easy to make.



Not as easy as getting a gun.  Which is probably why mass shootings (like the one THIS AFTERNOON in S.C.) use guns.



Open Bolt said:


> Trucks are easy to steal if a murderer wants to plow one into a crowd at high speed.



While this happens, there are MANY MANY MANY more mass shootings with guns.  That must mean that guns are easier to get ahold of and use for this purpose.  



Open Bolt said:


> It's not imaginary.  The left is still trying to violate my civil liberties.



It's imaginary.  But it's always important to keep the unwashed masses scared of SOMETHING. It's how you control mobs of the less educated.  Your favorite anti-elitist stalwarts in Congress are all elites.  They've ALWAYS been elites.  Most of them only own guns to pose in pictures for you guys to make you think they are like you.  They aren't.  You're being played.



Open Bolt said:


> I have a pretty good idea how it works.


Apparently not.



Open Bolt said:


> The money isn't nearly as important as our ability to vote people out of office in rural districts.



Nah.  There's a reason why politicians care about their NRA rating.  They actually don't much care about you personally....you simply aren't important.  Your vote is effectively meaningless because you've been gerrymandered into solid districts that don't really act as political battlegrounds.  And YOU don't give much in the way of funding.

The NRA, on the other hand, acts as a great "clearinghouse" for information for the illiteratti so you get skewed info and the politicians only care about the NRA lobbying money.

You're being sold a load of sh*t keeping you amped up over fake outrage.  You're being played more than you know.


----------



## koshergrl (Apr 16, 2022)

PV System said:


> I understand.  A lot of heavy math there and you don't understand it.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


What complete nonsense. I’m not a victim. Yes my guns are safe because nobody will ever take them from me, that has nada to do with you.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 16, 2022)

koshergrl said:


> What complete nonsense. I’m not a victim. Yes my guns are safe because nobody will ever take them from me, that has nada to do with you.



Apparently it has EVERYTHING to do with me (and people like me). We terrify you that we want to take all your guns away.  It's hilarious.

There are a few among us on the Left who DO want to take your guns, but that's hardly a majority and there's *no mainstream political party currently planning to take your guns*.  You are being PLAYED. 

They WANT you to be scared so you'll join things like the NRA and send $$$ to support their "lobbying efforts".  And, by the way, enriching that scum Wayne La Pierre.

I would recommend that you actually take seriously the concerns expressed by those on the Left _while they are still being kind_.  Because a few more mass slaughters and sooner or later the majority of the active voters WILL pursue options that are not friendly.

But that's a while off.  America is currently OK watching toddlers get gunned down in school.  It's our "thing" apparently.

Then followed by our faux moralistic "thoughts and prayers" which is a load of crap.  We show that those prayers aren't aimed in the direction we want others to think.  Prayers are exactly meaningless if you act in support of a culture of death.


----------



## Open Bolt (Apr 16, 2022)

PV System said:


> That's overly dramatic.


Not really.  Freedom is important to people.




PV System said:


> 1. No one is taking your guns.


That's not for a lack of trying on the part of the left.




PV System said:


> In fact there is NO MAJOR POLITICAL PARTY WHO SAYS THEY WILL.


That is incorrect.  The Democratic Party is always trying to outlaw various guns.




PV System said:


> 2. Your personal guns have never been used to maintain freedom.  And it is EXTREMELY unlikely you would be able to do so if your freedom were at risk.  Look at Ruby Ridge.  Look at Waco.  Look at Malheur.


You don't understand what freedom is.  You have everything completely twisted around and backwards in that sentence.

It is not our guns that maintain our freedom.  It is our freedom that maintains our guns.




PV System said:


> You have GOT to be joking.


I'm not.  The system that I proposed has not been created.




PV System said:


> No one is REQUIRED to keep their guns.


Irrelevant.  People are going to choose to keep their guns, as it is their right to do.




PV System said:


> Not as easy as getting a gun.  Which is probably why mass shootings (like the one THIS AFTERNOON in S.C.) use guns.
> While this happens, there are MANY MANY MANY more mass shootings with guns.  That must mean that guns are easier to get ahold of and use for this purpose.


Probably true.

But so what?  It's easy enough to do that if someone can't manage to get guns, they will easily shift gears and pursue some other method.




PV System said:


> It's imaginary.


No it isn't.  The left's attempts to violate my rights may be doomed to failure, but the attempts are in earnest.




PV System said:


> Your favorite anti-elitist stalwarts in Congress are all elites.  They've ALWAYS been elites.  Most of them only own guns to pose in pictures for you guys to make you think they are like you.  They aren't.  You're being played.


I don't object to elitists.  All I care about is whether they protect my rights or not.  If they do that, I don't care whether they are like me or not.




PV System said:


> Apparently not.


I've been fighting in the trenches for decades now.  I know exactly how the war is being waged.




PV System said:


> Nah.  There's a reason why politicians care about their NRA rating.  They actually don't much care about you personally....you simply aren't important.  Your vote is effectively meaningless because you've been gerrymandered into solid districts that don't really act as political battlegrounds.  And YOU don't give much in the way of funding.


That is incorrect.  Rural districts are necessary for either party to control the House.

That makes our votes indispensable.




PV System said:


> The NRA, on the other hand, acts as a great "clearinghouse" for information for the illiteratti so you get skewed info


That is incorrect.  The NRA provides accurate information, and people also get information from other sources.

Civil liberties activists are hardly illiterate.




PV System said:


> and the politicians only care about the NRA lobbying money.


That is incorrect.  They care about getting voted out of office.

You should see some of them sob when we vote them out.




PV System said:


> You're being sold a load of sh*t keeping you amped up over fake outrage.  You're being played more than you know.


The NRA doesn't make leftist politicians say that they are out to violate our rights.

Those leftists politicians say that stuff voluntarily.


----------



## Open Bolt (Apr 16, 2022)

PV System said:


> I would recommend that you actually take seriously the concerns expressed by those on the Left _while they are still being kind_.  Because a few more mass slaughters and sooner or later the majority of the active voters WILL pursue options that are not friendly.


We can defeat the left as many times as we need to.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 16, 2022)

Open Bolt said:


> We can defeat the left as many times as we need to.



Soon it isn't _just_ going to be "the Left".


----------



## Open Bolt (Apr 17, 2022)

PV System said:


> Soon it isn't _just_ going to be "the Left".


No chance of that.  Only the left wants to violate people's civil liberties for fun.

The rest of America values civil liberties.


----------



## Blues Man (Apr 17, 2022)

PV System said:


> The Constitution is NOT a suicide pact.
> 
> Right now the 2A is being leveraged well beyond it's rational original intent.  America has the highest gun ownership rate of any developed nation on earth and we have along with it the highest gun homicide rate.
> 
> ...


You need to learn where murders take place in this country.

When you do you will realize that the reason our murder rate is what it is ( not the highest in the world FYI), is that's what the powers that be want it to be

70% or more of all murders occur within very small areas in our poorest inner city neighborhoods and these murders are young poor male minorities killing other young poor male minorities.  And the perpetrators of these murders are by and large people who cannot legally own firearms.

Our murder rates have nothing to do with the second amendment and everything to do with the fact that we do not enforce the gun laws we have on the books


----------



## Blues Man (Apr 17, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> But to have a debate, you have to get beyond the Rinse, Wash, Repeat statements. So forget the 2A, we all know it's there, it's discussing the topic beyond that. I would say gun nuts won't/don't because they know their argument is weak to piss poor.


We don;t need a debate with you foreigners.

Why the fuck do you care if Americans own guns?

The laws of this country are our concern not yours


----------



## Blues Man (Apr 17, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I'm not interested in other countries. Your argument is that a major reason for the 2nd Amendment was having firearms for self defence, yet you now claim the bulk of gun incidents are down to suicides. Now you stated that thicko, you blew your own balls off with that. I've told you all along, the self defence argument was just a guise, and you've confirmed it. So if you want to call anyone dumb, then start with yourself, dummy.
> 
> So allowing everyone to freely obtain a gun without infringing their rights for self defence is an utter load of bollox, and you've just confirmed it.


Yes you are.  You are a brit royal ass kisser and you're whining about the laws in the US.


----------



## Blues Man (Apr 17, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I'm not interested in other countries. Your argument is that a major reason for the 2nd Amendment was having firearms for self defence, yet you now claim the bulk of gun incidents are down to suicides. Now you stated that thicko, you blew your own balls off with that. I've told you all along, the self defence argument was just a guise, and you've confirmed it. So if you want to call anyone dumb, then start with yourself, dummy.
> 
> So allowing everyone to freely obtain a gun without infringing their rights for self defence is an utter load of bollox, and you've just confirmed it.


Not everyone can legally own a gun 

You don;t know shit about the laws in this country


----------



## Blues Man (Apr 17, 2022)

PV System said:


> Then you missed the point of my post.  I will try to make it clearer for you.
> 
> *This is a probabilistic game*.  If you increase the number of legal guns owned by perfectly good people _*you increase the probability that there will be guns that are stolen or otherwise make it into the hands of the bad people*._
> 
> ...


So because some people will break the law then we should remove the rights of people who donm;t break the law.

Yeah that makes perfect sense.

How about we enforce the gun laws we have on the books because we know that when we do gun crimes and murder taters decrease


----------



## Blues Man (Apr 17, 2022)

PV System said:


> You gun fetishists are the loudest whiners imaginable.  Worse that toddlers who didn't get as many sprinkles on their ice cream as they wanted.
> 
> YOU WON!  You have as many guns as you want!  You guys have turned America into the leading first world gun ownership capital!
> 
> ...


The need you people have for sexualizing guns is more telling of your own perversity.

A gun is nothing but a tool and it so happens to be the single best tool for self defense.


----------



## Flash (Apr 17, 2022)

PV System said:


> America has the highest per capita incarceration rate in the world.  So your theory fails at the outset.


Mostly Black on Black crime in the Democrat controlled big city shitholes.  Street thugs, gangs and druggies mostly.

If we ship those Blacks to other countries the crime rate in those countries would tremendously go up.

The stupid Liberals blame the crime on the Constitutional right to keep and bear arms but the real blame belongs with the shitheads that pulls the triggers.

I wonder why the Democrats don't really give a crap?  Do you know why?  They don't enforce the existing laws. Whenever they do make arrest they let the thugs out of jail.

That is kinda stupid, isn't it?


----------



## Flash (Apr 17, 2022)

Both the recent Sacramento and South Carolina "mass shootings" were Black on Black created gang shootings.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 17, 2022)

Interestingly racist idea.


Blues Man said:


> So because some people will break the law then we should remove the rights of people who donm;t break the law.



That wasn't my point at all.  My point is more legal guns means a _higher probability that those legal guns will make it into hands of people who want to do illegal things_.

More legal guns means higher probability of gun theft.
More legal guns means higher probability of uncontrolled sales/illegal sales

Let's try another example.

Let's say that doctors started prescribing say, an opiod painkiller, at EXTREMELY HIGH RATES.  Suddenly the probability of people getting ahold of this opiod illegally increases because of the chance of theft or illegal sales of the opiod.

Does that make sense?


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 17, 2022)

Flash said:


> Both the recent Sacramento and South Carolina "mass shootings" were Black on Black created gang shootings.



Does that matter somehow?


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 17, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> The need you people have for sexualizing guns is more telling of your own perversity.



No, it's just a means of adding insult to the posts.



Blues Man said:


> A gun is nothing but a tool and it so happens to be the single best tool for self defense.



It IS a tool.  But when people feel that they need to show off their rights by carrying the tool into a Starbucks while buying a coffee you know to that person it is now a TOY.

And that's the real problem.


----------



## Blues Man (Apr 17, 2022)

PV System said:


> Interestingly racist idea.
> 
> 
> That wasn't my point at all.  My point is more legal guns means a _higher probability that those legal guns will make it into hands of people who want to do illegal things_.
> ...


That is a meaningless point.

It's no different than saying the more cars owned by people means a probability of more car thefts.

It's not the drug that is the problem it is the Doctors overprescribing it that is the problem.  SO once again we see that the object isn't the issue but it is always the behavior of the people.


----------



## Blues Man (Apr 17, 2022)

PV System said:


> No, it's just a means of adding insult to the posts.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


No it's a perversion just like the penis comparisons anti gunners like to use.

In some states it is illegal to open carry.  In others it's not.  If people don't like it they can petition their politicians for change. And besides that no business is obligated to allow entrance to anyone who is open carrying a firearm or even to one who is carrying concealed.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 17, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> In some states it is illegal to open carry.  In others it's not.  If people don't like it they can petition their politicians for change.



Again, you seem to miss the point.  The gun is a TOOL but a lot of gun enthusiasts treat them like toys to show off their manhood facade.  And that's when we run into trouble.  Why America has a "gun problem".


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 17, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> That is a meaningless point.



Well, the opiod crisis which is a direct analogue would indicate otherwise.




Blues Man said:


> It's not the drug that is the problem it is the Doctors overprescribing it that is the problem.



It's not the gun that's the problem, it's Americans overprescribing themselves a need for more guns that is the problem.


----------



## Blues Man (Apr 17, 2022)

PV System said:


> Again, you seem to miss the point.  The gun is a TOOL but a lot of gun enthusiasts treat them like toys to show off their manhood facade.  And that's when we run into trouble.  Why America has a "gun problem".


How many is a lot?

You are taking the behavior of an extremely small percentage of gun owners are ascribing it to all.

We do not gave a gun problem.  The vast majority of people who own guns legally will never commit a crime never mind murder.  People who concealed carry permits are some of the most law abiding people in the country.


----------



## Blues Man (Apr 17, 2022)

PV System said:


> Well, the opiod crisis which is a direct analogue would indicate otherwise.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


No once again that had nothing to do with the opiate as a drug with legitimate uses and more to do with the behavior of  a rather small number of doctors who got away with overprescribing because of lack of oversight or because of hospital administrators who took big money from Pharma companies 

And what does it matter if a person has more guns than you think he should?  There is no correlation between the number of guns a person legally owns and his likelihood to commit murder or any crime for that matter.

AND gun violence happens to be worse in cities where the number of guns per capita is far lower than in rural areas.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 17, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> How many is a lot?



However many it takes to wind up with the highest rate of gun ownership and gun homicides in the developed world.  Often by nearly an order of magnitude.



Blues Man said:


> We do not gave a gun problem.



OK, then a gun homicide problem.  We have the highest per capita rate of gun homicides of any developed first world nation by a HUGE margin.



Blues Man said:


> The vast majority of people who own guns legally will never commit a crime never mind murder.  People who concealed carry permits are some of the most law abiding people in the country.



And we come back around to the original point I made about probabilities.


----------



## Blues Man (Apr 17, 2022)

PV System said:


> However many it takes to wind up with the highest rate of gun ownership and gun homicides in the developed world.  Often by nearly an order of magnitude.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Once again legal gun ownership has no correlation to the homicide rate.

We already know that at least 70% of all murders take place in very small very well defined areas in our poorest inner cities.
Most murder victims are young minority males killed by other young minority males and these murders are not committed with legally possessed or obtained firearms 

The fact is our murder rates would be significantly lower if we actually enforced the gun laws we have on the books but we routinely see that gun charges are the first to be dropped in plea deals and that even ALL instances of illegal gun possession is a federal crime we do not prosecute those crimes in the Federal Courts.

When Richmond VA decided to prosecute gun crimes in federal court and put people away in federal prisons guess what happened.

Crime overall decreased and the murder rate dropped.

So once again it's not the guns that  are legally owned that are the problem it is the state and federal government's dereliction of duty in the enforcement of laws that is the problem as well as the fact that no one really cares if young, poor , urban minority males kill each other


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 17, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> Once again legal gun ownership has no correlation to the homicide rate.



*1. Where there are more guns there is more homicide (literature review*)

Our review of the academic literature found that a broad array of evidence indicates that gun availability is a risk factor for homicide, both in the United States and across high-income countries.  Case-control studies, ecological time-series and cross-sectional studies indicate that in homes, cities, states and regions in the U.S., where there are more guns, both men and women are at a higher risk for homicide, particularly firearm homicide.

*Hepburn, Lisa; Hemenway, David*.  Firearm availability and homicide: A review of the literature.  _Aggression and Violent Behavior: A Review Journal_.  2004; 9:417-40.

(SOURCE)


----------



## Flash (Apr 17, 2022)

PV System said:


> Does that matter somehow?


Hell yea it does.

Most of the crime in this country is Black crime.  Most of the shootings in this country are Negroes shooting other Negroes.  Street thugs, druggies and gang bangers.

No gun control law you stupid uneducated Libtards want to inflict upon the American people will change the ghetto crime mentality.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 17, 2022)

Flash said:


> Most of the crime in this country is Black crime.



You might wish to check with the FBI who say rather the opposite.









						Table 21
					





					ucr.fbi.gov
				







Flash said:


> Most of the shootings in this country are Negroes shooting other Negroes.



It appears that you are hoping to elicit a response by use of outdated racist language.  



Flash said:


> No gun control law you stupid uneducated Libtards want to inflict upon the American people will change the ghetto crime mentality.



And clearly no amount of advancements in education will stop bigots from being bigots.


----------



## Flash (Apr 17, 2022)

PV System said:


> *1. Where there are more guns there is more homicide (literature review*)
> 
> Our review of the academic literature found that a broad array of evidence indicates that gun availability is a risk factor for homicide, both in the United States and across high-income countries.  Case-control studies, ecological time-series and cross-sectional studies indicate that in homes, cities, states and regions in the U.S., where there are more guns, both men and women are at a higher risk for homicide, particularly firearm homicide.
> 
> ...


You are confused Moon Bat.

Most of the crime that takes place in this country are in the Democrat controlled big city shitholes that already have tough gun control laws.  Gun control laws do not work, ever.

Those Negroes don't give a crap about any gun law.

They create the demand for guns that are used in crime.

Since there is a demand there will always be a supply, no matter what the law is.

All gun control laws do is make it hard for law abiding citizens to have the ability to protect themselves.

By the way Moon Bat, states with mostly white rural population have a very high per capita ownership of guns and a very low homicide rate compared to the Democrat controlled big city shitholes with Blacks and Browns that love to kill each other every day and twice on the weekends.  The premise that more guns create more crime is flawed.

It is guns in the hands of shitheads that create the problems. Like in the hands of some asshole called "Jawayne" who just shot up that mall in SC,

The problem we have is not the ownership of firearms but the destructive culture of the ghetto mentality that use the guns in crimes.

.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 17, 2022)

Flash said:


> You are confused Moon Bat.



Do you think _I_ wrote the article?  Wow.  Thanks.  Unfortunately I didn't.



Flash said:


> Those Negroes don't give a crap about any gun law.



We "get it".  You like that word.  It helps give your life definition.  



Flash said:


> By the way Moon Bat,



You need to expand your "insult repertoire".  Here are some suggestions when talking to me.  You can call me any of these:

Degenerate libtard
Anencephalic douchenozzle
Your mom's favorite boyfriend
Sniveling wimp
Limp-wristed SJW

I've got more if you run out of those.



Flash said:


> states with mostly white rural population have a very high per capita ownership of guns



And meth!



Flash said:


> .


----------



## Blues Man (Apr 17, 2022)

PV System said:


> *1. Where there are more guns there is more homicide (literature review*)
> 
> Our review of the academic literature found that a broad array of evidence indicates that gun availability is a risk factor for homicide, both in the United States and across high-income countries.  Case-control studies, ecological time-series and cross-sectional studies indicate that in homes, cities, states and regions in the U.S., where there are more guns, both men and women are at a higher risk for homicide, particularly firearm homicide.
> 
> ...


That's just wrong.

Most murder take place in urban areas where the number of guns per person are lower than in other parts of the country.

Unless you are trying to make the argument that some guy in East Assfuck ND who owns more guns than you think he should is responsible for the murder rate in Compton









						Murders in US very concentrated: 54% of US counties in 2014 had zero murders, 2% of counties have 51% of the murders
					

You can examine the picture of the US counties in more detail by opening it in a new tab. The Distribution of murders The United States can really be divided up into three types of places. Places w…




					crimeresearch.org
				




According to a 2013 PEW Research Center survey, the household gun ownership rate in rural areas was 2.11 times greater than in urban areas (“Why Own a Gun? Protection is Now Top Reason,” PEW Research Center, March 12, 2013). Suburban households are 28.6% more likely to own guns than urban households. Despite lower gun ownership, urban areas experience much higher murder rates. One should not put much weight on this purely “cross-sectional” evidence over one point in time and many factors determine murder rates, but it is still interesting to note that so much of the country has both very high gun ownership rates and zero murders.


----------



## Flash (Apr 17, 2022)

PV System said:


> Do you think _I_ wrote the article?  Wow.  Thanks.  Unfortunately I didn't.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You stupid Libtards don't understand that gun crime in this country is mostly a minority cultural problem.  Mostly in Democrat controlled big city shitholes.  You dipshits think it is because we have a Constitutional Right to Keep and Bear Arms.

Pull your head out of your Moon Bat ass.


----------



## Blues Man (Apr 17, 2022)

Flash said:


> You stupid Libtards don't understand that gun crime in this country is mostly a minority cultural problem.  Mostly in Democrat controlled big city shitholes.  You dipshits think it is because we have a Constitutional Right to Keep and Bear Arms.
> 
> Pull your head out of your Moon Bat ass.


The powers that be want it that way.

There is no attempt to get criminals off the streets because people just don't care is young minority males kill each other


----------



## Flash (Apr 17, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> The powers that be want it that way.
> 
> There is no attempt to get criminals off the streets because people just don't care is young minority males kill each other


True, nobody really cares if Blacks kill Blacks.  The Liberals don't care because in their Democrat controlled big city shitholes they kiss the ass of the minority community and don't ever get tough on crime.  

For instance, in Democrat controlled Chicago so far this year (as of this morning) there have been 756 shot with 145 of them killed.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 17, 2022)

Flash said:


> You stupid Libtards don't understand that gun crime in this country is mostly a minority cultural problem.  Mostly in Democrat controlled big city shitholes.  You dipshits think it is because we have a Constitutional Right to Keep and Bear Arms.
> 
> Pull your head out of your Moon Bat ass.



I hoped you would expand beyond "Moon Bat".  It's a good one, I'll agree.  But tis getting stale now.


----------



## Open Bolt (Apr 17, 2022)

PV System said:


> *1. Where there are more guns there is more homicide (literature review*)
> 
> Our review of the academic literature found that a broad array of evidence indicates that gun availability is a risk factor for homicide, both in the United States and across high-income countries.  Case-control studies, ecological time-series and cross-sectional studies indicate that in homes, cities, states and regions in the U.S., where there are more guns, both men and women are at a higher risk for homicide, particularly firearm homicide.
> 
> ...


That study is bogus.  Statistics show that gun availability has little impact on homicide rates.








						Everybody's Lying About the Link Between Gun Ownership and Homicide
					

Revealing how the media lies with graphs to further an anti-gun agenda.




					hwfo.substack.com
				







PV System said:


> OK, then a gun homicide problem.  We have the highest per capita rate of gun homicides of any developed first world nation by a HUGE margin.


I do not regard it as any kind of a problem that so many of our homicides involve the use of a gun.

The victims would be just as dead if they were killed with other kinds of weapons.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Apr 17, 2022)

Open Bolt said:


> No chance of that.  Only the left wants to violate people's civil liberties for fun.
> 
> The rest of America values civil liberties.


This is a lie.

It’s the authoritarian right that seeks to violate citizens' rights and protected liberties.

For decades liberals have fought to defend those rights and protected liberties from attack by conservatives – the ongoing war on women’s rights by conservatives being among the more reprehensible examples.


----------



## Open Bolt (Apr 17, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> This is a lie.


No it isn't.  The left routinely tries to outlaw pistol grips on semi-auto long guns.




C_Clayton_Jones said:


> It’s the authoritarian right that seeks to violate citizens' rights and protected liberties.


The attempts to outlaw pistol grips on semi-auto long guns is coming from the left.




C_Clayton_Jones said:


> For decades liberals have fought to defend those rights and protected liberties


Progressives are in no way deserving of the label "liberal".

And as I noted above, progressives are the ones who are trying to outlaw pistol grips on semi-auto long guns.




C_Clayton_Jones said:


> from attack by conservatives – the ongoing war on women’s rights by conservatives being among the more reprehensible examples.


Meh.  Off topic, but feminists are the victims of their own whacky extremism.

They'd have a lot more support for their position if they acknowledged that men have a vital interest in the question of whether or not they become a father.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 17, 2022)

Open Bolt said:


> No it isn't.  The left routinely tries to outlaw pistol grips on semi-auto long guns.



That isn't quite the same thing as taking your guns away from you.



> Meh.  Off topic, but feminists are the victims of their own whacky extremism.



Yeah, it's pretty extreme when people want to get paid the same as a man for the same work.



> They'd have a lot more support for their position if they acknowledged that men have a vital interest in the question of whether or not they become a father.



How is the man's body impacted?


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Apr 17, 2022)

PV System said:


> Interestingly racist idea.
> 
> 
> That wasn't my point at all.  My point is more legal guns means a _higher probability that those legal guns will make it into hands of people who want to do illegal things_.
> ...


It makes sense but it’s rhetorical and irrelevant.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Apr 17, 2022)

Open Bolt said:


> No it isn't.  The left routinely tries to outlaw pistol grips on semi-auto long guns.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yes it is a lie.

_Brown v. Board of Education, Hernandez v. Texas, Gideon v. Wainwright, Griswold v. Connecticut, Loving v. Virginia, Roe v. Wade, Plyler v. Doe, Planned Parenthood v. Casey, Romer v. Evans, Lawrence v. Texas, United States v. Windsor, Obergefell v. Hodges_

Above are but a few of the cases where liberals defended the rights and protected liberties of citizens from attack by racist, bigoted, hateful conservatives.

And liberals will continue the fight against the authoritarian right’s effort to violate the rights and protected liberties of citizens for years to come – if not in the courts, then at the ballot box.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Apr 17, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> So because some people will break the law then we should remove the rights of people who donm;t break the law.


Wrong.

No one advocates for any such thing.

Regardless the murder rates, regardless the gun crime and violence, guns will always be easily accessible, available, and present in society.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Apr 17, 2022)

Cecilie1200 said:


> "We haven't succeeded in our goals yet, so that means you should pretend our goals don't exist!  Be as stupid and gullible as I am, damn it!"
> 
> Uh huh.


This is a lie.

No need to pretend, no such ‘goals’ exist.

No one seeks to ‘ban’ guns, no one seeks to ‘confiscate’ guns.

The notion that anyone seeks to ‘ban’ or ‘confiscate’ guns exists only as a ridiculous rightwing lie.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Apr 17, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> The idea of the 2nd Amendment is to have weapons to create a militia if necessary and prevent the arbitrariness of the feds. It doesn't work, the feds are constantly getting stronger, and the Americans have already turned into obedient sheep of the left regime. The weapon has become a fetish. The left is not afraid of it.


It doesn’t work because that was never the intent of the Second Amendment.

The Framers never sanctioned insurrectionist dogma; it was never the Founders’ intent to amend the Constitution to authorize the destruction of the Republic they had just created.

There is no ‘left regime,’ whatever that’s supposed to be.

The fact that the Second Amendment is neither unlimited nor absolute has nothing to do with left or right.

The fact that government has the authority to place limits and restrictions on the Second Amendment right consistent with Second Amendment jurisprudence likewise has nothing to do with left or right.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Apr 17, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> I believe that only those who agree to join the militia, conduct exercises and, if necessary, fight for the state should have the right to bear arms. Otherwise, this will lead to the federalization of the state and the deprivation of the right to own weapons in general.


This makes no sense whatsoever.

If the only citizens who have the right to bear arms are those who agree to join the militia, conduct exercises, and fight for the state, then the general right to own weapons is already lost – having nothing to do with the ‘federalization’ of the state.

Fortunately what you believe is wrong; the Second Amendment right enshrines an individual right to possess a weapon, unconnected to militia service.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Apr 17, 2022)

hadit said:


> There is no need to justify gun ownership in the US. The Constitution allows it, the end.


Yet conservatives spend excessive amounts of time doing just that – ‘justifying’ gun ownership.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Apr 17, 2022)

PV System said:


> The Constitution is NOT a suicide pact.
> 
> Right now the 2A is being leveraged well beyond it's rational original intent.  America has the highest gun ownership rate of any developed nation on earth and we have along with it the highest gun homicide rate.
> 
> ...


You’re attempting to conflate two issues one having nothing to do with the other: gun crime and violence with Second Amendment jurisprudence.

The solution to gun crime and violence is not to amend the Constitution to allow for more regulation, or to subject the Amendment to further judicial interpretation allowing for more regulation.

Bans and restriction have a long history of not working – Prohibition was a unmitigated failure, banning abortion will do nothing to end the practice, and the ‘war’ on drugs has only made the problem worse, facilitating drug crime and violence.


----------



## Concerned American (Apr 17, 2022)

Relative Ethics said:


> Weapons are very harmful.


Virtually ANYTHING can be a weapon, moron.  In your case, its a spoon.


----------



## Concerned American (Apr 17, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Yet conservatives spend excessive amounts of time doing just that – ‘justifying’ gun ownership.


Wrong again, commie.  The second amendment says I don't have to justify it to you or anyone else.  Try again.  What part of "shall not be infringed" do you not understand.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Apr 17, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> What law gives women the right to own guns?



The same one that gives men the right to own guns.  I told you this before, lackwit.  Maybe you should write it down somewhere.

Women are not a different species from men; we're all people.

Tell all your idiot friends.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Apr 17, 2022)

marvin martian said:


> Damn, what century are you from?



The problem isn't that he's old-fashioned.  It's that he's a moron whose only accomplishment in life was being born with a penis.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Apr 17, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Somewhere I came across information that in the US constitution this applies only to men.



That would be in your own, mad-cow-infected brain.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Apr 17, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Does Florida have a gun ownership law for women?



All states have a gun ownership law for women.  It's the same one as for men because - again - men and women aren't different species.  We call that law "The Second Amendment of the US Constitution."


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Apr 17, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> You don't understand your own country. Women in the army and fag in America appeared only a few years ago. America is still an extreme right-wing country, it is a unique country, it is not like any other country in the world in this.



I just heard you say, "No, I know more about a country I'm not in than the people who live there, because I know what I want to believe it is."

Shut. Up.  Go peddle your bullshit about your own lame-ass country and quit trying to horn in on ours.


----------



## Open Bolt (Apr 17, 2022)

PV System said:


> That isn't quite the same thing as taking your guns away from you.


It is exactly the same thing.




PV System said:


> How is the man's body impacted?


It isn't.

No one ever said that it was.


----------



## Open Bolt (Apr 17, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Yes it is a lie.


No it isn't.  The left routinely tries to outlaw pistol grips on semi-auto long guns.




C_Clayton_Jones said:


> _Brown v. Board of Education, Hernandez v. Texas, Gideon v. Wainwright, Griswold v. Connecticut, Loving v. Virginia, Roe v. Wade, Plyler v. Doe, Planned Parenthood v. Casey, Romer v. Evans, Lawrence v. Texas, United States v. Windsor, Obergefell v. Hodges_


None of those cases change the reality that progressives routinely try to outlaw pistol grips on semi-auto long guns.




C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Above are but a few of the cases where liberals


Progressives are not liberals.  Their routine attempts to violate everyone's civil liberties is the opposite of liberalism.




C_Clayton_Jones said:


> The fact that the Second Amendment is neither unlimited nor absolute has nothing to do with left or right.


That isn't a fact.

The Second Amendment does have limits, just as all rights do.  If there were no limits there would only be a single right to do anything and everything.

But the Second Amendment is absolute.  If a law is in conflict with the Second Amendment, the law is unconstitutional.




C_Clayton_Jones said:


> This is a lie.


No it isn't.  Cecilie1200 is entirely correct.




C_Clayton_Jones said:


> No need to pretend, no such ‘goals’ exist.


Yes they do.




C_Clayton_Jones said:


> No one seeks to ‘ban’ guns, no one seeks to ‘confiscate’ guns.


Progressives seek to do exactly that.




C_Clayton_Jones said:


> The notion that anyone seeks to ‘ban’ or ‘confiscate’ guns exists only as a ridiculous rightwing lie.


Not a lie.  That is exactly what progressives are trying to do.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Apr 17, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> evenflow1969 By the way, in animals like lions and wolves, men don't hunt either.



Is that supposed to be your justification for being a fat, useless lump?  Does it make you feel better for providing no value to the world by existing and using up resources?


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Apr 17, 2022)

PV System said:


> It's so sad when people like you can't handle someone with a different opinion.



When I need to hear from someone who's wetting his panties at the idea that someone might own a scary gun, I'll be sure to call you.  Meanwhile, I'm not planning to ask for the approval of the likes of you to tell a foreigner to mind his own fucking business when it comes to our country.

In fact, I'm not planning to ask your approval on anything, because I don't respect you enough to allow you to approve of me.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Apr 17, 2022)

PV System said:


> That's overly dramatic.
> 
> 1. No one is taking your guns.  In fact there is NO MAJOR POLITICAL PARTY WHO SAYS THEY WILL.
> 
> ...



"No one's saying they're going to take your guns, so why don't you just believe their words at face value the way I do?  How DARE you suggest that our betters might lie to us!"

And then I stopped reading, because puling serf-wannabes make me ill.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 17, 2022)

Cecilie1200 said:


> And then I stopped reading, because puling serf-wannabes make me ill.



"Puling".  That is a COOL WORD!  I'd not run across that one before.  Thanks!  That is really neat.  I will attempt to utilize it this week!


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 17, 2022)

Cecilie1200 said:


> When I need to hear from someone who's wetting his panties at the idea that someone might own a scary gun,



To be fair I had a gun and gun safety training before I could drive a car.



> In fact,I'm not planning to ask your approval on anything, because I don't respect you enough to allow you to approve of me.



I should hope you DON'T feel the need to ask for my approval on ANYTHING!  That's a lot of responsibility to throw on me and I'm not up to the task.

As for "respecting me", well you will understand that I don't feel bad that you lack respect for me.  In fact, I'm actually kinda proud of it.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Apr 17, 2022)

PV System said:


> "Puling".  That is a COOL WORD!  I'd not run across that one before.  Thanks!  That is really neat.  I will attempt to utilize it this week!



You're welcome.  For reference, here's the definition.









						Definition of PULING
					

whine, whimper… See the full definition




					www.merriam-webster.com
				




In connotation, it means not simply whining and sniveling, but specifically the sort that one gets from a cranky, fussy baby.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Apr 17, 2022)

PV System said:


> To be fair I had a gun and gun safety training before I could drive a car.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't care.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 17, 2022)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't care.



That's fine.  You just seemed like you needed some validation on your rant telling me how much you didn't respect me or care about anything I said.

You're welcome.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Apr 17, 2022)

PV System said:


> That's fine.  You just seemed like you needed some validation on your rant telling me how much you didn't respect me or care about anything I said.
> 
> You're welcome.



No, Sparkles, you are once again making the mistake of flattering yourself.

You started out by ostentatiously withholding your approval, as though you thought that was going to matter to me.  I informed you that you should wait to withhold your approval from someone who cares.  You conveniently forgot that you started it and are now trying to play that I made my statement _apropos_ of nothing.

Learn to read for context.

And I am now officially bored with your narcissistic attempt to make this conversation all about discussing you and your unearned ego, to deflect from the topic and your inability to make an argument beyond, "It's scary for other people to own guns, I hope I can make them feel ashamed for owning them by telling them I think badly about them".


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 17, 2022)

Cecilie1200 said:


> No, Sparkles, you are once again making the mistake of flattering yourself.



I don't think my post actually flattered me.  



> You started out by ostentatiously withholding your approval, as though you thought that was going to matter to me.



I don't think it was done ostentatiously.



> And I am now officially bored with your narcissistic attempt to make this conversation all about discussing you and your unearned ego



My sincerest apologies.  It is probably hard to bore you and here I've gone and done that very thing.  Again, please accept my apologies.



> , to deflect from the topic and your inability to make an argument beyond, "It's scary for other people to own guns, I hope I can make them feel ashamed for owning them by telling them I think badly about them".



Again, I know that glory hole won't attend itself, so I will let you get back to it.  Again, my apologies for boring you or failing to appreciate your greatness and that I should have rightfully accepted your spew as the pure golden shower it was intended to be.

Please forgive me.  I did not know I was in the presence of the Lord.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 17, 2022)

Cecilie1200 said:


> No, Sparkles, you are once again making the mistake of flattering yourself.
> 
> You started out by ostentatiously withholding your approval, as though you thought that was going to matter to me.  I informed you that you should wait to withhold your approval from someone who cares.  You conveniently forgot that you started it and are now trying to play that I made my statement _apropos_ of nothing.
> 
> ...



Here, I made this for you.  As a "peace offering".  Enjoy!


----------



## Failzero (Apr 17, 2022)

Did the CHAZ / Chop occupiers in Portland need an infusion
Of weapons ?


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Apr 17, 2022)

Open Bolt said:


> No it isn't.  The left routinely tries to outlaw pistol grips on semi-auto long guns.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You’re a liar, like most on the right.

Liberals work to protect and defend citizens’ rights; conservatives work to violate those rights.

And none of the firearm regulatory measures proposed by liberals violate the Second Amendment; the Supreme Court has never ruled as to the constitutionality of measures such as UBCs or magazine capacity restrictions – consequently, liberals do not seek to violate citizens’ rights, hence the fact you’re a liar.


----------



## Captain Caveman (Apr 17, 2022)

PV System said:


> Where do you think the evil doers get their guns?
> 
> If you have a nation in which there are sufficient guns in circulation such that every man, woman and child could have one it means that there is a much higher _*probability*_ that guns will be stolen or misplaced or otherwise get into the hands of people who want to do harm.
> 
> ...


As any sane person knows, gun incidents and self defence by gun are both tiny tiny percentages but gun nuts make out they happen 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 52 weeks of the year. It's their little fallacy to justify the gun chaos, where their only reason for the chaos is, "We like guns".

Now, I've been over it a thousands times about sensible gun regs and enforcement, now I'm just waiting for the bumbling fools to come rushing in saying I support banning guns. I don't think they're a bright crowd.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Apr 17, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> As any sane person knows, gun incidents and self defence by gun are both tiny tiny percentages but gun nuts make out they happen 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 52 weeks of the year. It's their little fallacy to justify the gun chaos, where their only reason for the chaos is, "We like guns".
> 
> Now, I've been over it a thousands times about sensible gun regs and enforcement, now I'm just waiting for the bumbling fools to come rushing in saying I support banning guns. I don't think they're a bright crowd.


Lying about people wanting to ‘ban’ guns is what conservatives usually resort to.


----------



## Open Bolt (Apr 17, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> As any sane person knows, gun incidents and self defence by gun are both tiny tiny percentages but gun nuts make out they happen 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 52 weeks of the year.


You Freedom Haters can deny reality all you want, but lots of people do defend themselves with guns.




Captain Caveman said:


> It's their little fallacy to justify the gun chaos, where their only reason for the chaos is, "We like guns".


Wrong.  No one here is bothering to justify anything.

There is hardly chaos here.  Get a grip.




Captain Caveman said:


> Now, I've been over it a thousands times about sensible gun regs and enforcement,


It's funny how everyone who supports fascism or opposes civil liberties will always invoke some version of the term "sensible".




Captain Caveman said:


> now I'm just waiting for the bumbling fools to come rushing in saying I support banning guns. I don't think they're a bright crowd.


You are not qualified to assess the intelligence of people who are smarter than you are.


----------



## Open Bolt (Apr 17, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> You’re a liar, like most on the right.


Wrong.  You are the only liar here.




C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Liberals work to protect and defend citizens’ rights;


Wrong.  Progressives are not liberals.

And wrong again.  Progressives intentionally violate people's rights for fun.




C_Clayton_Jones said:


> And none of the firearm regulatory measures proposed by liberals violate the Second Amendment;


Wrong.  Progressives are not liberals.

And wrong again.  Outlawing pistol grips on semi-auto long guns violates the Second Amendment.




C_Clayton_Jones said:


> the Supreme Court has never ruled as to the constitutionality of measures such as UBCs or magazine capacity restrictions


That doesn't make it OK for you to deliberately violate people's civil liberties.




C_Clayton_Jones said:


> consequently, liberals do not seek to violate citizens’ rights,


Wrong.  Progressives are not liberals.

And wrong again.  Progressives deliberately violate people's rights for fun.




C_Clayton_Jones said:


> hence the fact you’re a liar.


Wrong again.  You are the only liar here.




C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Lying about people wanting to ‘ban’ guns is what conservatives usually resort to.


The truth sure is inconvenient for you, but no.  The truth is not a lie.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 17, 2022)

Open Bolt said:


> You are the only liar here.
> 
> 
> You are the only liar here.



I am reminded of a post I saw a while back:



Open Bolt said:


> This term "lie" is really overused on the internet.
> 
> An untrue statement could be an honest mistake instead of a lie.



But then I am reminded of this:


Open Bolt said:


> It's why you lie all the time.
> 
> Liar.



Such a strange thing to see someone throw the lable "Liar" around at people and simultaneously complain about its overuse.

Interesting.


----------



## Open Bolt (Apr 17, 2022)

PV System said:


> Such a strange thing to see someone throw the lable "Liar" around at people and simultaneously complain about its overuse.


Yes, but enough is enough.  That guy has no interest in the truth, and he incessantly lies about other people by falsely accusing them of being liars.

Sometimes the best defense is a good offense.


----------



## hadit (Apr 17, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Yet conservatives spend excessive amounts of time doing just that – ‘justifying’ gun ownership.


I'm not, which is the point. Gun grabbers totally ignore the Constitution when they insist on arguing justification, or screech that no one "needs" a certain type of gun or amount of ammo, or anything like that. It's a pointless exercise.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 17, 2022)

hadit said:


> I'm not, which is the point. Gun grabbers totally ignore the Constitution when they insist on arguing justification, or screech that no one "needs" a certain type of gun or amount of ammo,



Not to nitpick but it isn't the "gun grabbers" who did that...  The Supreme Court already noted that the 2A is not an unlimited right.  So there are limits on your "Right".



hadit said:


> or anything like that. It's a pointless exercise.



The gun debate doesn't HAVE to be pointless.  But the Pro-2A group has their standard response of "It's my right per the Constitution so I don't have to care ONE WHIT about what YOU LOT want."

That's fine so far as it goes.  But America is also capable of changing the Constitution and often overcorrecting when things get really bad.  We willingly gave up most of our civil liberties after 9/11. 

Now imagine a day in which the majority of Americans get SO OUTRAGED at another mass shooting:  it might cause an overcorrection that doesn't take into account the needs of the 2A defenders.

The thing many of us on the left are trying to get you folks to do is meet us at least PARTIALLY in the middle.  Yeah, some folks on the left have a rough set of talking points, but honestly you cannot point to ANY major party that promises to take away your guns.  The will just doesn't exist.

What we would like for you to do is *at least admit that guns may play a role in the off-the-charts level of gun violence we have in this society.  And that we are unique in how many guns we own and what our gun homicide rate is*.

But you guys never do that.  So the Left gets more and more and more bent and finally throws it right back at you.

If you are not strategic about this, you may very well lose something that is EXTREMELY important to you.  America has done it before.


----------



## Open Bolt (Apr 17, 2022)

PV System said:


> Not to nitpick but it isn't the "gun grabbers" who did that...  The Supreme Court already noted that the 2A is not an unlimited right.  So there are limits on your "Right".


There is no comparison between "saying that there are limits on the Second Amendment (as on all rights)" and "insisting that we justify exercising our rights, or saying that we don't need the very sorts of guns that we have the right to have".

The first is correct and acceptable.  The second is incorrect and unacceptable.




PV System said:


> Now imagine a day in which the majority of Americans get SO OUTRAGED at another mass shooting:  it might cause an overcorrection that doesn't take into account the needs of the 2A defenders.


An empty threat.




PV System said:


> The thing many of us on the left are trying to get you folks to do is meet us at least PARTIALLY in the middle.


On the surface, that sounds like a non-starter.  Middle ground between "having my freedom" and "being enslaved" sounds like nowhere I want to be.

But perhaps middle ground is just a slogan.  I'm certainly willing to try to find common ground with the enemy.




PV System said:


> honestly you cannot point to ANY major party that promises to take away your guns.  The will just doesn't exist.


Most Democrats want to do exactly that.

Not all Democrats of course.  I certainly do not want to do that.




PV System said:


> What we would like for you to do is *at least admit that guns may play a role in the off-the-charts level of gun violence we have in this society.  And that we are unique in how many guns we own and what our gun homicide rate is*.
> But you guys never do that.


I've admitted it before.  I forget if it was in this thread or another thread.

If 100% of the population has guns, most murders will involve guns.  If 0% of the population has guns, most murders will not involve guns.  That is pretty straightforward.

I do question though why it matters that someone is killed with guns versus some other kind of weapon.  They are just as dead either way.




PV System said:


> If you are not strategic about this, you may very well lose something that is EXTREMELY important to you.  America has done it before.


An empty threat.


----------



## Man of Ethics (Apr 17, 2022)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Long life and happiness to the 2 million+ people whose lives are saved by guns every year.  Seems like they found quite an important use for weapons "except murder and suicide".


Given that only 200 -300 homicides per year are classified as justifiable, I find these statistics not credible.  Some studies may cite these statistics, but they are not credible.


----------



## Man of Ethics (Apr 17, 2022)

koshergrl said:


> Most of whom die at the hands of criminals who don't give two shits for gun laws.
> And that number doesn't seem real.


Most of about 32,000 people who die by guns each year are suicides.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Apr 17, 2022)

Relative Ethics said:


> Given that only 200 -300 homicides per year are classified as justifiable, I find these statistics not credible.  Some studies may cite these statistics, but they are not credible.



Sorry, Sparkles, but YOU decided that defensive uses for guns are only those ending in justifiable homicide.  I never said that, nor do FBI and CDC statistics view it that way, so spare me your fucking straw man arguments.

If you want to conduct both sides of this argument yourself so that you finally get to "win" instead of being beaten like a drum, I suggest you get off the computer and go sit in front of a mirror to do it.  Do not waste my time "refuting" the point you decided to attribute to me again.


----------



## Open Bolt (Apr 17, 2022)

Relative Ethics said:


> Given that only 200 -300 homicides per year are classified as justifiable, I find these statistics not credible.  Some studies may cite these statistics, but they are not credible.


They are quite credible.  Most criminals flee after a show of force.  There is seldom a need to fire a gun when defending yourself.

Granted, gunfights do occur.  But plenty of criminals are seen off without gunfire erupting.


----------



## Captain Caveman (Apr 18, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Lying about people wanting to ‘ban’ guns is what conservatives usually resort to.


Gun culture needs changed, can only happen as older generations die out. They're stuck in their ways, looking at this board, some are still stuck in 1776.


----------



## Open Bolt (Apr 18, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Gun culture needs changed, can only happen as older generations die out. They're stuck in their ways, looking at this board, some are still stuck in 1776.


Sorry, but future generations of Americans will be raised to embrace freedom too.  You're just going to have to accept that America is going to remain free forever.

A large swath of the EU is going to remain free forever as well.  Don't expect the Czech Republic to ever give up their freedom either.  There is an arc of countries from Finland through Switzerland that will always want freedom.


----------



## Blues Man (Apr 18, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Wrong.
> 
> No one advocates for any such thing.
> 
> Regardless the murder rates, regardless the gun crime and violence, guns will always be easily accessible, available, and present in society.


So then why the push for more and more gun laws when we do not enforce the laws we already have on the books if not to make it harder for law abiding people to own guns?


----------



## Blues Man (Apr 18, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Gun culture needs changed, can only happen as older generations die out. They're stuck in their ways, looking at this board, some are still stuck in 1776.


And you're till stuck in the middle ages when you bend the knee to a "royal"


----------



## Blues Man (Apr 18, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Yet conservatives spend excessive amounts of time doing just that – ‘justifying’ gun ownership.


Because liberals spend even more time trying to make it more difficult for law abiding people to own firearms


----------



## Blues Man (Apr 18, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> You’re attempting to conflate two issues one having nothing to do with the other: gun crime and violence with Second Amendment jurisprudence.
> 
> The solution to gun crime and violence is not to amend the Constitution to allow for more regulation, or to subject the Amendment to further judicial interpretation allowing for more regulation.
> 
> Bans and restriction have a long history of not working – Prohibition was a unmitigated failure, banning abortion will do nothing to end the practice, and the ‘war’ on drugs has only made the problem worse, facilitating drug crime and violence.


Maybe just maybe we should enforce the gun laws we already have.


----------



## Blues Man (Apr 18, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> As any sane person knows, gun incidents and self defence by gun are both tiny tiny percentages but gun nuts make out they happen 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 52 weeks of the year. It's their little fallacy to justify the gun chaos, where their only reason for the chaos is, "We like guns".
> 
> Now, I've been over it a thousands times about sensible gun regs and enforcement, now I'm just waiting for the bumbling fools to come rushing in saying I support banning guns. I don't think they're a bright crowd.


Once again people who own guns legally aren't the problem and never have been.

People with concealed carry permits are arguably the most law abiding people in the US even more so than police officers.

And you have yet to back up your claim on defensive gun use or to be honest about what a DGU actually is.

FACT

A person does not have to fire a gun in a DGU.

When you parse all the data even on the low end of the range far more people use guns in self defense than use guns to commit murders


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Apr 18, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Gun culture needs changed, can only happen as older generations die out. They're stuck in their ways, looking at this board, some are still stuck in 1776.



Perhaps you raised your children to be ignorant serfs-in-training; we did not raise ours that way.


----------



## Blues Man (Apr 19, 2022)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Perhaps you raised your children to be ignorant serfs-in-training; we did not raise ours that way.


Of course he does.  He's from the UK after all and still submits to rule by a "royal family"


----------

