# Man uses his concealed gun to save life of woman entering abortion clinic...likely there to kill her baby.  Leftists cry.



## 2aguy (May 18, 2021)

A woman was attempting to enter an abortion clinic was attacked by the man who brought her to the clinic....he started shooting at her.   An Abortion protestor, armed with a concealed, legal, gun, fired on the attacker saving the woman's life.

But......But.....I thought people never used guns for actual self defense....right? 

And two......saving the life of a woman who is there to end the life of her baby?  Odd, isn't it.....

Here is the story...

The fact that an anti-abortion protestor saved a woman who was going into an abortion clinic should be very newsworthy. If the opposite had happened, if the protestor had harmed the woman, it would get national news. But this story of an anti-abortion protestor saving a woman’s life is only getting local news coverage. The event took place on Saturday, May 15th, 2021, at the Alamo Women’s Reproductive Services, 7402 John Smith Dr #101, San Antonio, TX 78229.

. No one was injured, San Antonio Police spokesperson crediting an armed bystander who returned fire.
No one was injured, San Antonio Police Department spokesperson Christopher Ramos said, crediting an armed bystander who returned fire.
The shooting happened Saturday around 8:30 a.m. in the 7400 block of John Smith Drive, near the intersection of Wurzbach and Babcock roads on the Northwest Side. 
A man who arrived with a woman at the facility pulled out a gun and shot at the woman but missed, Ramos said during a morning press conference near the scene.
A person who was with a group of protesters near the clinic saw the shooter and used his handgun to fire at the man, police said. Police said the protester had a license to carry the pistol.









						Abortion Protestor who is a Concealed Handgun Permit Holder saves Woman Going to an Abortion Clinic - Crime Prevention Research Center
					

The fact that an anti-abortion protestor saved a woman who was going into an abortion clinic should be very newsworthy. If the opposite had happened, if the protestor had harmed the woman, it would get national news. But this story of an anti-abortion protestor saving a woman’s life is only...




					crimeresearch.org


----------



## JGalt (May 18, 2021)

There's a whole lot of irony in that story. Did she go ahead and kill the baby after the armed abortion protester saved her life?


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (May 18, 2021)

This story doesn't give out a whole lot of information, so I dug up another source.  

According to a local news agency, this guy was hiding in the trunk of her car.  When she stopped to get out at the clinic, he jumped out of the trunk and started shooting at her.  The CCW holder then shot at the shooter.  He ran and at least from what I read, was not found.  The article also said it's not known if the shooter was hit or not.  









						SAPD: Man hid in woman’s trunk before shooting at her when she arrived at abortion clinic
					

Police released new details Sunday about the investigation into the search for a <a href="https://www.ksat.com/news/local/2021/05/15/san-antonio-police-called-to-northwest-side-shooting/" target="_blank">man who shot at a woman at a reproductive health clinic</a> on Saturday morning.




					www.ksat.com


----------



## Lysistrata (May 18, 2021)

There is not enough information. Apparently, the guy who shot at her was hiding in the trunk of her car, and she knows him. I hope that they catch this guy and more information becomes known as to his motives. This does not seem to be a situation in which the shooter in the trunk was attempting to force her to have an abortion against her will.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (May 18, 2021)

Lysistrata said:


> There is not enough information. Apparently, the guy who shot at her was hiding in the trunk of her car, and she knows him. I hope that they catch this guy and more information becomes known as to his motives. This does not seem to be a situation in which the shooter in the trunk was attempting to force her to have an abortion against her will.



It may be the opposite.  This may have been the father of the expected child who wanted her to have the baby.  We don't know.


----------



## 2aguy (May 18, 2021)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> Lysistrata said:
> 
> 
> > There is not enough information. Apparently, the guy who shot at her was hiding in the trunk of her car, and she knows him. I hope that they catch this guy and more information becomes known as to his motives. This does not seem to be a situation in which the shooter in the trunk was attempting to force her to have an abortion against her will.
> ...



One question then...if he was the father and didn't want her to abort the baby, then shooting and killing her is an odd choice.

We do need more info.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (May 18, 2021)

2aguy said:


> One question then...if he was the father and didn't want her to abort the baby, then shooting and killing her is an odd choice.
> 
> We do need more info.



Yes, but you know how godless people are today.  It's just one possibility I thought of.  

The reason I came to that possibility is it's reported that she knew the shooter, meaning he could have shot her anytime.  Why did he hide in the trunk of her car, drive to a place where a lot of people were, and shoot here there of all places?  Seems like he was trying to make a statement of some sort.


----------



## Lysistrata (May 18, 2021)

2aguy said:


> Ray From Cleveland said:
> 
> 
> > Lysistrata said:
> ...


Yup. We do. My initial reaction to the headline was that the anti-abortion protester was saving the woman from someone trying to force her to have an abortion. But this seems not to be the case. She could have gone to the clinic for other reasons, and we don't know if she was even pregnant. All we know is that she was going to the clinic voluntarily, given that she drove herself there. This could turn out to be two anti-abortion guys having a shoot out.


----------



## JoeB131 (May 28, 2021)

So two anti-choice nuts shoot at each other in broad daylight, and Dick Tiny thinks this is a good thing.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (May 28, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> So two anti-choice nuts shoot at each other in broad daylight, and Dick Tiny thinks this is a good thing.



Everybody ended up alive is a bad thing?  What's a good thing to you, this guy murdering this woman and perhaps never getting caught?


----------



## JoeB131 (May 28, 2021)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> Everybody ended up alive is a bad thing? What's a good thing to you, this guy murdering this woman and perhaps never getting caught?



Actually, what would have been a good thing would have been neither of these jackasses having a gun to start with.  

That would have been a good thing.  

Now, if a couple of anti-Choice crazies perform a 126th Trimester abortion on each other, I'm down with that, too.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (May 28, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Actually, what would have been a good thing would have been neither of these jackasses having a gun to start with.
> 
> That would have been a good thing.
> 
> Now, if a couple of anti-Choice crazies perform a 126th Trimester abortion on each other, I'm down with that, too.



But this is the point we have been trying to make to you on the left.  If firearms were difficult or nearly impossible to retain, the only guy in this scenario that would have had a gun was the murderer, because all the laws or government harassment in the world won't stop them from getting a firearm in the US.  It would only have stopped the good guy with the gun that stopped a murder.


----------



## JoeB131 (May 28, 2021)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> But this is the point we have been trying to make to you on the left. If firearms were difficult or nearly impossible to retain, the only guy in this scenario that would have had a gun was the murderer, because all the laws or government harassment in the world won't stop them from getting a firearm in the US. It would only have stopped the good guy with the gun that stopped a murder.



Actually, it would have stopped both of them, because most gun crimes are not committed by career criminals. 

This sounds like a guy who was just upset his girlfriend was aborting his fetus.  Not a career, lifelong criminal who had a gun from the black market, but a guy who made a bad decision...one me might not have made had ne not had easy access to a gun.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (May 28, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Actually, it would have stopped both of them, because most gun crimes are not committed by career criminals.
> 
> This sounds like a guy who was just upset his girlfriend was aborting his fetus. Not a career, lifelong criminal who had a gun from the black market, but a guy who made a bad decision...one me might not have made had ne not had easy access to a gun.



He doesn't have to be a career criminal to be a criminal, just like people who buy illegal drugs are in many cases not career criminals.  Illegal guns will always be available to those who want them, but only the law abiding won't seek one.  Somebody willing to go to the extremes of murder doesn't give a damn whether he has an illegal gun or not.


----------



## JoeB131 (May 29, 2021)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> He doesn't have to be a career criminal to be a criminal, just like people who buy illegal drugs are in many cases not career criminals. Illegal guns will always be available to those who want them, but only the law abiding won't seek one. Somebody willing to go to the extremes of murder doesn't give a damn whether he has an illegal gun or not.



You miss the point entirely.  

Okay. World without guns.  The guy who is upset that his girlfriend is getting an abortion does not have a gun in the nightstand.   He might be upset enough to be angry about it, but he isn't going to try to find a reliable illegal gun dealer and chuck out a few thousand bucks to get an illegal gun.  

The point is, most murders happen because a gun is readily available in a stressful situation.  So instead of using fists to resolve a problem, guns end up getting involved.  Most homicides are people who know each other, not a criminal taking out a stranger.  

The rest of the industrialized world has figured this out, which is why we have 19,000 homicides a year and they all have less than 1000.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (May 29, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> You miss the point entirely.
> 
> Okay. World without guns. The guy who is upset that his girlfriend is getting an abortion does not have a gun in the nightstand. He might be upset enough to be angry about it, but he isn't going to try to find a reliable illegal gun dealer and chuck out a few thousand bucks to get an illegal gun.
> 
> ...



Most criminal acts with guns are committed with an illegal firearm.  Very few will use their own registered gun to commit murder outside of murder/ suicide.  That would be like leaving a bread crumb trail to your door.  Every gun sold in the US by a licensed dealer has to submit a fired round from that weapon for the ballistics to be entered into a national data base.  If I used my firearm to commit a crime, they would be knocking on my door within hours.  

Guns are not that difficult to make either.  They were showing how they can be made with a 3-D printer, and the article claims that they are doing that today.  Years ago one of my friends had another one of our friends who worked at a machine shop make him parts for his guns that turned his weapons from a semi-automatic to fully automatic. It was just some stupid little part.  

The conclusion is that all you would do by making guns difficult or impossible to get is create a larger black market than we already have, and that only empowers the criminal and weakens victims.


----------



## woodwork201 (Jun 16, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Ray From Cleveland said:
> 
> 
> > He doesn't have to be a career criminal to be a criminal, just like people who buy illegal drugs are in many cases not career criminals. Illegal guns will always be available to those who want them, but only the law abiding won't seek one. Somebody willing to go to the extremes of murder doesn't give a damn whether he has an illegal gun or not.
> ...


Most murders happen because someone wants someone else dead.  Most murders, by far, are committed by criminals with long records for whom it was already illegal for them to have a gun but, surprisingly, when planning to break the law to commit murder, they don't care about the law.  Most murders are black-on-black gang-related murders.  Did you know that black women are murdered at twice the rate that are white women?

Gun murders are absolutely a product of the availability of guns.  Knife murders are a product of unavailability of guns while knives were available.  Choking murders are a product of the unavailability of guns and knives but the availability of hands.

Most crime-of-passion murders against women are not committed with guns; women are beaten or strangled.  To get the gun takes at least some bit of planning.


----------



## woodwork201 (Jun 16, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Ray From Cleveland said:
> 
> 
> > He doesn't have to be a career criminal to be a criminal, just like people who buy illegal drugs are in many cases not career criminals. Illegal guns will always be available to those who want them, but only the law abiding won't seek one. Somebody willing to go to the extremes of murder doesn't give a damn whether he has an illegal gun or not.
> ...



You're completely wrong about most murders.  Most murders are gang-related murders where people don't really know each other more than superficially.  

Women are routinely beaten to death by the men, or women, in their lives.  Banning guns does nothing to reduce crime; it may reduce some gun crime but then the crimes will simply be crimes instead of gun crimes.

The difference in murder rates has far more to do with gang violence and drug laws, and even culture, than it does with guns.


----------



## Quasar44 (Jun 16, 2021)

You can’t intervene in any abortion clinic as that is a felony


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 16, 2021)

Another person who is completely wrong about everything. 



woodwork201 said:


> Most murders happen because someone wants someone else dead. Most murders, by far, are committed by criminals with long records for whom it was already illegal for them to have a gun but, surprisingly, when planning to break the law to commit murder, they don't care about the law. Most murders are black-on-black gang-related murders. Did you know that black women are murdered at twice the rate that are white women?
> 
> Gun murders are absolutely a product of the availability of guns. Knife murders are a product of unavailability of guns while knives were available. Choking murders are a product of the unavailability of guns and knives but the availability of hands.
> 
> Most crime-of-passion murders against women are not committed with guns; women are beaten or strangled. To get the gun takes at least some bit of planning.



Except none of that is true.   Most murders in the US are committed with guns.  

The US had 18,319 homicides in 2019.  Of those, 14,839 were committed with guns.  






						Guns in the United States — Firearms, gun law and gun control
					

Gun law, gun control statistics, number of guns in United States, gun deaths, firearm facts and policy, armed violence, public health and development




					www.gunpolicy.org
				




As for "gang related" murders, that's simply not true, either.   According to the National Gang Center, between 2008 and 2012, the number of "Gang related" murders was between 1659 and 2363.  In short, only a fraction of all homicides committed. 









						National Youth Gang Survey Analysis: Measuring the Extent of Gang Problems
					

The NGC conducted an annual survey of law enforcement agencies to assess the extent of gang problems. This page shows data measuring the extent of gang problems.




					nationalgangcenter.ojp.gov
				







woodwork201 said:


> You're completely wrong about most murders. Most murders are gang-related murders where people don't really know each other more than superficially.



Simply not true.  32% of homicides in the US are family members.   51% victims are known to the killer.  Only 5% are people being killed by complete strangers.  (Another 12% are unknown, because they don't know who killed the person.) 








woodwork201 said:


> Women are routinely beaten to death by the men, or women, in their lives. Banning guns does nothing to reduce crime; it may reduce some gun crime but then the crimes will simply be crimes instead of gun crimes.


Except, again, this isn't true.  Going back to the above Gun Policy.org figures. 

Japan completely bans guns.  They had 334 homicides a year with only ONE of those involving a gun.  





__





						Guns in Japan — Firearms, gun law and gun control
					

Gun law, gun control statistics, number of guns in Japan, gun deaths, firearm facts and policy, armed violence, public health and development




					www.gunpolicy.org
				




The United Kingdom mostly banned guns.  They had 809 homicides with only 32 of those being committed with guns.  






						Guns in the United Kingdom — Firearms, gun law and gun control
					

Gun law, gun control statistics, number of guns in United Kingdom, gun deaths, firearm facts and policy, armed violence, public health and development




					www.gunpolicy.org
				




Let's use the closest analog to the US, Canada.   Canada allows some gun ownership, but it's not considered a right and you have to  jump through a lot of hoops to get a gun. 

They had 651 homicides with only 249 of those committed with guns.





__





						Guns in Canada — Firearms, gun law and gun control
					

Gun law, gun control statistics, number of guns in Canada, gun deaths, firearm facts and policy, armed violence, public health and development




					www.gunpolicy.org
				




As the Onion put it... 








woodwork201 said:


> The difference in murder rates has far more to do with gang violence and drug laws, and even culture, than it does with guns.



Naw, buddy, it's the guns. Culturally, Canada isn't really that different from us.  They have gangs, they have poverty, they don't have that many guns and they don't have that many murders.  

Now, if you want to make the argument that because the US doesn't deal well with other factors like racism, poverty, addiction and mental illness, you might have a point.  We have a shitty record on those things.  Our priorities are fucked up.  It's what you can expect when a country lets a guy like Trump become President. 

But the fact is, the US is the only G-7 country that allows this kind of gun policy, and we get exactly the expected result.   If you let a mentally ill, addicted or poor person have easy access to a gun, you are going to get exactly these kinds of results.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jun 16, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Another person who is completely wrong about everything.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Except all your statistics ignore one important thing: Race.  

People in Japan kill less people because they don't have guns?  Japanese Americans pretty much the same in our country.  Why are mostly or all white suburbs virtually gun crime free?  We have access to all kinds of guns.  

53% of all US murders are committed by a group that's 7% of our population--black males.  Second in line are Hispanic males.  

The citizens in Sweden always had guns.  No problems.  They were the second most safest country in the world.  Today it's the most violent country in Europe.  So what changed, did they get more guns?  No.  What changed is they allowed middle-east refugies into their country.  Are we going to learn any lessons from Sweden and like places?  Not if Democrats are in charge.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 16, 2021)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> Except all your statistics ignore one important thing: Race.



Tell us again how not racist you are, Ray, that shit never gets old.  

I mean, I know you are very frightened when you see a black person, but the mere sight of one isn't fatal.  Your soiled shorts notwithstanding you need a gun to kill people. 



Ray From Cleveland said:


> 53% of all US murders are committed by a group that's 7% of our population--black males. Second in line are Hispanic males.


You need to stop posting NRA propaganda. 



Ray From Cleveland said:


> The citizens in Sweden always had guns. No problems.


Really?





__





						Guns in Sweden — Firearms, gun law and gun control
					

Gun law, gun control statistics, number of guns in Sweden, gun deaths, firearm facts and policy, armed violence, public health and development




					www.gunpolicy.org
				




The regulation of guns in Sweden is categorised as restrictive90

In Sweden, the right to private gun ownership is not guaranteed by law

In Sweden, only licensed gun owners91 101 97 99 35 may lawfully acquire, possess or transfer a firearm or ammunition
Genuine Reason Required for Firearm Possession​Applicants for a gun owner’s licence in Sweden are required to establish a genuine reason to possess a firearm, for example hunting, target shooting, collection and self-defence (but in practice, no such licences are ever granted)91 102

Well, you get the idea.  Nowhere near the insanity we have.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jun 16, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> ell us again how not racist you are, Ray, that shit never gets old.



Neither does leftists calling statistics racist. Statistics can't be racist, they are not human.  They are compiled data usually performed by the FBI.  



JoeB131 said:


> You need to stop posting NRA propaganda.



The NRA deals with gun issues, not crime issues.  Now if you can find a better source than the FBI, by all means, post it. 



JoeB131 said:


> The regulation of guns in Sweden is categorised as restrictive90
> 
> In Sweden, the right to private gun ownership is not guaranteed by law
> 
> ...



I never said obtaining guns in Sweden was as easy as it is here.  Here, it's a constitutional right.  But the point is they always had guns, and very little violent crime problems until they opened their borders to people of color.


----------



## woodwork201 (Jun 17, 2021)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> I never said obtaining guns in Sweden was as easy as it is here.  Here, it's a constitutional right.  But the point is they always had guns, and very little violent crime problems until they opened their borders to people of color.



Thanks for a great post.  It gets tiring proving facts to those who won't hear them so I'm glad to see great arguments.

One thing I'll say, though; it's not that they opened their borders to people of color, color is coincidence in this case.  They opened their borders to people who hate everything about Sweden and its culture, religions, and history.  They opened their border to a culture that has spent the past 1200+ years trying to take over everything between Arabia and the northern tip of Norway, including Sweden.  And now they're surprised.  They knew it was a snake when they let it in.

But the cause is culture differences not color differences.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 17, 2021)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> Neither does leftists calling statistics racist. Statistics can't be racist, they are not human. They are compiled data usually performed by the FBI.



There's an old saying figures don't lie, but liars figure. 

Or as Disraeli might have said,  Mendacity comes in three forms, lies, damned lies and statistics. 



Ray From Cleveland said:


> The NRA deals with gun issues, not crime issues. Now if you can find a better source than the FBI, by all means, post it.



Kind of not the point.  Other countries have high minority populations ,and they still don't have our crime levels because - wait for it - no guns.  



Ray From Cleveland said:


> I never said obtaining guns in Sweden was as easy as it is here. Here, it's a constitutional right. But the point is they always had guns, and very little violent crime problems until they opened their borders to people of color.



Except they don't have guns..  Sweden has about 2 million guns in civilian hands for 11 million people. About 8% of swedes live in a household with a gun.  Compared to the US, which has 300 million guns, and 42% of us live in a household with a gun.   Sweden has 108 homicides a year with 39 committed with guns, the US has 19000 homicides with 14,600 being committed with guns.  



woodwork201 said:


> One thing I'll say, though; it's not that they opened their borders to people of color, color is coincidence in this case. They opened their borders to people who hate everything about Sweden and its culture, religions, and history. They opened their border to a culture that has spent the past 1200+ years trying to take over everything between Arabia and the northern tip of Norway, including Sweden. And now they're surprised. They knew it was a snake when they let it in.



Actually, Sweden still has very little crime.  

Because not only do they sensibly restrict who can have a gun, they have social programs, universal health care, they don't let their mentally ill wander the streets and they treat addiction as a medical problem. 

Oh, and there isn't a scary Muslim under your bed waiting to kill you.  If you are a victim of murder in this country, it's probably going to be someone you know well.  Maybe someone you share a bed with.  Because that person was able to get a gun.


----------



## Colin norris (Jun 17, 2021)

2aguy said:


> A woman was attempting to enter an abortion clinic was attacked by the man who brought her to the clinic....he started shooting at her.   An Abortion protestor, armed with a concealed, legal, gun, fired on the attacker saving the woman's life.
> 
> But......But.....I thought people never used guns for actual self defense....right?
> 
> ...



I didn't know it was illegal for a woman to have an abortion. 
Who has the right to stop her? The godbotherers?


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jun 17, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> There's an old saying figures don't lie, but liars figure.
> 
> Or as Disraeli might have said, Mendacity comes in three forms, lies, damned lies and statistics.



Yes, because anybody that posts facts you disagree with is a liar.  Liberal handbook page 2. 



JoeB131 said:


> Kind of not the point. Other countries have high minority populations ,and they still don't have our crime levels because - wait for it - no guns.



I said people of color. So what white country with people of color do you speak of? 



JoeB131 said:


> Except they don't have guns.. Sweden has about 2 million guns in civilian hands for 11 million people. About 8% of swedes live in a household with a gun. Compared to the US, which has 300 million guns, and 42% of us live in a household with a gun. Sweden has 108 homicides a year with 39 committed with guns, the US has 19000 homicides with 14,600 being committed with guns.



They are still legal in that country.  People in an all white population seldom need guns just like here in the US.  One of the best aspects of legal firearm ownership is the criminal element doesn't know who has guns and who does not.  How many millions of guns is irrelevant.


----------



## NoNukes (Jun 17, 2021)

2aguy said:


> A woman was attempting to enter an abortion clinic was attacked by the man who brought her to the clinic....he started shooting at her.   An Abortion protestor, armed with a concealed, legal, gun, fired on the attacker saving the woman's life.
> 
> But......But.....I thought people never used guns for actual self defense....right?
> 
> ...


A guy with a gun started shooting at her. Not a good argument for being able to carry handguns.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jun 17, 2021)

woodwork201 said:


> Thanks for a great post. It gets tiring proving facts to those who won't hear them so I'm glad to see great arguments.
> 
> One thing I'll say, though; it's not that they opened their borders to people of color, color is coincidence in this case. They opened their borders to people who hate everything about Sweden and its culture, religions, and history. They opened their border to a culture that has spent the past 1200+ years trying to take over everything between Arabia and the northern tip of Norway, including Sweden. And now they're surprised. They knew it was a snake when they let it in.
> 
> But the cause is culture differences not color differences.



Same thing here, but it's generally people of color who have those culture differences.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 17, 2021)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> Yes, because anybody that posts facts you disagree with is a liar. Liberal handbook page 2.



You're not posting facts, you are posting racism. 



Ray From Cleveland said:


> I said people of color. So what white country with people of color do you speak of?



France and the UK... for starters.  



Ray From Cleveland said:


> They are still legal in that country. People in an all white population seldom need guns just like here in the US. One of the best aspects of legal firearm ownership is the criminal element doesn't know who has guns and who does not. How many millions of guns is irrelevant.



Well, no, it's completely relevant...  We have millions of guns and hundreds of thousands of gun crimes...  we have to lock up 2 million people and we STILL don't feel safe going out at night.


----------



## LeftofLeft (Jun 17, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> So two anti-choice nuts shoot at each other in broad daylight, and Dick Tiny thinks this is a good thing.


Planned Parenthood ought to be sending the NRA a Thank You card.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jun 17, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> You're not posting facts, you are posting racism.



Facts are not racism. Are you calling the FBI racists?  Facts are facts until you find evidence those facts are wrong. 



JoeB131 said:


> France and the UK... for starters.



WTF are you talking about?  The police don't even go in Muslim areas in France because they fear for their lives. 



JoeB131 said:


> Well, no, it's completely relevant... We have millions of guns and hundreds of thousands of gun crimes... we have to lock up 2 million people and we STILL don't feel safe going out at night.



You could have 500 million guns in this country, and it wouldn't change a thing.  Guns don't open the gun safe and go out and night to kill people, only people do.  As I have stated before, if you took a nice safe all white suburb, created law that all households must have a firearm, you would see no change in their violent crime rate.  If you went to a low-income high crime minority area and made law that all guns were illegal to have, their crime statistics wouldn't change either.  It would still be an extremely dangerous place to be.


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 17, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Ray From Cleveland said:
> 
> 
> > Neither does leftists calling statistics racist. Statistics can't be racist, they are not human. They are compiled data usually performed by the FBI.
> ...




Moron.....Sweden has fully automatic military weapons in their homes...and very little crime...you idiot...it isn't access to guns that creates crime.....

Tell that to Switzerland...where they have escalating gun crime...tell that to France where the fully automatic military rifle is the weapon of choice for French criminals........

You are such a lying asshole.......

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

Our problem is the democrat party that keeps releasing violent criminals from prison and jail.....something the European countries don't do...yet...but their idiots, like you, want to release violent criminals........you are the problem.


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 17, 2021)

NoNukes said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > A woman was attempting to enter an abortion clinic was attacked by the man who brought her to the clinic....he started shooting at her.   An Abortion protestor, armed with a concealed, legal, gun, fired on the attacker saving the woman's life.
> ...




And was stopped by a civilian with a gun....good argument for having guns.....lives are saved with guns.


----------



## NoNukes (Jun 17, 2021)

2aguy said:


> NoNukes said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


Not necessary if the gun is not there to begin with.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jun 17, 2021)

NoNukes said:


> Not necessary if the gun is not there to begin with.



The gun will always be there for criminals. That's our objection to any new gun laws: they will only apply to law abiding citizens in effort to make it so difficult, so impossible to get a gun that most will just give up.


----------



## whitehall (Jun 17, 2021)

A legally armed anti-abortion protester saves the life of a woman who entered a clinic to kill her unborn child. Some conundrum for lefties. No wonder it failed to make national news.


----------



## NoNukes (Jun 18, 2021)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> NoNukes said:
> 
> 
> > Not necessary if the gun is not there to begin with.
> ...


It works over here in Ireland.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 18, 2021)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> Facts are not racism. *Are you calling the FBI racists? *Facts are facts until you find evidence those facts are wrong.



Um, yeah, the FBI is racist as shit.  They didn't even have black agents until the 1970's.  



Ray From Cleveland said:


> You could have 500 million guns in this country, and it wouldn't change a thing. Guns don't open the gun safe and go out and night to kill people, only people do.



Exactly, dummy, people with guns.  

A gun in a bad situation can turn it into a tragedy.  The rest of the world has figured this out, it's why they have few guns and few murders.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 18, 2021)

2aguy said:


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



No, they don't. It's more like 49,000 a year, according to the FBI.  



2aguy said:


> Moron.....Sweden has fully automatic military weapons in their homes...and very little crime...you idiot...it isn't access to guns that creates crime.....



Sweden has one gun for every eight people, and it's very hard to get one.   I posted a link to what Sweden's gun laws are.  

Yes, SOME people can get a fully auto weapon, but most people can't.  Not without a good reason. 




2aguy said:


> Tell that to Switzerland...where they have escalating gun crime...tell that to France where the fully automatic military rifle is the weapon of choice for French criminals........



Didn't you morons claim Switzerland was gun paradise?  Except it isn't.


----------



## NoNukes (Jun 18, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Americans use their legal guns 1.1 million times a year to stop violent rapes, robberies, stabbings, beatings, and murders...according to the Centers for Disease Control......
> ...


The Swedish used to have weapons in their homes, but were told to hand them in and they did.


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 18, 2021)

NoNukes said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



And how did that handing in of guns work for the Swedes?


Well...the criminals didn't pay attention.......they also didn't pay attention to the law that says that hand grenades are also illegal...as are fully automatic military rifles...the weapon that Swedish...and French criminals prefer.....

The increase in gun homicide in Sweden is closely linked to criminal milieux in socially disadvantaged areas,” the report said, noting that shooting deaths had more than doubled between 2011 and 2019 and now accounted for 40% of violent deaths.
The report said more than eight out of 10 shootings were linked to organised crime, a significantly higher proportion than in other countries, and cited gang wars, the drugs trade and low confidence towards the police as potential factors.
The report said a decline in other forms of deadly violence, including knife crime, had masked the rise in fatal shootings.
Of 22 European countries analysed in the report, data from 2014-2017 put the country in second place, behind Croatia and ahead of Latvia. In 2018 it topped the ranking, although data from some countries was not complete that year.
-------
Last year the country of 10.3 million people recorded more than 360 incidents involving guns, including 47 deaths and 117 people injured.
Sweden is the only European country where fatal shootings have risen significantly since 2000, leaping from one of the lowest rates of gun violence on the continent to one of the highest in less than a decade, a report has found.
The report, by the Swedish national council for crime prevention (BRA), said the Scandinavian country had overtaken Italy and eastern European countries primarily because of the violent activities of organised criminal gangs.
Sweden’s gun violence rate has soared due to gangs, report says

=======
Swedish capital sees 79% spike in shootings as govt laments ‘high levels’ of violence in the Scandinavian country
Sweden recorded a surge in gun-related violence last year, according to new figures released by the government amid accusations that authorities have turned a blind eye to rising crime in the country.
Interior Minister Mikael Damberg disclosed on Monday that 47 people were killed and 117 injured in 366 shooting incidents in 2020, marking a 10 percent increase in gun violence when compared to statistics from 2019.

Damberg noted that in nearly half of the shootings registered last year, someone was injured or killed. _“We will neither accept nor get used to such high levels of violence,”_ he said.


The situation in Malmo, a city with a large migrant population that has struggled with gang violence, has improved, while crime is surging in Stockholm, the interior minister pointed out.

According to Damberg, the Swedish capital saw a staggering 79 percent increase in shootings in 2020.
-----
Most of the violent incidents occurred in 60 suburbs across the country identified by police as _“vulnerable”_ areas. Damberg said that while 5.4 percent of Sweden’s population live in such neighborhoods, they account for more than half of the nation’s fatal shootings.


===========
In the report on Tuesday, the Swedish Television, citing statistics from the Swedish Police Authority, revealed that by November, there had been as many shootings in 2020 as during the whole of 2019.
Between January 1 and December 15, there were 349 confirmed shootings in Sweden, with 111 people wounded and 44 dead as a result, Xinhua news agency quoted the report as saying.
The death toll is close to the highest number on record so far -- 45 gun-related fatalities in 2018.
Most of the shootings, or 146, occurred in the capital Stockholm, where 23 deaths and 48 injuries were reported.
According to the police, most incidents were related to organised crime and conflicts between gang members.
Criminologist Joakim Sturup told Swedish Television that a major reason behind the worrying statistics is that automatic weapons are becoming more commonly used by gang members.

Sweden witnesses spike in shooting incidents​​Shootings on the Rise in Sweden Despite Crackdown on Gang Violence, COVID-19 Epidemic​The number of shootings is increasing in Sweden, despite a national effort to curtail gang violence amid the ongoing coronavirus epidemic, SVT reported.​-------
The police also noted that the raging coronavirus epidemic, contrary to some people's expectations, has not had a major impact on crime. This is likely due to the fact that Sweden, unlike most European nations, has consistently avoided lockdowns. Even the flow of drugs has not been disturbed to any great extent, the police said. However, there is still a risk that reduced access to drugs may increase violence.
Crime gangs in Sweden: What's behind the rise in the use of explosives?

The frequent use of explosives is a relatively recent phenomenon, and criminologists told The Local that the blasts can be seen as part of an overall rise in violence and growing recklessness in these criminal networks.

Amir Rostami, a police superintendent turned sociologist with a focus on criminal gangs, told The Local that so-called 'street gangs' are showing an increased tendency towards violence, and that this violence was becoming more severe when it took place.

*"If previously they maybe fired one shot or shot someone in the legs, today it's more about AK47s, using more bullets, hand grenades and explosions that we didn't see before.* I'd say that's the biggest shift we see – they're more reckless, they don't seem to care about the consequences," Rostami said.

Fatal shootings linked to criminal gangs have increased from around four per year in the early 1990s to over 40 in 2018. And while the blasts that have taken place in Sweden have caused no fatalities so far this year, they could be seen as a sign that the gangs are unafraid of causing damage and potentially harming people.
No, Sweden, hand grenade attacks aren’t an ‘image’ problem

In 2018 there were 162 bombings reported to police, and 93 reported in the first five months of this year, 30 more than during the same period in 2018. The level of attacks is _“extreme in a country that is not at war,”_ Crime Commissioner Gunnar Appelgren told SVT last year.
-------
*The use of hand grenades is a purely Swedish phenomenon too, with no other country in Europe reporting their use on such a level, a police manager told Swedish Radio in 2016, a year after attacks first spiked.*

The grenades used almost exclusively originate in the former Yugoslavia, and are sold in Sweden for around $100 per piece. But while only three hand grenades were thrown in Kosovo between 2013 and 2014, more than 20 have been used in Sweden every year since 2015.

*More broadly, homicide has risen in Sweden, with more than 300 shootings reported last year, causing 45 deaths.* Though homicide rates had been in decline since 2002, they again began trending upwards in 2015, as did rapes and sexual assaults, which more than tripled in the last four years.

*Of course, 2015 was also the year in which Sweden flung open its doors to more than 160,000 asylum seekers, more per capita than any other European country.
-------*

*Dagens Nyheter pointed out that 90 percent of shooting perpetrators in Sweden are either first or second generation immigrants.*​Bomb attacks are now a normal part of Swedish life | The Spectator​
Only days after the murder of Karolin Hakim, another young woman fell victim to the gang wars. Eighteen-year-old Ndella Jack was killed as someone fired an automatic weapon into her flat in western Stockholm, probably aiming for her husband, a well-known figure in Stockholm’s gang scene. Less than a week after the murder, associates of Ms Jack’s husband were lured to a middle-class suburb of Stockholm, where they had been promised information about her killer. Shots were fired, missing the targets and hitting instead a taxi driver and a resident in a nearby building. One victim, also a university student, lost his sight in an eye after it was hit by a bullet


Holding Sweden hostage: firearm-related violence

Statistics from the NBHW shows that the number of individuals in Sweden injured by a firearm has greatly increased since 2009. Between 2012 and 2017, the number of individuals that were injured by a firearm increased by 50% [13]. Figure 3 outlines the number of individuals being treated at Swedish hospitals for firearm-related injuries.
----------
International reports [1, 2], the Swedish police [12,19], and Swedish scholars [3–6,20,21] *agree that the main cause for the increase in the rate of firearm-related violence is the presence of many gangs and criminal networks in Sweden.*

Although gangs and criminal networks have always existed in Sweden, street gangs flourished in the late 1990s and are today considered to be one of the main security problems in the country [22–24]. Swedish gangs and foremost criminal networks have not only continued to increase, but*they have also become bolder and more violent as can be seen in their use of firearms and explosive devices as their modus operandi [3,6].*

Another very important source of the increase of firearm-related violence in Sweden is the easy access to illegal firearms. 

Although Sweden was, for decades, shielded from firearm-related violence, mostly because of its restrictive gun laws, the easy access to illegal firearms, in addition to the many gangs and criminal networks in the country, is the main reason for the disturbing increase in the country’s rate of firearm-related violence. According to police reports, there has been a high inflow of illegal weapons into Sweden from the western Balkans [12].
==========

https://www.thelocal.se/20190704/in-depth-whats-behind-the-rise-in-gang-violence​


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 18, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Americans use their legal guns 1.1 million times a year to stop violent rapes, robberies, stabbings, beatings, and murders...according to the Centers for Disease Control......
> ...




Sweden......

The increase in gun homicide in Sweden is closely linked to criminal milieux in socially disadvantaged areas,” the report said, noting that shooting deaths had more than doubled between 2011 and 2019 and now accounted for 40% of violent deaths.
The report said more than eight out of 10 shootings were linked to organised crime, a significantly higher proportion than in other countries, and cited gang wars, the drugs trade and low confidence towards the police as potential factors.
The report said a decline in other forms of deadly violence, including knife crime, had masked the rise in fatal shootings.
Of 22 European countries analysed in the report, data from 2014-2017 put the country in second place, behind Croatia and ahead of Latvia. In 2018 it topped the ranking, although data from some countries was not complete that year.
-------
Last year the country of 10.3 million people recorded more than 360 incidents involving guns, including 47 deaths and 117 people injured.
Sweden is the only European country where fatal shootings have risen significantly since 2000, leaping from one of the lowest rates of gun violence on the continent to one of the highest in less than a decade, a report has found.
The report, by the Swedish national council for crime prevention (BRA), said the Scandinavian country had overtaken Italy and eastern European countries primarily because of the violent activities of organised criminal gangs.
Sweden’s gun violence rate has soared due to gangs, report says

=======
Swedish capital sees 79% spike in shootings as govt laments ‘high levels’ of violence in the Scandinavian country
Sweden recorded a surge in gun-related violence last year, according to new figures released by the government amid accusations that authorities have turned a blind eye to rising crime in the country.
Interior Minister Mikael Damberg disclosed on Monday that 47 people were killed and 117 injured in 366 shooting incidents in 2020, marking a 10 percent increase in gun violence when compared to statistics from 2019.

Damberg noted that in nearly half of the shootings registered last year, someone was injured or killed. _“We will neither accept nor get used to such high levels of violence,”_ he said.


The situation in Malmo, a city with a large migrant population that has struggled with gang violence, has improved, while crime is surging in Stockholm, the interior minister pointed out.

According to Damberg, the Swedish capital saw a staggering 79 percent increase in shootings in 2020.
-----
Most of the violent incidents occurred in 60 suburbs across the country identified by police as _“vulnerable”_ areas. Damberg said that while 5.4 percent of Sweden’s population live in such neighborhoods, they account for more than half of the nation’s fatal shootings.


===========
In the report on Tuesday, the Swedish Television, citing statistics from the Swedish Police Authority, revealed that by November, there had been as many shootings in 2020 as during the whole of 2019.
Between January 1 and December 15, there were 349 confirmed shootings in Sweden, with 111 people wounded and 44 dead as a result, Xinhua news agency quoted the report as saying.
The death toll is close to the highest number on record so far -- 45 gun-related fatalities in 2018.
Most of the shootings, or 146, occurred in the capital Stockholm, where 23 deaths and 48 injuries were reported.
According to the police, most incidents were related to organised crime and conflicts between gang members.
Criminologist Joakim Sturup told Swedish Television that a major reason behind the worrying statistics is that automatic weapons are becoming more commonly used by gang members.

Sweden witnesses spike in shooting incidents​​Shootings on the Rise in Sweden Despite Crackdown on Gang Violence, COVID-19 Epidemic​The number of shootings is increasing in Sweden, despite a national effort to curtail gang violence amid the ongoing coronavirus epidemic, SVT reported.​-------

Crime gangs in Sweden: What's behind the rise in the use of explosives?

The frequent use of explosives is a relatively recent phenomenon, and criminologists told The Local that the blasts can be seen as part of an overall rise in violence and growing recklessness in these criminal networks.

Amir Rostami, a police superintendent turned sociologist with a focus on criminal gangs, told The Local that so-called 'street gangs' are showing an increased tendency towards violence, and that this violence was becoming more severe when it took place.

*"If previously they maybe fired one shot or shot someone in the legs, today it's more about AK47s, using more bullets, hand grenades and explosions that we didn't see before.* I'd say that's the biggest shift we see – they're more reckless, they don't seem to care about the consequences," Rostami said.

Fatal shootings linked to criminal gangs have increased from around four per year in the early 1990s to over 40 in 2018. And while the blasts that have taken place in Sweden have caused no fatalities so far this year, they could be seen as a sign that the gangs are unafraid of causing damage and potentially harming people.
No, Sweden, hand grenade attacks aren’t an ‘image’ problem

In 2018 there were 162 bombings reported to police, and 93 reported in the first five months of this year, 30 more than during the same period in 2018. The level of attacks is _“extreme in a country that is not at war,”_ Crime Commissioner Gunnar Appelgren told SVT last year.
-------
*The use of hand grenades is a purely Swedish phenomenon too, with no other country in Europe reporting their use on such a level, a police manager told Swedish Radio in 2016, a year after attacks first spiked.*

The grenades used almost exclusively originate in the former Yugoslavia, and are sold in Sweden for around $100 per piece. But while only three hand grenades were thrown in Kosovo between 2013 and 2014, more than 20 have been used in Sweden every year since 2015.

*More broadly, homicide has risen in Sweden, with more than 300 shootings reported last year, causing 45 deaths.* Though homicide rates had been in decline since 2002, they again began trending upwards in 2015, as did rapes and sexual assaults, which more than tripled in the last four years.

*Of course, 2015 was also the year in which Sweden flung open its doors to more than 160,000 asylum seekers, more per capita than any other European country.
-------*

*Dagens Nyheter pointed out that 90 percent of shooting perpetrators in Sweden are either first or second generation immigrants.*​Bomb attacks are now a normal part of Swedish life | The Spectator​
Only days after the murder of Karolin Hakim, another young woman fell victim to the gang wars. Eighteen-year-old Ndella Jack was killed as someone fired an automatic weapon into her flat in western Stockholm, probably aiming for her husband, a well-known figure in Stockholm’s gang scene. Less than a week after the murder, associates of Ms Jack’s husband were lured to a middle-class suburb of Stockholm, where they had been promised information about her killer. Shots were fired, missing the targets and hitting instead a taxi driver and a resident in a nearby building. One victim, also a university student, lost his sight in an eye after it was hit by a bullet


Holding Sweden hostage: firearm-related violence

Statistics from the NBHW shows that the number of individuals in Sweden injured by a firearm has greatly increased since 2009. Between 2012 and 2017, the number of individuals that were injured by a firearm increased by 50% [13]. Figure 3 outlines the number of individuals being treated at Swedish hospitals for firearm-related injuries.
----------
International reports [1, 2], the Swedish police [12,19], and Swedish scholars [3–6,20,21] *agree that the main cause for the increase in the rate of firearm-related violence is the presence of many gangs and criminal networks in Sweden.*

Although gangs and criminal networks have always existed in Sweden, street gangs flourished in the late 1990s and are today considered to be one of the main security problems in the country [22–24]. Swedish gangs and foremost criminal networks have not only continued to increase, but*they have also become bolder and more violent as can be seen in their use of firearms and explosive devices as their modus operandi [3,6].*

Another very important source of the increase of firearm-related violence in Sweden is the easy access to illegal firearms.

 Although Sweden was, for decades, shielded from firearm-related violence, mostly because of its restrictive gun laws, the easy access to illegal firearms, in addition to the many gangs and criminal networks in the country, is the main reason for the disturbing increase in the country’s rate of firearm-related violence. 

According to police reports, there has been a high inflow of illegal weapons into Sweden from the western Balkans [12].
==========

https://www.thelocal.se/20190704/in-depth-whats-behind-the-rise-in-gang-violence​


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 18, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Americans use their legal guns 1.1 million times a year to stop violent rapes, robberies, stabbings, beatings, and murders...according to the Centers for Disease Control......
> ...




*No, they don't. It's more like 49,000 a year, according to the FBI.*

*according to the Department of Justice Research......long before we had over 19.4 million Americans legally carrying guns for self defense in public.........the number of defensive gun uses each year was 1.5 million....... *


----------



## NoNukes (Jun 18, 2021)

2aguy said:


> NoNukes said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...


You post so much shit without saying where it is from. Probably from some gun website.


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 18, 2021)

NoNukes said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > NoNukes said:
> ...




Dipshit....I link to all of my sources..including the ones you just posted about, you dumb ass....

It would make you seem more intelligent if you didn't post about things that you didn't read first....you idiot....


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 18, 2021)

NoNukes said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > NoNukes said:
> ...




Dipshit...you just hate that you mentioned Sweden getting rid of their guns, and then I link to article after article pointing out that criminal gangs in Sweden, majority from immigrant communities, are increasingly using military rifles and grenades....in Sweden...

you got caught, you look like an idiot...so you respond like a doofus.


----------



## NoNukes (Jun 18, 2021)

2aguy said:


> NoNukes said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


I have read these bullshit posts from gun sights, by gun nuts, for years on different boards. Always the same, always lies.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 19, 2021)

2aguy said:


> The increase in gun homicide in Sweden is closely linked to criminal milieux in socially disadvantaged areas,” the report said, noting that shooting deaths had more than doubled between 2011 and 2019 and now accounted for 40% of violent deaths.







__





						Guns in Sweden — Firearms, gun law and gun control
					

Gun law, gun control statistics, number of guns in Sweden, gun deaths, firearm facts and policy, armed violence, public health and development




					www.gunpolicy.org
				




Okay, let's look at this bit of Cherry Picking by DickTiny. 

Yes, in 2011 the number of gun homicides was a whopping 17 and in 2017, it was 39.  (I don't have figures for 2019)   That sounds horrible...until you realize it really isn't.   

There were 29 gun homicides in 1995 and 30 gun homicides 1999.   In fact, this very small number has been all over the board, actually being as low as 11 in 2005.  

Now, compare that to the US... 






						Guns in the United States — Firearms, gun law and gun control
					

Gun law, gun control statistics, number of guns in United States, gun deaths, firearm facts and policy, armed violence, public health and development




					www.gunpolicy.org
				




We haven't had less than 10,000 gun homicides since 1998.   The number was 14,389 in 2019, and frankly, when we finally get figures for 2020, with TRUMP PLAGUE and TRUMP RIOTS numbers, I'm sure those are going to be much, much, much worse.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 19, 2021)

2aguy said:


> according to the Department of Justice Research......long before we had over 19.4 million Americans legally carrying guns for self defense in public.........the number of defensive gun uses each year was 1.5 million.......



NRA horseshit. 

Here's how we can tell that number is horseshit. According to the FBI, only 200 gun homicides a year by civilians are ruled as "Self-Defense".

Now, what we are to believe is that a bunch of tiny-dicked gun wankers like 2AGuy are out there, gently stroking their guns dreaming of the happy day they finally get to shoot themselves a darkie who was mildly threatening.  And this happens 1,500,000 times, according to CompensatingGuy.  

And in 1,499,800 of those cases, nobody dies. 

Yes, in 1,499,800 cases, the Gun Wankers were able to either show enough restraint to not fire their guns, or miss badly, and in most of those cases, the criminal was deterred merely by the sight of a gun to give up on whatever they were planning to do.   Keeping in mind, you'd have to be pretty desperate to start with to risk jail in committing a crime to start with.


----------



## woodwork201 (Jun 19, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Here's how we can tell that number is horseshit. According to the FBI, only 200 gun homicides a year by civilians are ruled as "Self-Defense".


Clearly we need more guns then.  Out of 15000 gun deaths, you're saying it as 14,800 good guys killed and only 200 bad guys?  The good guys definitely need more guns.  Thanks for giving us that argument.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 20, 2021)

woodwork201 said:


> Clearly we need more guns then. Out of 15000 gun deaths, you're saying it as 14,800 good guys killed and only 200 bad guys? The good guys definitely need more guns. Thanks for giving us that argument.



That's the most retarded thing I've read today...


----------



## woodwork201 (Jun 21, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> woodwork201 said:
> 
> 
> > Clearly we need more guns then. Out of 15000 gun deaths, you're saying it as 14,800 good guys killed and only 200 bad guys? The good guys definitely need more guns. Thanks for giving us that argument.
> ...


Just going by your own numbers.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 21, 2021)

woodwork201 said:


> Just going by your own numbers.



Um, no... you clearly didn't understand the point at all.  

Seriously, were all you Wingnuts going to the same Christian school with the lead paint chips?


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 23, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > The increase in gun homicide in Sweden is closely linked to criminal milieux in socially disadvantaged areas,” the report said, noting that shooting deaths had more than doubled between 2011 and 2019 and now accounted for 40% of violent deaths.
> ...




Sweden didn't have the violence 10 years ago, now the criminals there are shooting at each other with fully automatic military weapons and grenades...you idiot........criminal culture changes, it is not static you idiot....now that 3rd world immigrants are taking control of the drug trade in Sweden, they don't care about gun control laws in Sweden, you idiot.....


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 23, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > according to the Department of Justice Research......long before we had over 19.4 million Americans legally carrying guns for self defense in public.........the number of defensive gun uses each year was 1.5 million.......
> ...




And you lie......with every post....

You know, since you have been told over and over again, and anyone with even 1/4 of a brain, sadly that isn't you........would understand that good people do not want to shoot anyone, even criminals....that is why they are not executing criminals when they defend themselves....they scare off the rapist, or robber, the rapist, robber or murderer surrenders and they wait for police, or the idiot is wounded ....you moron.....

600 million guns, over 19.4 million Americans can legally carry guns in public for self defense.....and those good Americans only shoot and kill about 235 criminals each year...criminals too stupid to realize that the victim with the gun isn't the victim they want to keep attacking...

you idiot.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 23, 2021)

2aguy said:


> Sweden didn't have the violence 10 years ago, now the criminals there are shooting at each other with fully automatic military weapons and grenades...you idiot........criminal culture changes, it is not static you idiot....now that 3rd world immigrants are taking control of the drug trade in Sweden, they don't care about gun control laws in Sweden, you idiot.....



Um, yeah, they still don't have violence. 

I mean, seriously, 39 gun murders for the whole country?  

No figures for Grenade murders...  

Compared to 14,500 for the US.  

Um, yeah, guns are the problem, Dick Tiny, not "criminal culture", whatever the fuck that is.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 23, 2021)

2aguy said:


> You know, since you have been told over and over again, and anyone with even 1/4 of a brain, sadly that isn't you........would understand that good people do not want to shoot anyone, even criminals....that is why they are not executing criminals when they defend themselves....they scare off the rapist, or robber, the rapist, robber or murderer surrenders and they wait for police, or the idiot is wounded ....you moron.....



Yeah, guy, sorry, listening to you gun wankers, it's just not possible to believe you'd show that much restraint. Not the way you guys all cheered for Zimmerman when he shot an unarmed child buying candy.  

If these incidents actually WERE common, we'd have a lot more dead bodies.  The problem is- they aren't.


----------



## Correll (Jun 23, 2021)

2aguy said:


> Ray From Cleveland said:
> 
> 
> > Lysistrata said:
> ...




Well, yes, very irrational.

Though....if he managed to WOUND her, they would have taken her to a hospital and that would have prevented teh abortion...


Though some of the feminists would have been willing to ignore a bleeding bullet wound, and done the abortion first, I'm sure. 

Probably not though.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jun 23, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Yeah, guy, sorry, listening to you gun wankers, it's just not possible to believe you'd show that much restraint. Not the way you guys all cheered for Zimmerman when he shot an unarmed child buying candy.
> 
> If these incidents actually WERE common, we'd have a lot more dead bodies. The problem is- they aren't.



What did I tell you about trying to win an argument with lies?  You leftists just never listen.  Yeah, Zimmerman shot an unarmed child because he was buying candy.  Keep believing that.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jun 23, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Um, yeah, they still don't have violence.



They were one of the safest countries in the world.  Today they are the second most dangerous in Europe thanks to their liberal leaders letting in all those middle-east refuges.


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 23, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > You know, since you have been told over and over again, and anyone with even 1/4 of a brain, sadly that isn't you........would understand that good people do not want to shoot anyone, even criminals....that is why they are not executing criminals when they defend themselves....they scare off the rapist, or robber, the rapist, robber or murderer surrenders and they wait for police, or the idiot is wounded ....you moron.....
> ...




Unarmed Child?

Wow....do you really think people see that in your post and not think you are an idiot?

Martin was close to 6 feet tall you moron.....he was living with his father because his mother couldn't control him anymore.....he was on the glide path to criminal offender.....and he violently attacked Zimmerman who had done nothing to him....you idiot.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jun 23, 2021)

2aguy said:


> Unarmed Child?
> 
> Wow....do you really think people see that in your post and not think you are an idiot?
> 
> Martin was close to 6 feet tall you moron.....he was living with his father because his mother couldn't control him anymore.....he was on the glide path to criminal offender.....and he violently attacked Zimmerman who had done nothing to him....you idiot.



If liberals didn't lie all the time, they'd have nothing to debate with.  It's like what happened in my city with Tamir Rice.  He was 5'9" and weighed nearly 200 lbs.  The only picture the family released of him was when he was younger, weighed about 120 lbs, and was short. 

Then he always uses the term "a toy" when the gun he pulled out was an exact replica of the real gun it was manufactured after, as if we are to believe he was shot pulling out a yo-yo or something. 

Here is the picture of the air soft gun he had and the real thing.






Some toy, huh?


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 23, 2021)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Unarmed Child?
> ...




I keep waiting for the day when I have to face an anti-gun extremist here on U.S. message board who has actual facts, truth and reality when it comes to arguing about gun control and the 2nd Amendment......they never, never have anything close to truth, facts or reality when they try to make their points......scratch a little bit at their argument and it crumbles as nothing more than emotion...emotion used to stampede uninformed Americans into giving them the power to ban and confiscate guns.

Even when they link to research?    My favorite is when they link to research about children who are killed by guns....then you barely take 5 seconds to look at the research and it turns out "Children," includes individuals up to the age of 21.....because gun deaths of children are majority young teens already trapped in gang life, getting shot over drug turf, disrespect on social media or girlfriends......


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jun 23, 2021)

2aguy said:


> I keep waiting for the day when I have to face an anti-gun extremist here on U.S. message board who has actual facts, truth and reality when it comes to arguing about gun control and the 2nd Amendment......they never, never have anything close to truth, facts or reality when they try to make their points......scratch a little bit at their argument and it crumbles as nothing more than emotion...emotion used to stampede uninformed Americans into giving them the power to ban and confiscate guns.
> 
> Even when they link to research? My favorite is when they link to research about children who are killed by guns....then you barely take 5 seconds to look at the research and it turns out "Children," includes individuals up to the age of 21.....because gun deaths of children are majority young teens already trapped in gang life, getting shot over drug turf, disrespect on social media or girlfriends......



Joe Bullshit tries to make the claim that CCW carriers are killing people all across the country.  You gave him statistics that we use our firearms over a million times a year--every year to stop crime, and very few involve anybody getting shot.  So how are we trigger happy NRA loving murderers when we shoot very few people?


----------



## woodwork201 (Jun 23, 2021)

2aguy said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


I was just curious; could you please provide some feedback on your opinion about JoeB131?


----------



## woodwork201 (Jun 23, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Sweden didn't have the violence 10 years ago, now the criminals there are shooting at each other with fully automatic military weapons and grenades...you idiot........criminal culture changes, it is not static you idiot....now that 3rd world immigrants are taking control of the drug trade in Sweden, they don't care about gun control laws in Sweden, you idiot.....
> ...



One big reason they have less violence is that their gangs aren't divided against each other, by race or by group, as they are in the US.  It's apples and oranges with the exception is that they're both fruits... and both countries have seen increases in crimes as they open up immigration and restrict guns from those who need them to defend themselves.


----------



## woodwork201 (Jun 23, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > You know, since you have been told over and over again, and anyone with even 1/4 of a brain, sadly that isn't you........would understand that good people do not want to shoot anyone, even criminals....that is why they are not executing criminals when they defend themselves....they scare off the rapist, or robber, the rapist, robber or murderer surrenders and they wait for police, or the idiot is wounded ....you moron.....
> ...



2aguy is right; you're just a liar.  You've seen the videos of the injuries to Zimmerman before he killed Martin in self-defense.  And Martin was not a child.  He was a 17 year old young man with the strength and power of a man, not of a child.  He was of an age of accountability where he was responsible for his own actions, knowing right from wrong, before he stalked Zimmerman, laid in wait, and attacked him,  pounding his head on the sidewalk.


----------



## woodwork201 (Jun 23, 2021)

2aguy said:


> I keep waiting for the day when I have to face an anti-gun extremist here on U.S. message board who has actual facts, truth and reality when it comes to arguing about gun control and the 2nd Amendment......they never, never have anything close to truth, facts or reality when they try to make their points......scratch a little bit at their argument and it crumbles as nothing more than emotion...emotion used to stampede uninformed Americans into giving them the power to ban and confiscate guns.
> 
> Even when they link to research?    My favorite is when they link to research about children who are killed by guns....then you barely take 5 seconds to look at the research and it turns out "Children," includes individuals up to the age of 21.....because gun deaths of children are majority young teens already trapped in gang life, getting shot over drug turf, disrespect on social media or girlfriends......



You can't face an anti-gun extremist with actual facts.  Actual facts do not support anti-gun extremism and anti-gun extremists know it; that's why they lie, use red-herrings, twist and turn logic inside out, and avoid actual debate on the value of arms to a free people.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 24, 2021)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> What did I tell you about trying to win an argument with lies? You leftists just never listen. Yeah, Zimmerman shot an unarmed child because he was buying candy. Keep believing that.



Naw, he shot him because he was a racist cop wannabe who got in over his head. 

That's kind of my point.  You gun wankers all want to think you are fucking Batman, but incidents where you actually use your guns in this way are actually kind of rare. If they weren't, you'd have a lot more dead bodies than we do.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 24, 2021)

2aguy said:


> Unarmed Child?
> 
> Wow....do you really think people see that in your post and not think you are an idiot?
> 
> Martin was close to 6 feet tall you moron.....he was living with his father because his mother couldn't control him anymore.....he was on the glide path to criminal offender.....and he violently attacked Zimmerman who had done nothing to him....you idiot.



You mean other than creepily follow him home?  

The point was, Martin hadn't commited any crimes.  I mean, I know you guys tried to claim he was because he had a screwdriver, but he had never been arrested for anything. 

Unlike Zimmerman, who was arrested several times before this and has been arrested several times since. 



2aguy said:


> I keep waiting for the day when I have to face an anti-gun extremist here on U.S. message board who has actual facts, truth and reality when it comes to arguing about gun control and the 2nd Amendment......they never, never have anything close to truth, facts or reality when they try to make their points......scratch a little bit at their argument and it crumbles as nothing more than emotion...emotion used to stampede uninformed Americans into giving them the power to ban and confiscate guns.



Blah, blah, blah... "I don't like Kellerman, because kellerman doesn't say what I want".  That's your level of fact arguing. 



woodwork201 said:


> 2aguy is right; you're just a liar. You've seen the videos of the injuries to Zimmerman before he killed Martin in self-defense. And Martin was not a child. He was a 17 year old young man with the strength and power of a man, not of a child. He was of an age of accountability where he was responsible for his own actions, knowing right from wrong, before he stalked Zimmerman, laid in wait, and attacked him, pounding his head on the sidewalk.



Wow, if you are a grown ass man getting your ass kicked by a 17 year old child, you probably should be staying home and not running around your gated community pretending you are Batman.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 24, 2021)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> Joe Bullshit tries to make the claim that CCW carriers are killing people all across the country. You gave him statistics that we use our firearms over a million times a year--every year to stop crime, and very few involve anybody getting shot. So how are we trigger happy NRA loving murderers when we shoot very few people?



1335 people have been killed by CCW carriers since 2007. 









						Concealed Carry Permit Holders Killed 1,335 Since 2007 | The Crime Report
					

Concealed handgun permit holders, sometimes regarded as the "good guys," are responsible for at least 1,335 deaths not involving self defense since 2007, according to a group's research.




					thecrimereport.org
				




Its' not a small amount.


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 24, 2021)

woodwork201 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...




He is an irrational nut job.....who has a psycho-sexual fixation on guns...it used to be whenever we would talk guns he would automatically start talking about penises.........he has only emotion and hate for arguments....


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 24, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Ray From Cleveland said:
> 
> 
> > Joe Bullshit tries to make the claim that CCW carriers are killing people all across the country. You gave him statistics that we use our firearms over a million times a year--every year to stop crime, and very few involve anybody getting shot. So how are we trigger happy NRA loving murderers when we shoot very few people?
> ...



And this is exactly the kind of crap I was talking about.....the fake research and false research you shit birds have to rely on because the facts, truth and reality do not support anything you believe....


Shit bird......your link

_*Concealed Carry Killers*_* includes detailed narratives for the majority of the 1,104 incidents,


the concealed carry permit holder either committed suicide (534),*


*Moron....almost half of their number is suicides......so what part of concealed carry has anything to do with suicides, you moron....

Then there is this........*

*The Violence Policy Center regularly puts out the claim that concealed handgun permit holders are a danger to themselves and others. Right now they claim that concealed handgun permits have been responsible for 636 deaths from the entire United States over almost seven years from May 2007 to March 2014. John Lott has pointed out errors in the VPC numbers for Florida, so here let’s take the errors in just one state Michigan.
— In the Michigan state reports on concealed handgun permit holders that are cited by the VPC, 185 people died of suicides during the four reports from 2007 through 2012. That is 29 percent of the purported 636 deaths for the entire United States that the Violence Policy Center attributes to permitted concealed handguns.*

*But there is the problem: If you look at page 2 in the latest report, you will see that the 28 suicides do not list a cause of death. 


The report merely notes that permit holders committed suicide.


 We don’t know if they committed suicide with a gun and if it was a gun, that it was the gun that they carried concealed. 



Given that the overwhelming majority of these suicides were presumably at home, like the vast majority of suicides, it isn’t even clear why a concealed handgun permit is relevant.*

*The suicide rate among permit holders in Michigan in 2012/13 (6.2 per 100,000 = ((28/450,000)*100,000) is about 62% lower than the suicide rate in the general adult population (see screen shot of suicide rate numbers from the CDC for adults in Michigan).*
-------
*The VPC claims that the Michigan State Police show in their five reports between 2007-08 and 2011-12 that murder cases were as follows: Pending 20 Convicted 14. In fact, if you look at the reports themselves you find:*



> *2007–08: Pending 5, Convicted 0
> 2008–09: Pending 0, Convicted 1
> 2009–10: Pending 1, Convicted 2
> 2010–11: Pending 5, Convicted 4
> ...


*In other words, during 2007–08, five cases were pending and there were no convictions. *



*The Violence Policy Center makes several fundamental mistakes. First, it can’t add simple numbers up correctly. 


While the VPC claims 20 pending cases and 14 convictions, the Michigan State Police report a total of 14 and 11 cases respectively.*

*If you include both pending and convicted cases for all these years, you are going to obviously double count cases.  Obviously, some pending cases end in convictions.  The problem is clearly even worse than that as many cases will be pending over multiple years.  


So if you have a news story on a case and then the case is pending for several years before the permit holder is found to have acted in justifiable self-defense, you will count one case as four bad cases when it shouldn’t have even been counted one time.
-----*

*The Violence Policy Center also includes cases of permit holders who were convicted of operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated and causing a death, but there is no evidence that the permit holder was carrying a concealed handgun at the time of the motorcycle accident (these cases were as follows: 2010-11 two cases, 2011-12 one case).*

*








						Massive errors in the Violence Policy Center’s “Concealed Carry Killers”
					

The Violence Policy Center regularly puts out the claim that concealed handgun permit holders are a danger to themselves and others. Right now they claim that concealed handgun permits have been re…




					crimeresearch.org
				



*


----------



## hadit (Jun 24, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> So two anti-choice nuts shoot at each other in broad daylight, and Dick Tiny thinks this is a good thing.


The woman who was being shot at thinks it's a good thing.


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 24, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Ray From Cleveland said:
> 
> 
> > Joe Bullshit tries to make the claim that CCW carriers are killing people all across the country. You gave him statistics that we use our firearms over a million times a year--every year to stop crime, and very few involve anybody getting shot. So how are we trigger happy NRA loving murderers when we shoot very few people?
> ...




Shit head......also from your link....

The VPC data....from May, 2017 to the time of the article....that is Oct. 2019.....

If the story took a few  weeks to write that 1,335..............only 1.104 are actually documented by the Violence Policy Center...of that, you idiot.....534 committed suicide.....

*In the vast majority of the 1,104 incidents documented in Concealed Carry Killers (995, or 90 percent), the concealed carry permit holder either committed suicide (534),*

*So first...you have the bait and switch...they first say 1,335 cases....then admit later to only 1,104 documented....then 534 are suicides where the concealed carry permit status has no bearing on the death...........then you have the cases that are still pending an actual outcome...which means innocent people are likely going through the process for having used their guns in self defense and will be found not guilty of a crime...you doofus...

And another thing........The first story in the link....you idiot....the man killed his wife and sons.....at home.....what bearing does concealed carry have to do with that?   *


----------



## hadit (Jun 24, 2021)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > So two anti-choice nuts shoot at each other in broad daylight, and Dick Tiny thinks this is a good thing.
> ...


He doesn't care very much about women.


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 24, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Ray From Cleveland said:
> 
> 
> > Joe Bullshit tries to make the claim that CCW carriers are killing people all across the country. You gave him statistics that we use our firearms over a million times a year--every year to stop crime, and very few involve anybody getting shot. So how are we trigger happy NRA loving murderers when we shoot very few people?
> ...




Moron........the Violence Policy Center has Triple counted the some of the same stories to get their number.....you idiot..

*Yet, despite having the annual state reports that already included both pending and convicted cases, the VPC then includes news stories from these individual years that involved suicides, murders, and even a case where no charges were filed. (Their news stories for other years don’t present the same problem.)
Troy Brake, 4 murders, September 29, 2008
Salam Shaker Zora, murder, January 23, 2009
Arlando Davis, one person killed, but no charges filed, May 24, 2009
Kevin Hoover, murder, July 21, 2009
Harlan Drake, 2 murders, September 11, 2009
Jamar Pinkney, Sr., murder, November 16, 2009
Tigh Croff, murder, December 27, 2009
Edward Bell, murder, May 12, 2010
Hayes Bacall, murder, July 2, 2010
Justin Luckhardt, suicide/murder, July 13, 2010
Blake Hullihen, murder, December 7, 2011*

*You thus have 12 cases for just Michigan that are triple counted.*

*This is exactly what I mean.....you idiots have nothing..........facts, truth and reality do not support what you say about guns, gun owners and self defense with guns......you and those you rely on for research either do shoddy/crappy work....or you just out and out lie......*


----------



## hadit (Jun 24, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Ray From Cleveland said:
> 
> 
> > Joe Bullshit tries to make the claim that CCW carriers are killing people all across the country. You gave him statistics that we use our firearms over a million times a year--every year to stop crime, and very few involve anybody getting shot. So how are we trigger happy NRA loving murderers when we shoot very few people?
> ...


Hmmm, let's see, 2007 to 2021 is 14 years. 1335 / 14 is 95 and change on average per year. I see that you combined multiple years into a single number to make it look bigger, but when compared to virtually any other cause of death, it's a small amount. 95 out of 350 million by any measure is a small amount.


----------



## woodwork201 (Jun 24, 2021)

2aguy said:


> He is an irrational nut job.....who has a psycho-sexual fixation on guns...it used to be whenever we would talk guns he would automatically start talking about penises.........he has only emotion and hate for arguments....



Haha... I was just joking, being facetious, because you were pretty clear with him already


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jun 24, 2021)

hadit said:


> Hmmm, let's see, 2007 to 2021 is 14 years. 1335 / 14 is 95 and change on average per year. I see that you combined multiple years into a single number to make it look bigger, but when compared to virtually any other cause of death, it's a small amount. 95 out of 350 million by any measure is a small amount.



Don't buy those lying sites.  They include people who were not under CCW laws when they killed somebody, it's just that they had a CCW.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jun 24, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> You mean other than creepily follow him home?
> 
> The point was, Martin hadn't commited any crimes. I mean, I know you guys tried to claim he was because he had a screwdriver, but he had never been arrested for anything.
> 
> Unlike Zimmerman, who was arrested several times before this and has been arrested several times since.



Which is BS.  Zimmerman had two domestic complaints that resulted in no charges or convictions because of no evidence.  When he was a kid, he and a friend of his were drunk at a bar.  An undercover officer had his friend pinned against a wall, and Zimmerman tried to push him away from his friend not knowing the guy was a cop. 

You must think we are all a bunch of idiots here or something.  I told you I'm a CCW holder, and I'm sure many here are.  We all know that the state will not issue anybody a license who has been convicted of any crime involving violence.  We also know that if a person commits such a crime after being granted a license, the state will revoke his or her CCW license.  



JoeB131 said:


> Wow, if you are a grown ass man getting your ass kicked by a 17 year old child, you probably should be staying home and not running around your gated community pretending you are Batman.



Zimmerman was nearly 30 when it happened.  It's not hard to imagine a lot of 17 year olds can take on a 30 year old guy, especially when they played football in school and the 30 year old not in good shape.  Martin was almost 6' tall and weighed 160 lbs.  Zimmerman was 5'7" and weighed 185 lbs, and not muscle either.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jun 24, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Naw, he shot him because he was a racist cop wannabe who got in over his head.



No, he shot him because he was in jeopardy of serious bodily harm or death as the law outlines.  Martin attacked him--not the other way around.  And don't tell me it was the other way around because I have the autopsy report right here in my Zimmerman folder where they determined Martin had no injuries outside two knuckles that were consistent with him hitting somebody or something.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jun 24, 2021)

2aguy said:


> I thought people never used guns for actual self defense.


This is a lie.

The thread premise fails as a strawman fallacy.

No one has claimed that no crimes are stopped by those carrying concealed.

The fact is that such cases are rare and do not have an overall effect of reducing violent crime.









						Study: Concealed Handgun Permits Don't Affect Crime Rate
					

Supporters insist that allowing people to legally carry concealed handguns reduces crime, but that has not been the result in at least four states that have tried it, including Texas, according to a newly published academic study.




					www.texastribune.org


----------



## woodwork201 (Jun 24, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Unarmed Child?
> ...



Zimmerman never touched or approached Martin.  Martin laid in wait and jumped on Zimmerman.  Last I heard, you don't get to break people's skull open on the sidewalk because they followed you - but, then, look at the Democratic response to crimes in the recent years; by their rules, Martin was having a peaceful discussion with Zimmerman.


----------



## woodwork201 (Jun 24, 2021)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > I thought people never used guns for actual self defense.
> ...


Like someone else said; the OP's story had an affect on one violent crime and saved the life of a woman.  Hopefully, she comes out of it all with a deeper appreciation for the value of human life than she had when she got up that morning.


----------



## bodecea (Jun 24, 2021)

JGalt said:


> There's a whole lot of irony in that story. Did she go ahead and kill the baby after the armed abortion protester saved her life?


If I have the only kidney that is a match to someone dying without one, am I legally required to give that kidney up?


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 24, 2021)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > I thought people never used guns for actual self defense.
> ...




You have one...by an anti-gun researcher...

https://crimeresearch.org/2020/11/do-right-to-carry-laws-reduce-violent-crime/

A detailed discussion of the National Research Council report is *available here*. We have reservations for many research papers on both sides of this debate, so inclusion here doesn’t mean that we think that the estimates were done correctly, but to give you information on the number of peer-reviewed academic papers that find a benefit from right-to-carry laws.


For the data errors in the one published paper by Aneja, Donohue, and Zhang that claims to find a bad effect from right-to-carry laws on aggravated assaults see this paper (the authors published an Erratum acknowledging errors in their piece here).
In addition, Aneja, Donohue, and Zhang have retracted their original claim that the my research could not be replicated. 

Their argument was that Aneja, Donohue, and Zhang could not replicate the replication work done by the National Research Council that had replicated my research. 
In an Erratum note published in October 2012 they concede: “Subsequent to the publication of this article, members of the NRC panel demonstrated to the authors that the results in question were replicable if the authors used the data and statistical models described in Chapter 6 of the NRC (2004) report.”
UPDATED: Another recent paper by Charles D. Phillips, Obioma Nwaiwu, Szu-hsuan Lin, Rachel Edwards, Sara Imanpour, and Robert Ohsfeldt in the Journal of Criminology is discussed here.
The Siegel et al paper in the American Journal of Public Health, “Easiness of Legal Access to Concealed Firearm Permits and Homicide Rates in the United States” is *discussed here*.
Another unpublished paper by Donohue is discussed here and here.
For those interested in seeing our debate with _Scientific American_ over whether some of the studies listed below should be included in our list, please see the discussion available here.

_Crime, Deterrence, and Right-to-Carry Concealed Handguns, John R. Lott, Jr. and David B. Mustard, Journal of Legal Studies, 1997_

_The Effect of Concealed Weapons Laws: An Extreme Bound Analysis by William Alan Bartley and Mark A Cohen, published in Economic Inquiry, April 1998_ (Copy available here)

The Concealed‐Handgun Debate, John R. Lott, Jr., Journal of Legal Studies, January 1998

_Criminal Deterrence, Geographic Spillovers, and Right-to-Carry Concealed Handguns by Stephen Bronars and John R. Lott, Jr., American Economic Review, May 1998_

_The Impact of Gun Laws on Police Deaths by David Mustard, published in the Journal of Law and Economics, October 2001_

_Privately Produced General Deterrence By BRUCE L. BENSON AND BRENT D. MAST, Journal of Law and Economics, October 2001_

_Does the Right to Carry Concealed Handguns Deter Countable Crimes? Only a Count Analysis Can Say By FLORENZ PLASSMANN AND T. NICOLAUS TIDEMAN,  Journal of Law and Economics, October 2001_

_Testing for the Effects of Concealed Weapons Laws: Specification Errors and Robustness By CARLISLE E. MOODY,  Journal of Law and Economics, October 2001_

_Right-to-Carry Concealed Weapon Laws and Homicide in Large U.S. Counties: The Effect on Weapon Types, Victim Characteristics, and Victim-Offender Relationships By DAVID E. OLSON AND MICHAEL D. MALTZ,  Journal of Law and Economics, October 2001_

_Safe-Storage Gun Laws: Accidental Deaths, Suicides, and Crime By JOHN R. LOTT, JR., AND JOHN E. WHITLEY, Journal of Law and Economics, October 2001 — see Table 3 on page 679_

_Confirming More Guns, Less Crime by Florenz Plassmann and John Whitley, published in the Stanford Law Review, 2003_

_Measurement Error in County-Level UCR Data_ by John R. Lott, Jr. and John Whitley, published in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology, June 2003, Volume 19, Issue 2, pp 185-198 

_Using Placebo Laws to Test “More Guns, Less Crime” by Eric Helland and Alexander Tabarrok, published in Advances in Economic Analysis and Policy, 4 (1): Article 1, 2004_

Abortion and Crime: Unwanted children and out-of-wedlock births, John R. Lott, Jr and John Whitley, October 2006.– page 14, Table 2.

_The Impact of Banning Juvenile Gun Possession By Thomas B. Marvell,  Journal of Law and Economics, October 2001 — page 707, fn. 29_

_Multiple Victim Public Shootings, Bombings, and Right-to-Carry Concealed Handgun Laws: Contrasting Private and Public Law Enforcement By John R. Lott, Jr. and William Landes, published in The Bias Against Guns_

_More Readers of Gun Magazines, But Not More Crimes by Florenz Plassmann and John R. Lott, Jr. — many places in the text._

“More Guns, Less Crime” by John R Lott, Jr. (University of Chicago Press, 2010, 3rd edition).

_“The Debate on Shall-Issue Laws” by Carlisle e. Moody, Thomas B. Marvell, Paul R Zimmerman, and Fasil Alemante published in Review of Economics & Finance, 2014_

_“An examination of the effects of concealed weapons laws and assault weapons bans on state-level murder rates” by Mark Giusa published in Applied Economics Letters, Volume 21, Issue 4, 2014_

_“The Debate on Shall-Issue Laws” by Carlisle e. Moody and Thomas B. Marvell, published in Econ Journal Watch, volume 5, number 3, September 2008 It is also available here.._

_“The Debate on Shall Issue Laws, Continued” by Carlisle e. Moody and Thomas B. Marvell, published in Econ Journal Watch, Volume 6, Number 2 May 2009 _

_“Did John Lott Provide Bad Data to the NRC? A Note on Aneja, Donohue, and Zhang” by Carlisle e. Moody, John R Lott, Jr, and Thomas B. Marvell, published in Econ Journal Watch, Volume 10, Number 1, January 2013_

“On the Choice of Control Variables in the Crime Equation” by Carlisle E. Moody and Thomas B. Marvell, Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Volume 72, Issue 5, pages 696–715, October 2010.

“The Impact of Right-to-Carry Laws: A Critique of the 2014 Version of Aneja, Donohue, and Zhang,”  Carlisle E. Moody and Thomas B. Marvell, Econ Journal Watch, January 2018: 51-66.

“
“Do Right to Carry Laws Increase Violent Crime? A Comment on Donohue, Aneja, and Weber,” Carlisle E. Moody and Thomas B. Marvell, Econ Journal Watch, Volume 16, Number 1, March 2019: 84-96.

_More Guns, Less Crime: A Response to Ayres and Donohue’s 1999 book review in the American Law and Economics Review by John R. Lott, Jr._

_Right-to-Carry Laws and Violent Crime Revisited: Clustering, Measurement Error, and State-by-State Break downs by John R. Lott, Jr._


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 24, 2021)

2aguy said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...





C_Clayton_Jones said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > I thought people never used guns for actual self defense.
> ...




Some of the papers with quotes....




> Summary and Conclusion Many articles have been published finding that shall-issue laws reduce crime. Only one article, by Ayres and Donohue who employ a model that combines a dummy variable with a post-law trend, claims to find that shall-issue laws increase crime. However, the only way that they can produce the result that shall-issue laws increase crime is to confine the span of analysis to five years. We show, using their own estimates, that if they had extended their analysis by one more year, they would have concluded that these laws reduce crime. Since most states with shallissue laws have had these laws on the books for more than five years, and the law will presumably remain on the books for some time, the only relevant analysis extends beyond five years. We extend their analysis by adding three more years of data, control for the effects of crack cocaine, control for dynamic effects, and correct the standard errors for clustering. We find that there is an initial increase in crime due to passage of the shall-issue law that is dwarfed over time by the decrease in crime associated with the post-law trend. These results are very similar to those of Ayres and Donohue, properly interpreted. The modified Ayres and Donohue model finds that shall-issue laws significantly reduce murder and burglary across all the adopting states.
> 
> http://www.econjournalwatch.org/pdf/MoodyMarvellCommentSeptember2008.pdf
> ======
> ...



Taking apart ayre and donahue one....


_“The Debate on Shall-Issue Laws” by Carlisle e. Moody and Thomas B. Marvell, published in Econ Journal Watch, volume 5, number 3, September 2008 It is also available here..
_

_Abstract_​_“Shall-issue” laws require authorities to issue concealed-weapons permits to anyone who applies, unless the applicant has a criminal record or a history of mental illness. A large number of studies indicate that shall-issue laws reduce crime. Only one study, an influential paper in the Stanford Law Review (2003) by Ian Ayres and John J. Donohue iii, implies that these laws lead to an increase in crime. We apply an improved version of the Ayres and Donohue method to a more extensive data set. Our analysis, as well as Ayres and Donohue’s when projected beyond a five-year span, indicates that shall-issue laws decrease crime and the costs of crime. Purists in statistical analysis object with some cause to some of methods employed both by Ayres and Donohue and by us. But our paper upgrades Ayres and Donohue, so, until the next study comes along, our paper should neutralize Ayres and Donohue’s “more guns, more crime” conclusion.
Summary and Conclusion Many articles have been published finding that shall-issue laws reduce crime. Only one article, by Ayres and Donohue who employ a model that combines a dummy variable with a post-law trend, claims to find that shall-issue laws increase crime. However, the only way that they can produce the result that shall-issue laws increase crime is to confine the span of analysis to five years. We show, using their own estimates, that if they had extended their analysis by one more year, they would have concluded that these laws reduce crime. Since most states with shallissue laws have had these laws on the books for more than five years, and the law will presumably remain on the books for some time, the only relevant analysis extends beyond five years. We extend their analysis by adding three more years of data, control for the effects of crack cocaine, control for dynamic effects, and correct the standard errors for clustering. We find that there is an initial increase in crime due to passage of the shall-issue law that is dwarfed over time by the decrease in crime associated with the post-law trend. These results are very similar to those of Ayres and Donohue, properly interpreted. The modified Ayres and Donohue model finds that shall-issue laws significantly reduce murder and burglary across all the adopting states. These laws appear to significantly increase assault, and have no net effect on rape, robbery, larceny, or auto theft. However, in the long run only the trend coefficients matter. We estimate a net benefit of $450 million per year as a result of the passage of these laws. We also estimate that, up through 2000, there was a cumulative overall net benefit of these laws of $28 billion since their passage. We think that there is credible statistical evidence that these laws lower the costs of crime. But at the very least, the present study should neutralize any “more guns, more crime” thinking based on Ayres and Donohue’s work in the Stanford Law Review. We acknowledge that, especially in light of the methodological issues of the literature in general, the magnitudes derived from our analysis of crime statistics and the supposed costs of crime might be dwarfed by other considerations in judging the policy issue. Some might contend that allowing individuals to carry a concealed weapon is a moral or cultural bad. Others might contend that greater liberty is a moral or cultural good. All we are confident in saying is that the evidence, such as it is, seems to support the hypothesis that the shall-issue law is generally beneficial with respect to its overall long run effect on crime._

The Debate on Shall-Issue Laws · Econ Journal Watch : shall-issue, crime, handguns, concealed weapons


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 25, 2021)

2aguy said:


> He is an irrational nut job.....who has a psycho-sexual fixation on guns...it used to be whenever we would talk guns he would automatically start talking about penises.........he has only emotion and hate for arguments...



Naw, man, pointing out a gun is a compensation for your inadequacies is just an observation.




hadit said:


> The woman who was being shot at thinks it's a good thing.



Getting caught in a gun fight between your stalker ex-boyfriend and some religious nut who wants to take away your right to choose isn't a good thing.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 25, 2021)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> If liberals didn't lie all the time, they'd have nothing to debate with. It's like what happened in my city with Tamir Rice. He was 5'9" and weighed nearly 200 lbs. The only picture the family released of him was when he was younger, weighed about 120 lbs, and was short.



Yes, mysteriously, there are no pictures of Tamir when he was 12.  Not his school, not his friends.  He was more elusive than Bigfoot.  So people couldn't see what a scary 12 year old he was.  

Oh, scary 12 year old.  No wonder Officer Weepy shot him. 

Ignore that cop was fired from another police department and four other agencies rejected him. Nope, that child playing with a toy was sooo scary. 



hadit said:


> Hmmm, let's see, 2007 to 2021 is 14 years. 1335 / 14 is 95 and change on average per year. I see that you combined multiple years into a single number to make it look bigger, but when compared to virtually any other cause of death, it's a small amount. 95 out of 350 million by any measure is a small amount.



One is too many.   The notion that letting nuts walk around with guns is a good thing.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 25, 2021)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> Which is BS. Zimmerman had two domestic complaints that resulted in no charges or convictions because of no evidence. When he was a kid, he and a friend of his were drunk at a bar. An undercover officer had his friend pinned against a wall, and Zimmerman tried to push him away from his friend not knowing the guy was a cop.



Wow, beating up women and fighting with cops.  Sounds like a model citizen, just the kind we want running around a gated community playing Batman. 



Ray From Cleveland said:


> You must think we are all a bunch of idiots here or something. I told you I'm a CCW holder, and I'm sure many here are. We all know that the state will not issue anybody a license who has been convicted of any crime involving violence. We also know that if a person commits such a crime after being granted a license, the state will revoke his or her CCW license.



Again, Ray, every one of your angry posts convince me you are a hate crime looking for a place to happen. 

And my guess is much like every other gun nut who shoots up something, we'll ask, "How was that guy able to get a gun. Look at all the crazy stuff he posted on USMB!"


----------



## hadit (Jun 25, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > He is an irrational nut job.....who has a psycho-sexual fixation on guns...it used to be whenever we would talk guns he would automatically start talking about penises.........he has only emotion and hate for arguments...
> ...


And when you're wrong, it's not an observation, it's a fabrication.


JoeB131 said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> > The woman who was being shot at thinks it's a good thing.
> ...


She walked away without harm. That is a good thing. You do realize, don't you, that you are trying to make the case that it would have been better for her to have no one there to stop the guy from killing her. That is your bottom line, and demonstrates why I've said multiple times that you don't really like women all that much.


----------



## hadit (Jun 25, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Ray From Cleveland said:
> 
> 
> > If liberals didn't lie all the time, they'd have nothing to debate with. It's like what happened in my city with Tamir Rice. He was 5'9" and weighed nearly 200 lbs. The only picture the family released of him was when he was younger, weighed about 120 lbs, and was short.
> ...


See, here's where the wheels fall off your tricycle. CCW permit holders have demonstrated that they are not nuts by giving proof of their identity, jumping through all the hoops and taking all the required training to obtain the permit. There are millions of them carrying safely every day. 

Are you willing to force all motor vehicles to travel at less than 35 mph because "one is too many" deaths on the highways every year, or is your freedom to compensate for your shortcomings by driving fast in a loud car more important? See how that works?


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jun 25, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Wow, beating up women and fighting with cops. Sounds like a model citizen, just the kind we want running around a gated community playing Batman.



No evidence of beating up women, and the officer told the judge Zimmerman was just drunk and even laughed about it.  It was reduced to some misdemeanor penalty of some kind.



JoeB131 said:


> Again, Ray, every one of your angry posts convince me you are a hate crime looking for a place to happen.
> 
> And my guess is much like every other gun nut who shoots up something, we'll ask, "How was that guy able to get a gun. Look at all the crazy stuff he posted on USMB!"



Because crazy stuff to you is anything you disagree with.  Go back to the USSR.  Here Americans are provided with the right to free speech and no retaliation by the government because of it.  In fact it's written down in a document called the US Constitution, something I know you hate. That's why we only penalize people for their actions and not their words.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jun 25, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Yes, mysteriously, there are no pictures of Tamir when he was 12. Not his school, not his friends. He was more elusive than Bigfoot. So people couldn't see what a scary 12 year old he was.
> 
> Oh, scary 12 year old. No wonder Officer Weepy shot him.
> 
> Ignore that cop was fired from another police department and four other agencies rejected him. Nope, that child playing with a toy was sooo scary.



Oh please.  You've been fired from more jobs than officer Loehmann ever has.  

The media doesn't want any pictures of what Martin or Rice looked like when they were shot, so they are not going out of their way to find them.  It destroys their narrative, and that is for the sheep to think these were harmless little children who were shot dusting themselves off after getting out of the sandbox.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 25, 2021)

hadit said:


> And when you're wrong, it's not an observation, it's a fabrication.



Naw, actually, you can kind of tell who the compensators are... the people who think that their gun makes up for their helplessness and inadequacies.  



hadit said:


> See, here's where the wheels fall off your tricycle. CCW permit holders have demonstrated that they are not nuts by giving proof of their identity, jumping through all the hoops and taking all the required training to obtain the permit. There are millions of them carrying safely every day.



Except for the 1300 or so who've killed people... 



hadit said:


> She walked away without harm. That is a good thing. You do realize, don't you, that you are trying to make the case that it would have been better for her to have no one there to stop the guy from killing her. That is your bottom line, and demonstrates why I've said multiple times that you don't really like women all that much.



Um, no, guy, in my ideal world, the stalker boyfriend wouldn't have had a gun, and the religious zealot in the crowd wouldn't have had a gun. Instead, you had a situation where innocent people COULD have been shot. 



hadit said:


> Are you willing to force all motor vehicles to travel at less than 35 mph because "one is too many" deaths on the highways every year, or is your freedom to compensate for your shortcomings by driving fast in a loud car more important? See how that works?



Uh, here's the thing.  If we banned all cars... frankly, it would completely wreck our society. Our society is built around the ability to quickly travel across long distances, compared to 100 years ago, where people lived and worked within walking distance. 

If we got rid of guns... it would actually IMPROVE our society.  Less crime, less violence, less suicide..


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 25, 2021)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> No evidence of beating up women, and the officer told the judge Zimmerman was just drunk and even laughed about it. It was reduced to some misdemeanor penalty of some kind.



And you guys whine when most cases are cleared that way.    Look, man, I know that Zimmerman is in your pantheons of guys who did what you don't have the balls to do...  but he's a seriously messed up dude, who never should have been playing Batman while hopped up on meds... which he was. 



Ray From Cleveland said:


> Because crazy stuff to you is anything you disagree with. Go back to the USSR. Here Americans are provided with the right to free speech and no retaliation by the government because of it. In fact it's written down in a document called the US Constitution, something I know you hate. That's why we only penalize people for their actions and not their words.



Uh, no buddy, I promise you, if you committed a hate crime tomorrow, everything you posted here would be posted in big fonts to make you look crazy... and it wouldn't be much of an effort. 

"He once compared black people to Racoons".  



Ray From Cleveland said:


> Oh please. You've been fired from more jobs than officer Loehmann ever has.
> 
> The media doesn't want any pictures of what Martin or Rice looked like when they were shot, so they are not going out of their way to find them. It destroys their narrative, and that is for the sheep to think these were harmless little children who were shot dusting themselves off after getting out of the sandbox.



Are you proporting that picture of a kid smoking is Rice?  Because it isn't.  

The reality is, if there was a scary picture of a 12 year old, it would ALL OVER FOX NEWS.  But funny thing. It isn't.


----------



## hadit (Jun 25, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> > And when you're wrong, it's not an observation, it's a fabrication.
> ...


Actually, in this case, your gun/penis obsession is easy to spot.


JoeB131 said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> > See, here's where the wheels fall off your tricycle. CCW permit holders have demonstrated that they are not nuts by giving proof of their identity, jumping through all the hoops and taking all the required training to obtain the permit. There are millions of them carrying safely every day.
> ...


And as I pointed out, 95 and change per year is a very small number.


JoeB131 said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> > She walked away without harm. That is a good thing. You do realize, don't you, that you are trying to make the case that it would have been better for her to have no one there to stop the guy from killing her. That is your bottom line, and demonstrates why I've said multiple times that you don't really like women all that much.
> ...


Your ideal world doesn't exist, and would be impossible to attain in America. So, like I said, you would prefer the woman become a statistic for your gun/penis obsession to use.


JoeB131 said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> > Are you willing to force all motor vehicles to travel at less than 35 mph because "one is too many" deaths on the highways every year, or is your freedom to compensate for your shortcomings by driving fast in a loud car more important? See how that works?
> ...


Okay, so you are perfectly willing to put a price tag on human life, just like everyone else. In your case, you want to be able to drive your compensator fast and loud more than you want tens of thousands of lives saved. Just admit that's the price of a human life to you.


----------



## hadit (Jun 25, 2021)

hadit said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > hadit said:
> ...


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 25, 2021)

hadit said:


> And as I pointed out, 95 and change per year is a very small number.



Not really.  Not if it was someone you cared about getting shot by a nut someone let get a gun. 



hadit said:


> Okay, so you are perfectly willing to put a price tag on human life, just like everyone else. In your case, you want to be able to drive your compensator fast and loud more than you want tens of thousands of lives saved. Just admit that's the price of a human life to you.



Actually, I rarely exceed the speed limit. I think in something like 35 years of driving, I've gotten all of one speeding ticket.   I doubt I've racked up 10 moving violations in my whole driving career.  

What I have done- driven to work safely and quietly, because I need to drive to get to work, and maybe the occasional vacation. 

Point is, we could get rid of all the cars, if we put in extensive public transportation, and it would still be a pain to get anywhere. (I didn't get a driver's license until I was 25, and relied on public trans to get to work and school) 



hadit said:


> Your ideal world doesn't exist, and would be impossible to attain in America.



Why is America special?  I mean, yeah, we are kind of "Special" in the short bus need a helmet kind of way.  But other countries ban private gun ownership, or limit it to just responsible people. They don't have anywhere near our levels of crime. 

Other countries have to publish brochures on "How Not to get shot when visiting America".  You know, like that Japanese kid who got shot because he got the wrong address while going to a Halloween party with his AMerican friends. 









						Shooting of Yoshihiro Hattori - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jun 25, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> And you guys whine when most cases are cleared that way. Look, man, I know that Zimmerman is in your pantheons of guys who did what you don't have the balls to do... but he's a seriously messed up dude, who never should have been playing Batman while hopped up on meds... which he was.



He was attacked by an animal.  If he didn't shoot Martin and the cops pulled up, Martin would have been charged with felonious assault and tried as an adult.  He probably would have served several years in prison which is where he should have been in the first place. 



JoeB131 said:


> Uh, no buddy, I promise you, if you committed a hate crime tomorrow, everything you posted here would be posted in big fonts to make you look crazy... and it wouldn't be much of an effort.
> 
> "He once compared black people to Racoons".



Nobody ever compared black people to raccoons.  What did I tell you about trying to debate using lies?  You never learn. 



JoeB131 said:


> Are you proporting that picture of a kid smoking is Rice? Because it isn't.
> 
> The reality is, if there was a scary picture of a 12 year old, it would ALL OVER FOX NEWS. But funny thing. It isn't.



What do you mean it isn't a picture of him?  Why is that, because your MSM who was hoping for riots over the matter didn't post it?  Facebook pictures of Martin are all over the internet.  They didn't scrub it fast enough.  

If anybody thinks that the picture of Rice was a 5'7" and 195 pound kid needs to have their head or eyes examined, or both.


----------



## hadit (Jun 25, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> > And as I pointed out, 95 and change per year is a very small number.
> ...


Kind of like this woman is glad someone was there with a gun to chase off the guy who was trying to kill her. If he didn't have a gun, he could have come at her with a knife, same outcome, except if a passerby was armed with a knife, someone would have gotten cut.


JoeB131 said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> > Okay, so you are perfectly willing to put a price tag on human life, just like everyone else. In your case, you want to be able to drive your compensator fast and loud more than you want tens of thousands of lives saved. Just admit that's the price of a human life to you.
> ...


But you would not accept lowering the speed limit to a level that would prevent close to 100% of the highway deaths, because you're willing to trade human life for the privilege of driving fast. Speed is the value you place on life.


JoeB131 said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> > Your ideal world doesn't exist, and would be impossible to attain in America.
> ...


America is special for one very practical reason. There are simply far too many guns in circulation right now that the government has no knowledge of who has what and where they are to gather them all up in a short enough period of time that we wouldn't see a massive spike in gun crime as criminals know that the law abiding won't be armed anywhere. Then you're going to turn millions of otherwise law abiding Americans into criminals for simply refusing to let the 2nd Amendment end because liberals think it's icky. Then you would spark a whole new shooting war as people will violently remove from office the treasonous twits that violated the Constitution.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 26, 2021)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> He was attacked by an animal. If he didn't shoot Martin and the cops pulled up, Martin would have been charged with felonious assault and tried as an adult. He probably would have served several years in prison which is where he should have been in the first place.



Actually, if the cops pulled up, Martin could have said, "This weird guy was stalking me on the way back to my apartment."   And he would have been fine. 



Ray From Cleveland said:


> Nobody ever compared black people to raccoons. What did I tell you about trying to debate using lies? You never learn.



You've used that metaphor several times.  Not to mention comparing them to spoiled milk and several other unpleasant analogies you've used to dehumanize them. 



Ray From Cleveland said:


> What do you mean it isn't a picture of him? Why is that, because your MSM who was hoping for riots over the matter didn't post it? Facebook pictures of Martin are all over the internet. They didn't scrub it fast enough.



Um, yeah, if the worst you could come up with was "Here's a picture of him smoking", this isn't the fucking 1950's, guy.  Smoking is no longer considered a sign of juvenile deliquency.  

Where are the pictures of 12 year old Tamir Rice looking menacing... 

Oh, there aren't any.  because he was a 12 year old kid.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 26, 2021)

hadit said:


> Kind of like this woman is glad someone was there with a gun to chase off the guy who was trying to kill her. If he didn't have a gun, he could have come at her with a knife, same outcome, except if a passerby was armed with a knife, someone would have gotten cut.



Except he wasn't trying to kill her, he was trying to stop her from aborting his kid. 



hadit said:


> But you would not accept lowering the speed limit to a level that would prevent close to 100% of the highway deaths, because you're willing to trade human life for the privilege of driving fast. Speed is the value you place on life.



Except there isn't a whole lot of evidence that lower speed limits save that many lives.  









						Motor vehicle fatality rate in U.S. by year - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				




The US imposed a national 55 MPH limit in 1974, not because they wanted to save lives, but because they wanted to save gas.  In fact the death rate didn't go down, it went up slightly for the next 4 years.  They finally revoked this silly law in 1995, and this amazing thing happened when teh Speed limit went back up to 65 and 70.   The fatality rate didn't go up. It in fact went down the next five years. 

In fact, it has been on an almost continuous decline since 1996. 

Now, since you brought it up, the government HAS mandated a lot of safety features in cars. Air bags, seat belt laws, etc.  And unlike the gun industry, the auto industry has not only gone along with this, they've actually gotten ahead of the game by introducing these things.  

Of course, here's the  key thing. Cars aren't designed to kill people.  While the Auto Industry to it's credit has been in a race to make their products safer, killing a lot of crash test dummies in the process, the gun industry has been upping the ante to put more dangerous guns out there and putting them in the hands of increasingly dangerous people.   



hadit said:


> America is special for one very practical reason. There are simply far too many guns in circulation right now that the government has no knowledge of who has what and where they are to gather them all up in a short enough period of time that we wouldn't see a massive spike in gun crime as criminals know that the law abiding won't be armed anywhere. Then you're going to turn millions of otherwise law abiding Americans into criminals for simply refusing to let the 2nd Amendment end because liberals think it's icky. Then you would spark a whole new shooting war as people will violently remove from office the treasonous twits that violated the Constitution.



Um, yeah, if the right wing nuts started shooting politicians, you'd see the ATF beefed up so fast it would make the Gestapo look like the Girl Scouts.   Get real.  Far more Americans are killed by household members than "criminals"... no matter how much NRA Spooge 2TinyGuy puts on here.


----------



## hadit (Jun 26, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> > Kind of like this woman is glad someone was there with a gun to chase off the guy who was trying to kill her. If he didn't have a gun, he could have come at her with a knife, same outcome, except if a passerby was armed with a knife, someone would have gotten cut.
> ...



And you know this, how? He had a gun. That alone, according to you, makes him a penis obsessed nutcase out to kill as many as possible. Now you're making excuses for criminals but throw the book at law abiding citizens. Okay then.


JoeB131 said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> > But you would not accept lowering the speed limit to a level that would prevent close to 100% of the highway deaths, because you're willing to trade human life for the privilege of driving fast. Speed is the value you place on life.
> ...


You're not thinking broad enough. I'm talking about slowing cars down to slightly faster than horse speed. Slow every vehicle down to 25 mph with passing burst mode up to 35 mph and you'd virtually eliminate highway deaths. Like I said, you're willing to trade tens of thousands of lives every year so you can drive fast enough to kill. As for gun safety, all your "safety" measures would make it harder to use a gun in situations where they're really needed, ala when there's little to no time to get through the safety features. Car safety features don't interfere with the operation of the car. You can still get in and start driving a car as fast as you could in 1955.


JoeB131 said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> > America is special for one very practical reason. There are simply far too many guns in circulation right now that the government has no knowledge of who has what and where they are to gather them all up in a short enough period of time that we wouldn't see a massive spike in gun crime as criminals know that the law abiding won't be armed anywhere. Then you're going to turn millions of otherwise law abiding Americans into criminals for simply refusing to let the 2nd Amendment end because liberals think it's icky. Then you would spark a whole new shooting war as people will violently remove from office the treasonous twits that violated the Constitution.
> ...


Oh, so the government cares about liberal politicians getting shot, just not Republicans. Heck, you can shoot at a bunch of them practicing for a ball game and nothing's going to change. But hey, when the mythical right wing nut shoots at democrats you bet we'll get right on it. I've noticed that, while he posts evidence to back up what he says, you post nothing beyond "Nuh-uh".


----------



## woodwork201 (Jun 26, 2021)

You continue to avoid the discussion and attack the messenger.  That's just more proof that you know that gun control will not reduce crime and guns are not the cause of crime.  When you can't win on logic or facts, attack the messenger.


----------



## woodwork201 (Jun 26, 2021)

hadit said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > hadit said:
> ...


Almost without exception, the only extremists shooting politicians in my life time, and I'm an old guy, have been left-wing nuts.


----------



## woodwork201 (Jun 26, 2021)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > And you guys whine when most cases are cleared that way. Look, man, I know that Zimmerman is in your pantheons of guys who did what you don't have the balls to do... but he's a seriously messed up dude, who never should have been playing Batman while hopped up on meds... which he was.
> ...


Actually, had Zimmerman not killed Martin, Martin would not have been charged with assault; he would likely have had a murder charge.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 27, 2021)

hadit said:


> And you know this, how? He had a gun. That alone, according to you, makes him a penis obsessed nutcase out to kill as many as possible. Now you're making excuses for criminals but throw the book at law abiding citizens. Okay then.



If he wanted to kill her, he could have done that at home.  Instead he hid in her trunk, and popped out when she stopped at the abortion clinic. 



hadit said:


> You're not thinking broad enough. I'm talking about slowing cars down to slightly faster than horse speed. Slow every vehicle down to 25 mph with passing burst mode up to 35 mph and you'd virtually eliminate highway deaths. Like I said, you're willing to trade tens of thousands of lives every year so you can drive fast enough to kill. As for gun safety, all your "safety" measures would make it harder to use a gun in situations where they're really needed, ala when there's little to no time to get through the safety features. Car safety features don't interfere with the operation of the car. You can still get in and start driving a car as fast as you could in 1955.



Except it would take you forever to get anywhere, that's the thing.  Your hour commute turns into an hour and a half.  Germany has Autobahns with no speed limits, they are just fine.  

There are no real situations where a gun is "needed".  Most industrialized countries don't let their citizens have guns, and they are just fine. 




hadit said:


> Oh, so the government cares about liberal politicians getting shot, just not Republicans. Heck, you can shoot at a bunch of them practicing for a ball game and nothing's going to change. But hey, when the mythical right wing nut shoots at democrats you bet we'll get right on it. I've noticed that, while he posts evidence to back up what he says, you post nothing beyond "Nuh-uh".



While there was a bit of irony about Grand Wizard SKKKalise being shot by a gun nut and being saved by a lesbian black security officer, even that wouldn't cause the GOP to stand up to the NRA>

Now, if a lot of them got killed and it happened all the time, the ones who survived would certainly love gun control.

On the day that SKKKalise was defining irony, a UPS worker went nuts and shot four of his coworkers.  You probably never heard about that one. 









						UPS worker who threatened mass shooting had 20,000 rounds of ammunition, small arsenal, say police
					

A California UPS worker who threatened to carry out a mass shooting at his employer’s premises had multiple tactical rifles and 20,000 rounds of ammunition at his home.




					abcnews.go.com
				









Again, how was THIS guy able to get a gun?


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jun 27, 2021)

woodwork201 said:


> You continue to avoid the discussion and attack the messenger.  That's just more proof that you know that gun control will not reduce crime and guns are not the cause of crime.  When you can't win on logic or facts, attack the messenger.



Even they can't be stupid enough to not know that.  The left are puppets.  They only act the way their strings are pulled. 

Democrat politicians want us to think they're stupid, but they're really not.  They know if they could make guns illegal or virtually impossible to get, we would end up with a society where only the police and criminals have the guns because the criminals will always find a way to get them.  This is the society they want to create in the US, because once we have no ability to protect ourselves from criminals with guns, crime will spiral out of control which is their goal.  My evidence is what's happening in commie cities today where violent crimes and murders are in double digit increases compared to last year since they stood behind weakening our police force, de-funding their police, and making severe restrictions like they did in Chicago where officers can no longer engage in foot pursuits.  They have to call into their supervisor, get permission to chase a suspect, and by then, the culprit has a six block head start.  Criminals really celebrate commies like that Mayor Lighthead.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 27, 2021)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> Democrat politicians want us to think they're stupid, but they're really not. They know if they could make guns illegal or virtually impossible to get, we would end up with a society where only the police and criminals have the guns because the criminals will always find a way to get them. This is the society they want to create in the US, because once we have no ability to protect ourselves from criminals with guns, crime will spiral out of control which is their goal. My evidence is what's happening in commie cities today where violent crimes and murders are in double digit increases compared to last year since they stood behind weakening our police force, de-funding their police, and making severe restrictions like they did in Chicago where officers can no longer engage in foot pursuits. They have to call into their supervisor, get permission to chase a suspect, and by then, the culprit has a six block head start. Criminals really celebrate commies like that Mayor Lighthead.



Here's the thing. If we limited the ownership of guns to just the criminals and cops, we'd drop the death rate from guns considerably. 

Because 80% of our 15,000 gun homicides are people who are known to each other, we'd take 12000 homicides out of the mix along with 23,000 suicides and 500 accidents.    

So that means we go from 39,000 gun deaths a year to a mere 3000.   

Progress!!!   

But it gets better.  Once criminals know it's a lot harder to get guns, and cops can spend more time on criminal intradiction because they aren't cleaning up suicides and domestic homicides, we can probably get that number down, too.  We'd also have less cases of cops shooting civilians, because then the cops can't use the excuse "Well, I thought that toy was a real gun!!!"  or "He was reaching for his cell phone and I thought it was a gun" or "Oops, how did that gun get into his hand after I shot him."


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jun 27, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Actually, if the cops pulled up, Martin could have said, "This weird guy was stalking me on the way back to my apartment." And he would have been fine.



Your ignorance of the law is astounding.  Nobody has the right to physically attack another person that was "stalking' them, even though that was not the case.  If I go for a walk, and half-way down the street another person decides to do the same and is behind me, there is no law that permits me to beat the shit out of them, giving them a broken nose, two black eyes, and a laceration to the back of their head.  There is no law against following another person. 

A person is only legally allowed to use physical violence in defense if they are physically attacked.  The lowlife would have been arrested and charged with felonious assault and tried like an adult.




JoeB131 said:


> You've used that metaphor several times. Not to mention comparing them to spoiled milk and several other unpleasant analogies you've used to dehumanize them.



met·a·phor| ˈmedəˌfôr, ˈmedəˌfər | noun 

a figure of speech in which a word or phrase is applied to an object or action to which it is not literally applicable: her poetry depends on suggestion and metaphor | “I had fallen through a trapdoor of depression,” said Mark, who was fond of theatrical metaphors. • a thing regarded as representative or symbolic of something else, especially something abstract: 

Where do you see a comparison in these definitions?  



JoeB131 said:


> Um, yeah, if the worst you could come up with was "Here's a picture of him smoking", this isn't the fucking 1950's, guy. Smoking is no longer considered a sign of juvenile deliquency.
> 
> Where are the pictures of 12 year old Tamir Rice looking menacing...
> 
> Oh, there aren't any. because he was a 12 year old kid.



It has nothing to do with him smoking pot, it has to do with that's what he looked like when the animal violently attacked Zimmerman.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jun 27, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Here's the thing. If we limited the ownership of guns to just the criminals and cops, we'd drop the death rate from guns considerably.
> 
> Because 80% of our 15,000 gun homicides are people who are known to each other, we'd take 12000 homicides out of the mix along with 23,000 suicides and 500 accidents.
> 
> ...



You leftists live in your own little world.  The people doing the killing are not law abiding citizens.  In many cases they are gang related like we have here, you have there, and in just about any Democrat run major city.  The killing would only increase because the gang murders would stay the same, and the rest of us would be defenseless.  

As has been pointed out repeatedly, Americans use their guns over a million times every single year to protect themselves, other people, or to stop a crime.  That means without us, we add an additional one to four million more crimes in our country.  

Like I tell you leftists all the time, if you really believe disarming the good people would be such a great idea, get a huge sign made that says THIS HOME HAS NO FIREARMS IN IT and place that on your front porch.  Get back to us in a month or two (if you're still alive) and let us know how that worked out for you.  Because by disarming the public, that's exactly what you're doing---putting a sign on all of our front porches we can't defend ourselves.


----------



## postman (Jun 27, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Um, yeah, if the right wing nuts started shooting politicians, you'd see the ATF beefed up so fast it would make the Gestapo look like the Girl Scouts.   Get real.  Far more Americans are killed by household members than "criminals"... no matter how much NRA Spooge 2TinyGuy puts on here.



Even the OP has the shooter likely acquainted to the woman.









						Man hid in car trunk before shooting at woman outside San Antonio abortion clinic, police say
					

San Antonio police are searching for a man accused of shooting at a woman outside of a...




					www.expressnews.com
				




_San Antonio police are searching for a man accused of shooting at a woman outside of a San Antonio abortion clinic on Saturday.

She did not know the man was hiding in the trunk of her vehicle.  The man got out of the trunk and began firing several rounds at the woman._

Here you have two gun owners in Texas, and the result of the shootout between the man who got out of the trunk, and the bystander with a licensed pistol.

_Several facility windows, however, were hit_


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Jun 27, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Here's the thing. If we limited the ownership of guns to just the criminals and cops, we'd drop the death rate from guns considerably.
> 
> Because 80% of our 15,000 gun homicides are people who are known to each other, we'd take 12000 homicides out of the mix along with 23,000 suicides and 500 accidents.


----------



## postman (Jun 27, 2021)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> As has been pointed out repeatedly, Americans use their guns over a million times every single year to protect themselves, other people, or to stop a crime.  That means without us, we add an additional one to four million more crimes in our country.



The other statistic is that careless gun owners are responsible for hundreds of gun accidents, and thousands of guns getting into criminal hands.

_According to the FBI, during the six-year period from 2012 to 2017, more than $829 million worth of guns were reported stolen from individuals nationwide, amounting to an estimated 1.8 million guns_


----------



## postman (Jun 27, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Here's the thing. If we limited the ownership of guns to just the criminals and cops, we'd drop the death rate from guns considerably.
> 
> Because 80% of our 15,000 gun homicides are people who are known to each other, we'd take 12000 homicides out of the mix along with 23,000 suicides and 500 accidents.



Not to mention a big chunk of the 300.000 guns a year that fall into criminal hands.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 27, 2021)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> Your ignorance of the law is astounding. Nobody has the right to physically attack another person that was "stalking' them, even though that was not the case. If I go for a walk, and half-way down the street another person decides to do the same and is behind me, there is no law that permits me to beat the shit out of them, giving them a broken nose, two black eyes, and a laceration to the back of their head. There is no law against following another person.


Tell you what, you go follow someone around, and see how well they take it.  (Please leave your gun at home, we don't want you committing a hate crime). 




Ray From Cleveland said:


> A person is only legally allowed to use physical violence in defense if they are physically attacked. The lowlife would have been arrested and charged with felonious assault and tried like an adult.



Would he have? Creepy ass guy follows you home, you have every right to defend yourself. 



Ray From Cleveland said:


> It has nothing to do with him smoking pot, it has to do with that's what he looked like when the animal violently attacked Zimmerman.



Still looks like a kid.  



Ray From Cleveland said:


> You leftists live in your own little world. The people doing the killing are not law abiding citizens. In many cases they are gang related like we have here, you have there, and in just about any Democrat run major city. The killing would only increase because the gang murders would stay the same, and the rest of us would be defenseless.



Guy, according to the National Gang Survey Analysis, only 2000 murders a year (all methods) are "Gang related"  









						National Youth Gang Survey Analysis: Measuring the Extent of Gang Problems
					

The NGC conducted an annual survey of law enforcement agencies to assess the extent of gang problems. This page shows data measuring the extent of gang problems.




					nationalgangcenter.ojp.gov
				




The rest are people who know each other.  



Ray From Cleveland said:


> As has been pointed out repeatedly, Americans use their guns over a million times every single year to protect themselves, other people, or to stop a crime. That means without us, we add an additional one to four million more crimes in our country.



Except this is such total bullshit it doesn't pass the laugh test. 

So I ask again, if you gun wankers are waving your guns around stopping crimes like Batman, how is it that only 200 homicides a year by civilians are ruled as "Justified", according to the FBI?  

You would have us believe that out of a million times you gun wankers pull out your guns, that happy day you finally get to play Batman, and of those, you refrain from shooting that Darkie dead 999,800 times?  



Ray From Cleveland said:


> Like I tell you leftists all the time, if you really believe disarming the good people would be such a great idea, get a huge sign made that says THIS HOME HAS NO FIREARMS IN IT and place that on your front porch. Get back to us in a month or two (if you're still alive) and let us know how that worked out for you. Because by disarming the public, that's exactly what you're doing---putting a sign on all of our front porches we can't defend ourselves.



Most people who are going to break into a home don't break in when someone is home to start with.  That escalates burglary to home invasion, and carries much stiffer penalties.  

They break into the home with the gun in it to help themselves to a free gun. 

500,000 guns are stolen every year.  So obviously, disarming everyone would cut off the bad guys main source of guns.


----------



## Mac-7 (Jun 27, 2021)

.


----------



## Mac-7 (Jun 27, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 500,000 guns are stolen every year. So obviously, disarming everyone would cut off the bad guys main source of guns.


I dont know if that number is correct but the logic is pure lib

Punish good people for the actions of the ctiminals


----------



## postman (Jun 27, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 500,000 guns are stolen every year.  So obviously, disarming everyone would cut off the bad guys main source of guns.



You don't have to disarm them.  But you need to have them store their guns so that thieves and visitors can't get control of them.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jun 27, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Tell you what, you go follow someone around, and see how well they take it. (Please leave your gun at home, we don't want you committing a hate crime).



It doesn't matter how they take it.  That's not what was being discussed.  Nobody has the right to use physical violence unless they were attacked which Martin wasn't.  Everything is on the 911 call.

Zimmerman chased after Martin for about 10 seconds or so.  Zimmerman admitted he lost Martin because he outran him so quickly.  Martin hid between the houses and Zimmerman continued his call with the police dispatcher for another minute.  While walking back to his truck, Martin seen he was off the phone and violently attacked him.



JoeB131 said:


> Would he have? Creepy ass guy follows you home, you have every right to defend yourself.



Defend yourself from what?  Nobody is hurting you by following you.



JoeB131 said:


> Guy, according to the National Gang Survey Analysis, only 2000 murders a year (all methods) are "Gang related"
> 
> 
> 
> ...



So where is it written how many were law abiding citizens that legally owned their firearm they murdered with?



JoeB131 said:


> Except this is such total bullshit it doesn't pass the laugh test.
> 
> So I ask again, if you gun wankers are waving your guns around stopping crimes like Batman, how is it that only 200 homicides a year by civilians are ruled as "Justified", according to the FBI?
> 
> You would have us believe that out of a million times you gun wankers pull out your guns, that happy day you finally get to play Batman, and of those, you refrain from shooting that Darkie dead 999,800 times?



Because the only way to control crime is with a strong enough deterrent; death is the ultimate deterrent, that's why.  The mere sight of a gun pointed at you is enough to stop just about anything illegal that you're doing.  Criminals may be stupid, but they know that anybody getting involved in their actions has the legal authority to use that deadly weapon.  They shoot or kill you, they're going to prison.  You shoot or kill them, the police call your gun in, check your license, and you go home and have a bologna sandwich. 



JoeB131 said:


> Most people who are going to break into a home don't break in when someone is home to start with. That escalates burglary to home invasion, and carries much stiffer penalties.
> 
> They break into the home with the gun in it to help themselves to a free gun.
> 
> 500,000 guns are stolen every year. So obviously, disarming everyone would cut off the bad guys main source of guns.



The reason they don't break into an occupied home is because they don't know if you have a gun or not.  That's why in most occupied home burglaries, it's usually a disabled or very elderly person unlikely to be able to use deadly force.  It's an advantage for the intruder to have somebody home to forcefully tell them where all their valuables are hidden.  If you disarm Americans, then we are all like that 86 year old lady living at home alone.  The only defense against somebody with a gun is you having a gun too.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jun 27, 2021)

postman said:


> The other statistic is that careless gun owners are responsible for hundreds of gun accidents, and thousands of guns getting into criminal hands.
> 
> _According to the FBI, during the six-year period from 2012 to 2017, more than $829 million worth of guns were reported stolen from individuals nationwide, amounting to an estimated 1.8 million guns_



Which (on average) means 360,000 a year.  Joe likes to fabricate numbers.  

In any case the solution is not to disarm the entire public to stop that problem, the solution is to have a minimum 20 year sentence for being in possession of a stolen gun.


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 27, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Ray From Cleveland said:
> 
> 
> > Democrat politicians want us to think they're stupid, but they're really not. They know if they could make guns illegal or virtually impossible to get, we would end up with a society where only the police and criminals have the guns because the criminals will always find a way to get them. This is the society they want to create in the US, because once we have no ability to protect ourselves from criminals with guns, crime will spiral out of control which is their goal. My evidence is what's happening in commie cities today where violent crimes and murders are in double digit increases compared to last year since they stood behind weakening our police force, de-funding their police, and making severe restrictions like they did in Chicago where officers can no longer engage in foot pursuits. They have to call into their supervisor, get permission to chase a suspect, and by then, the culprit has a six block head start. Criminals really celebrate commies like that Mayor Lighthead.
> ...




Wow...the stupid is strong with you.....

Taking guns away from people who do not use them for crime doesn't lower the gun crime rate you idiot.

As you have been shown over and over again "people who are known to each other," isn't Bob and Fred down the block who are neighbors........"people who are known to each other," are the rival gang members shooting each other over drug turf, girlfriends, or insults on social media...you moron........so taking the guns away from Bob and Fred who don't use guns for crime or murder does nothing......

You idiot.

And the domesitc homicides?  Are again, not Bob and Fred....they are the criminals living with their baby mommas.....they are the criminal murdering the girlfriend after he gets high on crack....you idiot.

We know from 27 years of actual expereince that normal people owning and carrying guns does not increase the gun crime or gun murder rate.....letting violent, known, repeat gun offenders out of jail and prison increases the gun crime and murder rate...you doofus....

700 known, violent criminals drive the gun crime rate in Oakland....and every other city.....it isn't normal people who own and carry guns you idiot....

*We know that in any given city there’s a small group of offenders who are responsible for most of the shootings and murders. A 2017 study of homicides in Oakland, California, for example, found that about 700 people, or 0.16% of the city’s population, committed a majority of the city’s homicides and shootings over an 18-month period. Rochester has about half the population of Oakland, California, so the city’s likely going to be focusing its efforts on about 500 residents at high risk of both committing and being the victim of violent crimes.*

*By focusing policing efforts on these offenders and referring them to the U.S. Attorney’s office for prosecution whenever possible, Rochester can dramatically cut down on the number of shootings and homicides in the city without trying to arrest anyone and everyone who may be committing a non-violent possessory offense like carrying a gun without a license.*









						Rochester's New Approach To Reducing Crime: Focus On Violent Offenders
					

Believe it or not, some activists in the city actually have a problem with this.




					bearingarms.com
				





Meanwhile.....as normal Americans own and carry guns....

Over the last 27 years, 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 (Jun 27, 2021)

postman said:


> Ray From Cleveland said:
> 
> 
> > As has been pointed out repeatedly, Americans use their guns over a million times every single year to protect themselves, other people, or to stop a crime.  That means without us, we add an additional one to four million more crimes in our country.
> ...




The other, other statistic is that normal gun owners use their legal guns 1.1 million times a year to stop rapes, robberies and murders....according to the Centers for Disease control......lives saved from violent criminals.....

What you are pointing to is that criminals captured with stolen guns need to go to prison for 30 years...that would dry up that market over night....


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 27, 2021)

postman said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Here's the thing. If we limited the ownership of guns to just the criminals and cops, we'd drop the death rate from guns considerably.
> ...




Link


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 27, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Ray From Cleveland said:
> 
> 
> > Your ignorance of the law is astounding. Nobody has the right to physically attack another person that was "stalking' them, even though that was not the case. If I go for a walk, and half-way down the street another person decides to do the same and is behind me, there is no law that permits me to beat the shit out of them, giving them a broken nose, two black eyes, and a laceration to the back of their head. There is no law against following another person.
> ...




Moron......the gang member shooting the rival over a girlfriend isn't on "gang" business, you idiot...so it doesn't count as a gang shooting, you moron.

The gang member shooting up a rival gang party isn't doing "gang" business.......so it doesn't count as a gang shooting, you moron.


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 27, 2021)

postman said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > 500,000 guns are stolen every year.  So obviously, disarming everyone would cut off the bad guys main source of guns.
> ...



Yeah..it's called keeping them in your home.   Which is what they do, then the criminals break the law, and enter the home illegally......


----------



## hadit (Jun 27, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> > And you know this, how? He had a gun. That alone, according to you, makes him a penis obsessed nutcase out to kill as many as possible. Now you're making excuses for criminals but throw the book at law abiding citizens. Okay then.
> ...


Then we should be glad he didn't kill her at home, where he could have taken his time and used a JoeB approved killing tool. What you are saying is ludicrous, because once a person starts shooting at another person, "I didn't want to kill her" doesn't fly as a defense.


JoeB131 said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> > You're not thinking broad enough. I'm talking about slowing cars down to slightly faster than horse speed. Slow every vehicle down to 25 mph with passing burst mode up to 35 mph and you'd virtually eliminate highway deaths. Like I said, you're willing to trade tens of thousands of lives every year so you can drive fast enough to kill. As for gun safety, all your "safety" measures would make it harder to use a gun in situations where they're really needed, ala when there's little to no time to get through the safety features. Car safety features don't interfere with the operation of the car. You can still get in and start driving a car as fast as you could in 1955.
> ...


Irrelevant. Making sure no car goes faster than 25 mph would save tens of thousands of lives every year.


JoeB131 said:


> There are no real situations where a gun is "needed".  Most industrialized countries don't let their citizens have guns, and they are just fine.


Well, except for cases like this one, where a woman is extremely grateful to be alive. You know, those people you don't care very much about.


JoeB131 said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> > Oh, so the government cares about liberal politicians getting shot, just not Republicans. Heck, you can shoot at a bunch of them practicing for a ball game and nothing's going to change. But hey, when the mythical right wing nut shoots at democrats you bet we'll get right on it. I've noticed that, while he posts evidence to back up what he says, you post nothing beyond "Nuh-uh".
> ...


I don't know, I didn't sell any to him. I can't wait for the lawsuits the first time you try to deny a person a weapon because you think he looks "icky".


----------



## woodwork201 (Jun 28, 2021)

postman said:


> Ray From Cleveland said:
> 
> 
> > As has been pointed out repeatedly, Americans use their guns over a million times every single year to protect themselves, other people, or to stop a crime.  That means without us, we add an additional one to four million more crimes in our country.
> ...


I had some guns stolen and the thieves were caught.  None of them, including the fence, a twice-convicted felon, that the thieves sold the guns to and from whom the police recovered the guns were charged with any crime.

The carelessness is in Democrats voting for DAs and judges who let criminals go without punishment for very serious crimes.  They create a lawless society for criminals and then, blaming the law-abiding for crime, pass laws punishing the law abiding.


----------



## Batcat (Jun 28, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Ray From Cleveland said:
> 
> 
> > He doesn't have to be a career criminal to be a criminal, just like people who buy illegal drugs are in many cases not career criminals. Illegal guns will always be available to those who want them, but only the law abiding won't seek one. Somebody willing to go to the extremes of murder doesn't give a damn whether he has an illegal gun or not.
> ...


The question is how do we get to your utopian nation without  firearms? 

There are an estimated 434 million firearms in our nation today. Most firearms and ammo will last and function indefinitely with reasonable care and storage. 

You can pass laws requiring all firearms to be turned in but  criminals and a high percentage of citizens will simply refuse to comply. Plus Americans have a significant level of distrust for government and many citizens believe the first sign of a tyrannical government taking over a nation is the banning and confiscation of firearms. 

All over this nation gun sanctuary counties and states are springIng up. The local law enforcement in those counties and states will not cooperate in gun confiscation efforts. 

You need to find a wizard who will cast a spell instantly making all firearms disappear. Good luck with that as such wizards are extremely rare and hard to find today. 









						Data: US has 434 Million Guns, 20M ARs, 150M Mags :: Guns.com
					

The trade association for the U.S. firearm industry crunched the numbers and came up with one solid fact: Americans really like guns.




					www.guns.com
				

















						Nearly Half of All U.S. Counties Are Now Second Amendment Sanctuaries
					

,What the media isn’t telling you: The number of states, counties and cities declaring themselves Second Amendment Sanctuaries is skyrocketing.




					www.ammoland.com


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 28, 2021)

Mac-7 said:


> I dont know if that number is correct but the logic is pure lib
> 
> Punish good people for the actions of the ctiminals





Ray From Cleveland said:


> It doesn't matter how they take it. That's not what was being discussed. Nobody has the right to use physical violence unless they were attacked which Martin wasn't. Everything is on the 911 call.
> 
> Zimmerman chased after Martin for about 10 seconds or so. Zimmerman admitted he lost Martin because he outran him so quickly. Martin hid between the houses and Zimmerman continued his call with the police dispatcher for another minute. While walking back to his truck, Martin seen he was off the phone and violently attacked him.





Ray From Cleveland said:


> So where is it written how many were law abiding citizens that legally owned their firearm they murdered with?



That's a good question. You see, Kellerman did this study where he found a gun in the home was 43 times more likely to kill a household member than a bad guy, and the response by the NRA was to demand that the CDC never do a gun study again.  



Ray From Cleveland said:


> Because the only way to control crime is with a strong enough deterrent; death is the ultimate deterrent, that's why. The mere sight of a gun pointed at you is enough to stop just about anything illegal that you're doing. Criminals may be stupid, but they know that anybody getting involved in their actions has the legal authority to use that deadly weapon. They shoot or kill you, they're going to prison. You shoot or kill them, the police call your gun in, check your license, and you go home and have a bologna sandwich.


If you are desperate enough to risk jail and commit a crime, you aren't going to be easily deterred by Marvin Milqtoast pointing a gun at you.  




Ray From Cleveland said:


> The reason they don't break into an occupied home is because they don't know if you have a gun or not.



No, the reason why they don't break into an occuppied home is that they don't want to be identified. 

The Europeans and Japanese don't have guns, they have lower burglary rates than we have.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 28, 2021)

2aguy said:


> Moron......the gang member shooting the rival over a girlfriend isn't on "gang" business, you idiot...so it doesn't count as a gang shooting, you moron.
> 
> The gang member shooting up a rival gang party isn't doing "gang" business.......so it doesn't count as a gang shooting, you moron.



Except that this is the only agency actually tracking gang violence... and it's not as bad as you claim it is. 

"Gang related"... that means the perp is in a gang.  

Again, it would be nice if we actually DID gun studies to find out how many of our  15,000 gun homicides were in fact domestic violence, but the NRA demanded the CDC stop studying gun violence after Kellerman. 



Batcat said:


> The question is how do we get to your utopian nation without firearms?
> 
> There are an estimated 434 million firearms in our nation today. Most firearms and ammo will last and function indefinitely with reasonable care and storage.
> 
> You can pass laws requiring all firearms to be turned in but criminals and a high percentage of citizens will simply refuse to comply. Plus Americans have a significant level of distrust for government and many citizens believe the first sign of a tyrannical government taking over a nation is the banning and confiscation of firearms.



Well, here's how I would do it.   First, yes, honestly, most people won't turn in their guns... but I'd be just as happy if they just hid them in a closet somewhere. 

The first thing to do is hold the Gun Industry accountable by removing the liability immunity for gun sales.  You sell a gun to Joker Holmes, his victims should be able to sue you for negligence.  Watch how fast the gun industry gets really responsible about who they sell to. 

The second thing I would do is to disqualify gun manufacturers from Federal contracts if they don't comply with regulations.  Since 40% of gun sales are to government agencies, no one will want to lose their best customer. 

if you are the kind of nut who is stockpiling guns to fight the government, most of your neighbors will be happy when the ATF removes you from the gene pool.  



Batcat said:


> All over this nation gun sanctuary counties and states are springIng up. The local law enforcement in those counties and states will not cooperate in gun confiscation efforts.
> 
> You need to find a wizard who will cast a spell instantly making all firearms disappear. Good luck with that as such wizards are extremely rare and hard to find today.



No, you just make the ATF as absolutely feared as the IRS.  The IRS doesn't need to go to each and every house to collect tax forms.   The mere fear of an IRS audit or garnishment does that.  

We have plenty of gun laws on the books now, but they aren't enforced.  The ATF only has 2500 agents.  

You also pick your targets carefully.   Take out the nut who is stockpiling dozens of guns and make an example of him.   Then the person who has that gun in his closet he bought in the 1990's isn't going to be that keen on keeping it.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jun 28, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> That's a good question. You see, Kellerman did this study where he found a gun in the home was 43 times more likely to kill a household member than a bad guy, and the response by the NRA was to demand that the CDC never do a gun study again.



When you can post a reliable source of evidence, do it.  The NRA has no power over a federal bureaucracy.  The Kellerman studies are all padded with phony numbers.  Nobody pays any attention to the anti-gun group. 



JoeB131 said:


> If you are desperate enough to risk jail and commit a crime, you aren't going to be easily deterred by Marvin Milqtoast pointing a gun at you.



A lot of criminals would never actually shoot anybody.  They use a gun to get what they want.  We see this all the time where a store owner is fed up with getting robbed, pulls out a gun from behind the counter and starts shooting at the robber.  The robber just runs out of the store.  

I'm leaving the store with my groceries heading to my car.  A woman starts screaming because a guy is trying to steal her purse and she's desperately fighting him to keep it.  I pull out my gun and tell him if he wants to live, GTF out of here. Or perhaps he is robbing her with a knife.  What choice does he have?  He can continue fighting and perhaps get killed for twenty bucks and some credit cards, or he gets out of there as fast as he can because another customer may have already called the police and they're on their way.  




JoeB131 said:


> No, the reason why they don't break into an occuppied home is that they don't want to be identified.
> 
> The Europeans and Japanese don't have guns, they have lower burglary rates than we have.



Oh please.  Anybody can wear a face covering to not be indentified, especially today where half the people are still wearing masks in public.  The only reason you are safe in your home is because any potential criminal knows there is a good chance you are armed.  Therefore if he wants to rob your house, he's going to wait until you're not home.  Robberies of occupied houses still happen, but as I already mentioned, the criminal has to be very picky to make sure the victim is too weak or helpless to use a firearm.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jun 28, 2021)

Batcat said:


> The question is how do we get to your utopian nation without firearms?
> 
> There are an estimated 434 million firearms in our nation today. Most firearms and ammo will last and function indefinitely with reasonable care and storage.
> 
> ...



The Democrat party is more than content to lock up innocent people to get what they want.  Law abiding people fear jail and many would turn in their guns.  The first step however is to make sure they know where those guns are at, and that means creating law that all gun owners must register their guns or get a federal license as outlined in Dementia's gun grabbing plan.  

He and the other commies also want to take liability protection from gun sellers and manufacturers, this giving other commies the ability to sue them all out of business.  With nobody in the country making guns, and nobody selling them, that stops the flow of guns to the law abiding American public.  

Okay, so I have to get a federal license, no big deal.  Wait!  The Communist agenda is that you have to undergo psychological exams, and nearly everybody that associates with you will also be interviewed by an anti-gun shrink.  The cost to you is $850.00, and it's non-refundable if your old girlfriend or coworker you don't get along with is trying to get even with you and make up some BS how violent you get and they deny your application.    

In the Dementia proposition, he wants to make buying ammo, guns or gun repair parts over the internet illegal so you can't even fix your gun when it breaks.  

Right now there is enough power of real Americans to stop the Nazis.  However if they gain even more power, crap like this could very well happen, especially if they pad the Supreme Court with Nazi judges that will rule in their favor.


----------



## Turtlesoup (Jun 28, 2021)

2aguy CONTROL FREAKS are some very irrational people.  He could have been a psychopath who by defination are some very bizarre control freaks-------


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jun 28, 2021)

woodwork201 said:


> I had some guns stolen and the thieves were caught. None of them, including the fence, a twice-convicted felon, that the thieves sold the guns to and from whom the police recovered the guns were charged with any crime.
> 
> The carelessness is in Democrats voting for DAs and judges who let criminals go without punishment for very serious crimes. They create a lawless society for criminals and then, blaming the law-abiding for crime, pass laws punishing the law abiding.



A lot of our crime problems, especially those committed with a gun could be stopped, but making much more severe penalties on criminals who use guns wouldn't disarm the public which is their ultimate goal.  As I mentioned earlier, if we had it that if you are caught with a stolen gun, you face a 20 year minimum prison sentence, the underground gun market would dry up.  Many less gun thefts since there would be many less people who would want to buy them.


----------



## Mac-7 (Jun 28, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> You see, Kellerman did this study where he found a gun in the home was 43 times more likely to kill a household member than a bad guy, and the response by the NRA was to demand that the CDC never do a gun study again.


That study included suicide which is a leading cause of death in America no matter which method is used


----------



## Mac-7 (Jun 28, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> you are desperate enough to risk jail and commit a crime, you aren't going to be easily deterred by Marvin Milqtoast pointing a gun at you.



Explain to us how much better off this family would be today if you took their guns away


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 28, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Mac-7 said:
> 
> 
> > I dont know if that number is correct but the logic is pure lib
> ...




You lie....you are insane....

*That's a good question. You see, Kellerman did this study where he found a gun in the home was 43 times more likely to kill a household member than a bad guy, and the response by the NRA was to demand that the CDC never do a gun study again.

Moron...actual researchers looked at his study and said it was wrong.....he then did it over.....and came up with the number 2.7 but his underlying mistakes were still in the work....you idiot.....we have shown you this over and over again....*

*The CDC was not banned from doing gun research, you idiot...I have listed the gun research they did after the 90s....you moron........*

This is some gun research from the CEC in 2006....

Violence-Related Firearm Deaths Among Residents of Metropolitan Areas and Cities --- United States, 2006--2007

And this one....2003

Source of Firearms Used by Students in School-Associated Violent Deaths --- United States, 1992--1999

And this one....

http://www.thecommunityguide.org/violence/viol-AJPM-evrev-firearms-law.pdf

And this one....2001

Surveillance for Fatal and Nonfatal Firearm-Related Injuries --- United States, 1993--1998

And this one....2013

Firearm Homicides and Suicides in Major Metropolitan Areas — United States, 2006–2007 and 2009–2010

And this one...2014

Indoor Firing Ranges and Elevated Blood Lead Levels — United States, 2002–2013

And this one....

Rates of Homicide, Suicide, and Firearm-Related Death Among Children -- 26 Industrialized Countries


==================

The Deleware study of 2015...

When Gun Violence Felt Like a Disease, a City in Delaware Turned to the C.D.C. (Published 2015)

When epidemiologists from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention came to this city, they were not here to track an outbreak of meningitis or study the effectiveness of a particular vaccine.

They were here to examine gun violence.
This city of about 70,000 had a 45 percent jump in shootings from 2011 to 2013, and the violence has remained stubbornly high; 25 shooting deaths have been reported this year, slightly more than last year, according to the mayor’s office
.-------

The final report, which has been submitted to the state, reached a conclusion that many here said they already knew: that there are certain patterns in the lives of many who commit gun violence.
“The majority of individuals involved in urban firearm violence are young men with substantial violence involvement preceding the more serious offense of a firearm crime,” the report said. “Our findings suggest that integrating data systems could help these individuals better receive the early, comprehensive help that they need to prevent violence involvement.”
Researchers analyzed data on 569 people charged with firearm crimes from 2009 to May 21, 2014, and looked for certain risk factors in their lives, such as whether they had been unemployed, had received help from assistance programs, had been possible victims of child abuse, or had been shot or stabbed. The idea was to show that linking such data could create a better understanding of who might need help before becoming involved in violence.


------------------
Why Congress stopped gun control activism at the CDC

I was one of three medical doctors who testified before the House’s Labor, Health, Human Services, and Education Appropriations Subcommittee on March 6, 1996 about the CDC’s misdeeds. (_Note: This testimony and related events are described in my three-part documented __historical series__)._ Here is what we showed the committee:


_Dr. Arthur Kellermann’s1993 New England Journal of Medicine __article__ that launched his career as a rock star gun control advocate and gave rise to the much-repeated “three times” fallacy. His research was supported by two CDC grants._
Kellermann and his colleagues used the case control method, traditionally an epidemiology research tool, to claim that having a gun in the home triples the risk of becoming a homicide victim. In the article Kellermann admitted that “a majority of the homicides (50.9 percent) occurred in the context of a quarrel or a romantic triangle.” Still another 30 percent “were related to drug dealing” or “occurred during the commission of another felony, such as a robbery, rape, or burglary.”

I*n summary, the CDC funded a flawed study of crime-prone inner city residents who had been murdered in their homes. The authors then tried to equate this wildly unrepresentative group with typical American gun owners. The committee members were not amused.*


_The Winter 1993 CDC official publication, __Public Health Policy for Preventing Violence__, coauthored by CDC official Dr. Mark Rosenberg. This taxpayer-funded gun control polemic offered two strategies for preventing firearm injuries—“restrictive licensing (for example, only police, military, guards, and so on)” and “prohibit gun ownership.”_
_The brazen __public comments__ of top CDC officials, made at a time when gun prohibitionists were much more candid about their political goals._
_“*We’re going to systematically build a case that owning firearms causes deaths. We’re doing the most we can do, given the political realities.” (P.W. O’Carroll, Acting Section Head of Division of Injury Control, CDC, quoted in Marsha F. Goldsmith, “Epidemiologists Aim at New Target: Health Risk of Handgun Proliferation,” Journal of the American Medical Association vol. 261 no. 5, February 3, 1989, pp. 675-76.) Dr. O’Carroll later said he had been misquoted.

But his successor Dr. Mark Rosenberg was quoted in the Washington Post as wanting his agency to create a public perception of firearms as “dirty, deadly—and banned.” (William Raspberry, “Sick People With Guns,” Washington Post, October 19, 1994.*


*CDC Grant #R49/CCR903697-06 to the Trauma Foundation, a San Francisco gun control advocacy group, supporting a newsletter that frankly advocated gun control.*
_


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 28, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Moron......the gang member shooting the rival over a girlfriend isn't on "gang" business, you idiot...so it doesn't count as a gang shooting, you moron.
> ...




You are an idiot.....


Again, it would be nice if we actually DID gun studies to find out how many of our  15,000 gun homicides were in fact domestic violence, but the NRA demanded the CDC stop studying gun violence after Kellerman.

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)

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..


----------



## Mac-7 (Jun 28, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> The Europeans and Japanese don't have guns, they have lower burglary rates than we have.


Japan yes

Euros no









						Countries Compared by Crime > Burglaries. International Statistics at NationMaster.com
					

Number of burglaries recorded by police in that country per 100,000 population.



					www.nationmaster.com


----------



## woodwork201 (Jun 28, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Moron......the gang member shooting the rival over a girlfriend isn't on "gang" business, you idiot...so it doesn't count as a gang shooting, you moron.
> ...



I assume, then, that you support permitting families of those killed by drunk drivers to sue the distillery, the car maker, the care seller, the gasoline seller and, as long as we're at it, Hanes or Fruit of the Loom, depending on the preference of the killer?


----------



## woodwork201 (Jun 28, 2021)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> woodwork201 said:
> 
> 
> > I had some guns stolen and the thieves were caught. None of them, including the fence, a twice-convicted felon, that the thieves sold the guns to and from whom the police recovered the guns were charged with any crime.
> ...



I generally dislike gun add-ons; robbing should carry a very stiff penalty whether it's with a knife or a gun.  But possession of a stolen gun is not an add-on; it's the crime itself.  I like 20 years minimum.  Maybe 30 to 40 years for selling a stolen gun.  Maybe life for selling more than one.


----------



## Batcat (Jun 28, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Moron......the gang member shooting the rival over a girlfriend isn't on "gang" business, you idiot...so it doesn't count as a gang shooting, you moron.
> ...


What do you do about the survivalists who have a buried cache of firearms and ammo? I have been reading articles in gun magazines since the 1970s on how to create a cache using PVC pipe and Cosmolene or desiccants. 

Over the years I have also heard a lot of people wonder why some gun owners buy so many firearms. Perhaps they just want to be sure they have access to firearms and ammo no matter what. 

For those who are interested there are plenty of instructions  you can find on the web on how to set up a gun cache. Google is your friend. 

I would also remind you that confiscating guns in a country or state that is a gun sanctuary is not going to be simple as the locals will not cooperate with the Feds. If things get real dicey the Feds may find gun owners following them around making their life difficult.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 28, 2021)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> When you can post a reliable source of evidence, do it. The NRA has no power over a federal bureaucracy. The Kellerman studies are all padded with phony numbers. Nobody pays any attention to the anti-gun group.





Ray From Cleveland said:


> A lot of criminals would never actually shoot anybody. They use a gun to get what they want. We see this all the time where a store owner is fed up with getting robbed, pulls out a gun from behind the counter and starts shooting at the robber. The robber just runs out of the store.



While I'm sure this is your wank video, it just doesn't happen that often.  It's usually some nut chasing some kids out of the store for being too roudy.  




Ray From Cleveland said:


> I'm leaving the store with my groceries heading to my car. A woman starts screaming because a guy is trying to steal her purse and she's desperately fighting him to keep it. I pull out my gun and tell him if he wants to live, GTF out of here. Or perhaps he is robbing her with a knife. What choice does he have? He can continue fighting and perhaps get killed for twenty bucks and some credit cards, or he gets out of there as fast as he can because another customer may have already called the police and they're on their way.



Okay, Batman, how many times have you actually done that.  I mean, you walk about with your gun, how many crimes have you actually broken up?  

What. Wait. Zero?  How could this be?  



Ray From Cleveland said:


> Oh please. Anybody can wear a face covering to not be indentified, especially today where half the people are still wearing masks in public. The only reason you are safe in your home is because any potential criminal knows there is a good chance you are armed. Therefore if he wants to rob your house, he's going to wait until you're not home. Robberies of occupied houses still happen, but as I already mentioned, the criminal has to be very picky to make sure the victim is too weak or helpless to use a firearm.



Again- Burglary, you might not even go to jail for tha. 
Home invasion, you go to jail for 20 years even if no one gets hurt.  

That's why you don't see crooks breaking into homes with people in them. Not because they are afraid of your Compensation.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 28, 2021)

Batcat said:


> What do you do about the survivalists who have a buried cache of firearms and ammo? I have been reading articles in gun magazines since the 1970s on how to create a cache using PVC pipe and Cosmolene or desiccants.



Those would probably be the easiest ones to find.  The Gun nut would probably have his wank map somewhere in his house so he could find them again.  



Batcat said:


> I would also remind you that confiscating guns in a country or state that is a gun sanctuary is not going to be simple as the locals will not cooperate with the Feds. If things get real dicey the Feds may find gun owners following them around making their life difficult.



Again, you trot in a few of the hard core nutters, the rest will fall into line. 

The IRS doesn't have to audit that many people, but the few they do keeps everyone else filing their taxes and mostly being honest about it.  

Same way with the ATF when we start cleaning up the gun nuts.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 28, 2021)

2aguy said:


> You lie....you are insane....
> 
> *That's a good question. You see, Kellerman did this study where he found a gun in the home was 43 times more likely to kill a household member than a bad guy, and the response by the NRA was to demand that the CDC never do a gun study again.
> 
> Moron...actual researchers looked at his study and said it was wrong....*



NOpe, never said anything of the sort.  You can post all the NRA Spooge you want where you can claim his clarification was a retraction, but it was exactly that, a clarification. 



2aguy said:


> A quick guide to the studies and the numbers.....the full lay out of what was studied by each study is in the links....



Guy, we're not talking about "how many times a gun made you feel better about your tiny dick" 

(OMG, OMG, OMG Joe told a dick joke.  Let's all freak out!!!) 

We are talking about how many people have died of guns.  

We know there are 23,000 suicides a year. 
We know that there are 15,000 homicides a year. 

Of the homicides, what percentage are criminals committing a crime (Robbery, murder for hire, shooting a rival drug dealer) vs. how many are people shooting their family members or neighbors or coworkers in the heat of an argument. 

Now, the way the gun nuts get around the fact that 83% of murder victims know their killers is that they say, "Well, he had a police record."   100 million Americans have police records, that's just not that big of a deal.  

So let's say for the sake of argument that 60% of gun deaths are people in domestic arguments where a gun turned a bad situation tragic.  

Here should be a clue.  Most of the places I've worked in the last 20 years have been Gun-Free workplaces.  management doesn't trust anyone to have a gun on their property.  Most of them have backed that up with security doors, security checkpoints and other anti-gun countermeasures.  Clearly they aren't worried about their employees being criminals, they are worried about them being a gun nut who is going to shoot the boss the day he gets fired.


----------



## Batcat (Jun 28, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Batcat said:
> 
> 
> > What do you do about the survivalists who have a buried cache of firearms and ammo? I have been reading articles in gun magazines since the 1970s on how to create a cache using PVC pipe and Cosmolene or desiccants.
> ...


You many try to clean up the “gun nuts” with the ATF but I suspect you will just start another revolution. Keep in mind gun control started the last one. 









						How the British Gun Control Program Precipitated the American Revolution - The Shooter's Log
					

A 2nd Amendment scholar asserts that what finally forced the colonials into a shooting war with the British Army in April 1775 were attempts by the British to disarm Americans. Click to see the facts.




					blog.cheaperthandirt.com


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 29, 2021)

Batcat said:


> You many try to clean up the “gun nuts” with the ATF but I suspect you will just start another revolution. Keep in mind gun control started the last one.



Actually, what started the last one was  bunch of slave-raping assholes didn't want to pay their fair share in taxes. 

The majority of us are sick and tired of being held hostage to the gun fetishists.


----------



## Hollie (Jun 29, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Batcat said:
> 
> 
> > You many try to clean up the “gun nuts” with the ATF but I suspect you will just start another revolution. Keep in mind gun control started the last one.
> ...


Gee, whiz. I hadn't realized you were the spokes-loon for ''most of us''. Have you read that in just the last year, there are more than 5 million new gun owners in the US. That spike in ownership is attributed to the leftist lowlife policies of defunding police, coddling criminals and the refusal of leftist DA's to prosecute crime. 

Those new gun owners are sick and tired of being held hostage to leftist crime fetishists.


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 29, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > You lie....you are insane....
> ...




His first study.....he comes up with 43 times...

He gets called out, does it over, comes up with 2.7 times..

That isn't a clarification, you moron.......

The majority of the shootings in this country are criminals shooting other criminals you idiot...you can lie all you want and claim that all shootings are men shooting wives but the truth, facts and reality show you are an idiot and a liar........

Knowing the victim...you idiot....is gang member from gang A, shoots at gang member from gang B because they know each other as rival gang members......

Knowing the victim.....drug addict shoots drug dealer because he wants the drug dealers stash and money......

You moron.


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 29, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > You lie....you are insane....
> ...



*So let's say for the sake of argument that 60% of gun deaths are people in domestic arguments where a gun turned a bad situation tragic.*


Let's not say 60% because that is bullshit.......

The Criminology of Firearms
In 2004, the National Academy of Sciences reviewed 253 journal articles, 99 books, 43 government publications and some empirical research of its own about guns. The Academy could not identify any gun restriction that had reduced violent crime, suicide or gun accidents.

Why don't gun bans work? Because they rely on voluntary compliance by gun-using criminals. Prohibitionists never see this absurdity because they deceive themselves into thinking that, as Katherine Christoffel has said: "[M]ost shootings are not committed by felons or mentally ill people, but are acts of passion that are committed using a handgun that is owned for home protection."

*Christoffel, et al., are utterly wrong. The whole corpus of criminological research dating back to the 1890'sshows murderers "almost uniformly have a long history of involvement in criminal behavior," and that "[v]irtually all" murderers and other gun criminals have prior felony records — generally long ones.*

*While only 15 percent of Americans have criminal records, roughly 90 percent of adult murderers have prior adult records — exclusive of their often extensive juvenile records — with crime careers of six or more adult years including four major felonies. 

Gerald D. Robin, writing for the Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences,notes that, unlike ordinary gun owners, "the average murderer turns out to be no less hardened a criminal than the average robber or burglar."*
-------
*The Institute's resulting report observed: "It is commonly hypothesized that much criminal violence, especially homicide, occurs simply because the means of lethal violence (firearms) are readily at hand, and, thus, that much homicide would not occur were firearms generally less available. T**here is no persuasive evidence that supports this view." (emphasis added)*

http://www.haciendapublishing.com/m...art-ii-gun-violence-and-constitutional-issues


*Another favorite view of the gun control, public health establishment is the myth propounded by Dr. Mark Rosenberg, former head of the NCIPC of the CDC, who has written: "Most of the perpetrators of violence are not criminals by trade or profession. Indeed, in the area of domestic violence, most of the perpetrators are never accused of any crime. The victims and perpetrators are ourselves --- ordinary citizens, students, professionals, and even public health workers."(6) 

That statement is contradicted by available data, government data. The fact is that the typical murderer has had a prior criminal history of at least six years with four felony arrests in his record before he finally commits murder.
-----

(17) The FBI statistics reveal that 75 percent of all violent crimes for any locality are committed by six percent of hardened criminals and repeat offenders.(18)*


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 29, 2021)

Hollie said:


> Gee, whiz. I hadn't realized you were the spokes-loon for ''most of us''. Have you read that in just the last year, there are more than 5 million new gun owners in the US. That spike in ownership is attributed to the leftist lowlife policies of defunding police, coddling criminals and the refusal of leftist DA's to prosecute crime.
> 
> Those new gun owners are sick and tired of being held hostage to leftist crime fetishists.



Uh, yeah, every time there is an election, the gun industry screams "XXXX is going to take your guns" and all the fetishists stock up on more guns.  









						Despite mass shootings, number of households owning guns is on the decline
					

Half of all guns are concentrated among 3 percent of Americans




					www.cbsnews.com
				




_The number of American households with guns has dropped 19 percentage points from 50 percent in 1977 to 31 percent in 2014 according to the General Social Survey of the National Opinion Research Center, which has surveyed about 2,000 Americans on the same set of questions since the early 1970's. 

Survey results also show that hunting as a sport has declined since 1977, when 31 percent of Americans said they or their spouse hunted. More recently, in 2014, just 15 percent said they hunted_. 

So bottom line.  The gun industry has a problem.  Less and less Americans actually think murdering animals is fun anymore.  

What to do?

I know.  Let's find the craziest people in the country, and convince them that they need enough guns to fight off the Zombie Apocalypse 

_They found that those who own guns own an average of 4.8 firearms.  But they also found that half of all guns — 130 million guns — are owned by 14 percent of gun owners or 7.6 million people.  That's 3 percent of the U.S. population._

I'm willing to guess that all our resident gun fetishists own more than one gun.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 29, 2021)

2aguy said:


> His first study.....he comes up with 43 times...
> 
> He gets called out, does it over, comes up with 2.7 times..



Except he didn't do it over.  

He very clearly stated that out of that 43 times, 39 of those were suicides, 2.7 were homicides and the remaining fraction were accidents.  

Now, we KNOW you gun fetishists like to pretend suicide isn't really part of our gun violence problem in this country.  but it really is.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 29, 2021)

2aguy said:


> Knowing the victim...you idiot....is gang member from gang A, shoots at gang member from gang B because they know each other as rival gang members......
> 
> Knowing the victim.....drug addict shoots drug dealer because he wants the drug dealers stash and money......



Okay, so let's do a study to define that.   How many were domestic murders and how many were murders in furtherance of criminal acts.  

On, no, wait, the NRA banned studies like that. They were bad for business.


----------



## Batcat (Jun 29, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Batcat said:
> 
> 
> > You many try to clean up the “gun nuts” with the ATF but I suspect you will just start another revolution. Keep in mind gun control started the last one.
> ...


Actually slavery was legal in the British Empire during the American revolution. Therefore plantation owners in the South would not have feared the loss of their slaves if the British won the war.

Taxes definitely played a role. The colonists were not fond of “taxation without representation.” There however were many other reasons for the revolution. 

As I pointed out before, the attempt by the British to impose gun control started the fighting. 









						Slavery Abolition Act 1833 - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				












						What Caused the American Revolution? - History of Massachusetts Blog
					

Trying to pinpoint the main causes of the American Revolution is difficult at best because there were many contributing factors and even historians can't agree on what they were. Author and Harvard professor, Bernard Bailyn argues in his book, The Idealogical Origins of the American Revolution...



					historyofmassachusetts.org
				












						Gun Control And The American Revolution
					

David Kopel of davekopel.org wrote an article detailing and comparing modern gun control with revolutionary era gun control




					www.gunsandtactics.com


----------



## Batcat (Jun 29, 2021)

Hollie said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Batcat said:
> ...


Plus many of these first time gun owners are democrats.









						First-Time Gun Buyers Grow to Nearly 5 Million in 2020
					

NSSF updated retail survey-based estimates and concluded that nearly 5 million Americans purchased a firearm for the very first time in 2020.




					www.nssf.org
				



_NSSF *surveys* revealed that 58 percent of firearm purchases were among African American men and women, the largest increase of any demographic group. Women comprised 40 percent of first-time gun purchasers. Retailers noted that they are seeing a 95 percent increase in firearm sales and a 139 percent increase in ammunition sales over the same period in 2019._


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Jun 29, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> he majority of us are sick and tired of being held hostage to the gun fetishists.



  You don't speak for any majority of us.

  Gun sales are up because a much larger part of the population that you represent is fed up with violent, destructive subhuman criminal filth such as yourself, and with the police being prevented from doing their job of protecting us from your kind.


----------



## Hollie (Jun 29, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Gee, whiz. I hadn't realized you were the spokes-loon for ''most of us''. Have you read that in just the last year, there are more than 5 million new gun owners in the US. That spike in ownership is attributed to the leftist lowlife policies of defunding police, coddling criminals and the refusal of leftist DA's to prosecute crime.
> ...


The gruesome twosome of Biden and Beto said very clearly prior to the election that they intended to seize people's personal property,; their legally owned firearms. 

So, um, yeah, the democrats were very specific about their intentions. 

Actually, the gun industry has a major supporter: the democrats. Rabid dem policies have been a huge boost toward gun ownership.

Nothing sells guns like gun-grabbers and leftist policies that embolden / enable criminals.


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 29, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Gee, whiz. I hadn't realized you were the spokes-loon for ''most of us''. Have you read that in just the last year, there are more than 5 million new gun owners in the US. That spike in ownership is attributed to the leftist lowlife policies of defunding police, coddling criminals and the refusal of leftist DA's to prosecute crime.
> ...




Yeah...the General Social Survey is crap....

https://crimeresearch.org/2019/01/r...un-violence-problem-explained-17-maps-charts/

*“32% of households have guns”

In another example of bias, the Times claims that only 32% of American households own guns. 

 That number comes from the General Social Survey (GSS), but it is an outlier.  A March 2018 poll by NBC News and the Wall Street Journal estimates that 47% of households own guns, with another 3% declining to answer.  

A Monmouth University Poll on March 2-5, 2018 asked: “Do you or anyone in your household own a gun, rifle, or pistol?”  With 46% saying “yes” and another 7% unsure or refusing to answer, it is quite plausible that half of all households own guns.*

Is gun ownership really down in America? | Fox News

*Surely, gun control advocates such as GSS director Tom Smith view this decline as a good thing. In a 2003 book of mine, I quoted Smith as saying that the large drop in gun ownership would “make it easier for politicians to do the right thing on guns” and pass more restrictive regulations. *

Other gun control advocates have mentioned to me that they hope that if people believe fewer people own guns, that may cause others to rethink their decision to own one themselves. It is part of the reason they dramatically exaggerate the risks of having guns in the home.

The Associated Press and Time ignored other polls by Gallup and ABC News/Washington Post.

These polls show that gun ownership rates have been flat over the same period. According to Gallup, household gun ownership has ranged from 51 percent in 1994 to 34 percent in 1999. In 2014, it was at 42 percent – comparable to the 43-45 percent figures during the 1970s.

*A 2011 Gallup poll with the headline “Self-Reported Gun Ownership in U.S. Is Highest Since 1993” appears to have gotten no news coverage.*


There are other measures that suggest that we should be very careful of relying too heavily on polling to gauge the level of gun ownership. For example, the nationally number of concealed handgun permits has soared over the last decade: rising from about 2.7 million in 1999 to 4.6 million in 2007 to 11.1 million in 2014.

*The National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) shows that the number of gun purchases has grown dramatically over time –doubling from 2006 to 2014. *


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 29, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > His first study.....he comes up with 43 times...
> ...




No...suicide isn't...but you guys need it otherwise your death number wouldn't be high enough to stampede uninformed Americans into giving you power to ban and confiscate guns...

You were shown that Japan, and many European countries have higher suicide rates than we do....guns aren't the issue.


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 29, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Knowing the victim...you idiot....is gang member from gang A, shoots at gang member from gang B because they know each other as rival gang members......
> ...




The NRA didn't ban anything you lying piece of shit......I listed Centers for Disease Control gun research after the Dickey Amendment which simply stated the CDC couldn't push gun control.......I listed the gun research done by the CDC after that, so you are lying again...


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 29, 2021)

Batcat said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...




See...if you use NSSF it confuses joe....he only knows "NRA."


----------



## Batcat (Jun 29, 2021)

2aguy said:


> Batcat said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...


At this stage of his life Joe is easily confused.


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 29, 2021)

Batcat said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Batcat said:
> ...




Really?   "At this stage of his life?"    Joe has been confused his entire life...


----------



## Batcat (Jun 29, 2021)

2aguy said:


> Batcat said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


True. However Joe‘s in the latter stages of his life and dementia is coming onboard.


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 29, 2021)

Batcat said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Batcat said:
> ...




Yeah.....I think "dementia," was a genetic condition that began moments after he was born...


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 29, 2021)

Batcat said:


> Actually slavery was legal in the British Empire during the American revolution. Therefore plantation owners in the South would not have feared the loss of their slaves if the British won the war.



Learn some history. There was already an active abolition movement in the UK at the time, which had ended the slave trade by 1804 and ended slavery itself by 1835. 

The American Revolution was entirely about maintaining slavery. It's what the 1619 project is about.  



Bob Blaylock said:


> You don't speak for any majority of us.
> 
> Gun sales are up because a much larger part of the population that you represent is fed up with violent, destructive subhuman criminal filth such as yourself, and with the police being prevented from doing their job of protecting us from your kind.



Mormon Bob. 

The majority of us don't own guns.
The majority wants tougher gun control. 






The people we need protecting from are people with anger management issues who fetishize guns. 

You are a hate crime looking for a place to happen.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 29, 2021)

2aguy said:


> No...suicide isn't...but you guys need it otherwise your death number wouldn't be high enough to stampede uninformed Americans into giving you power to ban and confiscate guns...



39,000 gun deaths.
70,000 gun injuries
400,000 gun crimes.
500,000 stolen guns every year

The reality is, the majority is anti-gun fetish, even gun owners.  

They just aren't organized.  Oh, they get upset for a few days after a Second Amendment Hero mows down a room full of preschoolers, but then they get on with their lives. 

While the gun fetishists are on, all the time.


----------



## Batcat (Jun 29, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Batcat said:
> 
> 
> > Actually slavery was legal in the British Empire during the American revolution. Therefore plantation owners in the South would not have feared the loss of their slaves if the British won the war.
> ...





JoeB131 said:


> Mormon Bob.
> 
> The majority of us don't own guns.
> The majority wants tougher gun control.
> ...





JoeB131 said:


> Learn some history. There was already an active abolition movement in the UK at the time, which had ended the slave trade by 1804 and ended slavery itself by 1835.
> 
> The American Revolution was entirely about maintaining slavery. It's what the 1619 project is about


An active abolition movement does not mean slavery was illegal. The 1619 project is bullshit. 









						New York Times corrects The 1619 Project — but it’s still a giant lie
					

It took The New York Times seven months to admit a problem with its 1619 Project — and even its correction preserves the fundamental lie of its bid to rewrite American history. The 1619 Project, wh…




					nypost.com
				




_Scholars of all political stripes from a variety of disciplines objected to Hannah-Jones’ essay immediately on its publication last August, especially this crucial line: “Conveniently left out of our founding mythology is the fact that one of the primary reasons the colonists decided to declare their independence from Britain was because they wanted to protect the institution of slavery.”

That’s a lie, pure and simple, and the paper still hasn’t corrected it. It “made an important clarification,” in Hannah-Jones’ words. A new “editors’ note” explains, “A passage has been adjusted.” Namely, it added two words: The essay now says protecting slavery was the main reason “some of” the colonists fought to rebel from England.

Sorry: Preserving slavery was not a major motive for declaring independence, and next to no one fought in the war for that reason: The colonists didn’t think slavery was under threat, because it wasn’t._


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 30, 2021)

Batcat said:


> An active abolition movement does not mean slavery was illegal. The 1619 project is bullshit.



Yes, we realize it hurts the feelings of white people. 

Everyone could see the writing was on the wall for slavery in the UK.  That's why the colonies wanted out. 



Batcat said:


> Sorry: Preserving slavery was not a major motive for declaring independence, and next to no one fought in the war for that reason: The colonists didn’t think slavery was under threat, because it wasn’t.











						Slave Nation: How Slavery United the Colonies & Sparked the American Revolution - Zinn Education Project
					

Book — Non-fiction. By Alfred Blumrosen and Ruth Blumrosen. 2006. 304 pages. A detailed account of the role slavery played in the Revolutionary War and the writing of the U.S. Constitution.




					www.zinnedproject.org
				




_In 1772, a judge sitting in the High Court in London declared slavery “so odious” that it could not exist at common law and set the conditions which would consequently result in the freedom of the 15,000 slaves living in England. This decision eventually reached America and terrified slaveholders in the collection of British colonies, subject to British law. The predominantly southern slave-owners feared that this decision would cause the emancipation of their slaves. It did result in some slaves freeing themselves.

To ensure the preservation of slavery, the southern colonies joined the northerners in their fight for “freedom” and their rebellion against England. In 1774, at the First Continental Congress John Adams promised southern leaders to support their right to maintain slavery. As Eleanor Holmes Norton explains in her introduction, “The price of freedom from England was bondage for African slaves in America. America would be a slave nation.”_










						Was the American Revolution Fought to Save Slavery?
					

African Demands for Freedom During the American Revolution




					www.counterpunch.org
				




_The South, however, with its large slave plantations was engaged in the export trade of tobacco, rice, indigo, grain, and cotton and other natural resources such as timber. Disrupting that export trade was not looked upon favorably, perhaps until the 1775 proclamation issued by John Murray, otherwise known as Lord Dunmore. Dunmore was the last colonial governor of Virginia.

In light of that, somewhat like the Spanish, Lord Dunsmore issued a proclamation offering enslaved Africans freedom and land if they left the plantations and joined the British in battle. Dunsmore’s decision backfired. But first some statistics.

Schama states that it is estimated that after Dunsmore’s call some 30,000 slaves had left Virginia; it is also estimated that two-thirds of all slaves in South Carolina had escaped.  Schama notes that some of the signatories to the Declaration of Independence that stated “all men are born free and equal” and who lost slaves were: Thomas Jefferson (lost 30 slaves); James Madison, Benjamin Harrison (lost 20 slaves), Arthur Middleton (lost 50 slaves), Edward Rutledge (the youngest signatory who lost slaves as well). Then there was General George Washington. “?while George Washington was encamped in early 1776 on Cambridge Common, wrestling with arguments, pro and con, about the desirability of recruiting blacks, his own slave, Henry Washington, born in West Africa, was finding his way to the king’s lines.  In exile with other black loyalists in Birchtown, Nova Scotia, Washington would describe himself, movingly, as a “farmer”, but it was the Union Jack that protected his forty acres and his freedom.”_

There's a reason I call the Founders the "Founding Slave Rapists".  

When they said, "Liberty and Justice for all", they didn't mean black people
When they said, "All men are crated equal', they didn't mean black people. 
When they said, "the right to keep and bear arms", they didn't mean black people.


----------



## Batcat (Jun 30, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Batcat said:
> 
> 
> > An active abolition movement does not mean slavery was illegal. The 1619 project is bullshit.
> ...


You have what I consider a very distorted view of early American history. Of course you feel I have the distorted view.

I am not going to change my view and neither are you.

While I understand our history has numerous areas where this nation was far less than admirable I firmly believe had we not broke away from the British and formed our own nation this world would be worse off. We would likely be speaking German today. 

I don’t imagine the racial minorities in this nation would be as happy living in the thousand year rule of the third Reich.





__





						Persecution of black people in Nazi Germany - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				




We both would be better off trying to make this nation a nicer place for all to live. We have plenty of problems that need to be addressed right now.


----------



## hadit (Jun 30, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Ray From Cleveland said:
> 
> 
> > When you can post a reliable source of evidence, do it. The NRA has no power over a federal bureaucracy. The Kellerman studies are all padded with phony numbers. Nobody pays any attention to the anti-gun group.
> ...


And you know this as fact how?


JoeB131 said:


> Ray From Cleveland said:
> 
> 
> > I'm leaving the store with my groceries heading to my car. A woman starts screaming because a guy is trying to steal her purse and she's desperately fighting him to keep it. I pull out my gun and tell him if he wants to live, GTF out of here. Or perhaps he is robbing her with a knife. What choice does he have? He can continue fighting and perhaps get killed for twenty bucks and some credit cards, or he gets out of there as fast as he can because another customer may have already called the police and they're on their way.
> ...


How many times does a sneeze guard at a salad bar need to be used to justify its existence?


JoeB131 said:


> Ray From Cleveland said:
> 
> 
> > Oh please. Anybody can wear a face covering to not be indentified, especially today where half the people are still wearing masks in public. The only reason you are safe in your home is because any potential criminal knows there is a good chance you are armed. Therefore if he wants to rob your house, he's going to wait until you're not home. Robberies of occupied houses still happen, but as I already mentioned, the criminal has to be very picky to make sure the victim is too weak or helpless to use a firearm.
> ...


Do you realize that you just supported a major argument from the pro-gun side? When a criminal faces higher consequences, he tends to limit his criminal activities. You yourself said "Burglary, you might not even go to jail for tha. Home invasion, you go to jail for 20 years even if no one gets hurt." to explain why burglars don't invade if they think someone's home. Using that same logic (again yours), if a criminal knows he faces 20 years for using a gun to commit a crime, he's less likely to do so.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jun 30, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Okay, so let's do a study to define that. How many were domestic murders and how many were murders in furtherance of criminal acts.
> 
> On, no, wait, the NRA banned studies like that. They were bad for business.



The NRA banned studies like that?  Care to explain exactly how they did that?  Better yet, post a reliable link to your claim.


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jun 30, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Actually, what started the last one was bunch of slave-raping assholes didn't want to pay their fair share in taxes.
> 
> The majority of us are sick and tired of being held hostage to the gun fetishists.



So who is holding you hostage?  What does your neighbor having a gun have anything to do with you?


----------



## Ray From Cleveland (Jun 30, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> While I'm sure this is your wank video, it just doesn't happen that often. It's usually some nut chasing some kids out of the store for being too roudy.



Right, when kids get rowdy, the store owner pulls out his gun and tries to kill them.  Yes, armed robbery does happen often, but it's only local news at best.  This is why you believe it never happens at all.  You think that a store owner defending himself with deadly force would be national news.  Well it isn't.  It happens so often they'd have to be reporting on such attempted robberies every day.  It's like all the murders in your city.  Since it happens nearly all the time, it's not national news any longer.



JoeB131 said:


> Okay, Batman, how many times have you actually done that. I mean, you walk about with your gun, how many crimes have you actually broken up?
> 
> What. Wait. Zero? How could this be?



How many times have I gotten into a traffic accident that was my fault?  None, but that's no reason not to carry auto insurance.  And I was only using myself as an example of the millions of CCW holders in this country. 



JoeB131 said:


> Again- Burglary, you might not even go to jail for tha.



Maybe in commie cities like yours where the government is on the side of criminals, but yes, you go to jail for burglary, and the more valuables you take, the higher the charge and higher the prison sentence. 



JoeB131 said:


> Home invasion, you go to jail for 20 years even if no one gets hurt.
> 
> That's why you don't see crooks breaking into homes with people in them. Not because they are afraid of your Compensation.



You do not get 20 years for a home invasion unless the criminal actually shoots somebody.


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 30, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Batcat said:
> 
> 
> > Actually slavery was legal in the British Empire during the American revolution. Therefore plantation owners in the South would not have feared the loss of their slaves if the British won the war.
> ...




The U.K. simply transported the slaves.......they didn't have a huge population of slaves on their island....so their efforts are minimal compared to the U.S.

The 1619 project is a joke, and even left wing sources are calling it a joke...you moron.......


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 30, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > No...suicide isn't...but you guys need it otherwise your death number wouldn't be high enough to stampede uninformed Americans into giving you power to ban and confiscate guns...
> ...



39,000 gun deaths.
70,000 gun injuries
400,000 gun crimes.
500,000 stolen guns every year

Gun Deaths...

10,235 gun murders, the majority of all victims are criminals murdered by other criminals...over 70-80% of the victims are actual criminals, while the majority of the remaining victims are friends and family or associates...of the criminals.....

That leaves the rest....suicide...which you always conceale because they make up the majority of gun deaths..

*23,941........

The CDC doesn't even list firearm injuries in their Wisqars data base...*


Meanwhile....

1.1 million Americans use their legal guns to stop rapes, robberies and murders.....

Lives saved?

Case Closed: Kleck Is Still Correct


* that makes for at least 176,000 lives saved*—less some attackers who lost their lives to defenders. This enormous benefit dwarfs, both in human and economic terms, the losses trumpeted by hoplophobes who only choose to see the risk side of the equation.


*Cost savings when Americans use their legal guns for self defense...*

Annual Defensive Gun Use Savings Dwarf Study's "Gun Violence" Costs - The Truth About Guns

I was going to go on and calculate the costs of incarceration ($50K/year) saved by people killing 1527 criminals annually, and then look at the lifetime cost to society of an average criminal (something in excess of $1 million). But all of that would be a drop in the bucket compared to the $1,000,000,000,000 ($1T) annual benefit of gun ownership.
--------

It’s one of the antis’ favorite tricks: cost benefit analysis omitting the benefit side of the equation. So what _are_ the financial benefits of firearm ownership to society? Read on . . .

In my post Dennis Henigan on Chardon: Clockwork Edition, I did an analysis of how many lives were saved annually in Defensive Gun Uses (DGUs). I used extremely conservative numbers. Now I am going to use some less conservative ones.
--------------

How can we get a dollar figure from 1.88 million defensive gun uses per year? Never fear, faithful reader, we can count on the .gov to calculate everything.

According to the AZ state government, in February of 2008 a human life was worth $6.5 million. Going to the Inflation Calculator and punching in the numbers gives us a present value of $6.93 million.

So figuring that the average DGU saves one half of a person’s life—as “gun violence” predominantly affects younger demographics—that gives us $3.465 million per half life.

*Putting this all together, we find that the monetary benefit of guns (by way of DGUs) is roughly $1.02 trillion per year. That’s trillion. With a ‘T’.*

I was going to go on and calculate the costs of incarceration ($50K/year) saved by people killing 1527 criminals annually, and then look at the lifetime cost to society of an average criminal (something in excess of $1 million). But all of that would be a drop in the bucket compared to the $1,000,000,000,000 ($1T) annual benefit of gun ownership.

*When compared to the (inflation adjusted from 2002) $127.5 billion ‘cost’ of gun violence calculated by by our Ludwig-Cook buddies, guns save a little more than eight times what they “cost.”*

*Which, I might add, is completely irrelevant since “the freedom to own and carry the weapon of your choice is a natural, fundamental, and inalienable human, individual, civil, and Constitutional right — subject neither to the democratic process nor to arguments grounded in social utility.”

So even taking Motherboard’s own total and multiplying it by 100, the benefits to society of civilian gun ownership dwarf the associated costs.*


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 30, 2021)

Batcat said:


> You have what I consider a very distorted view of early American history. Of course you feel I have the distorted view.
> 
> I am not going to change my view and neither are you.
> 
> While I understand our history has numerous areas where this nation was far less than admirable I firmly believe had we not broke away from the British and formed our own nation this world would be worse off. We would likely be speaking German today.



Actually, if we hadn't broken off, we'd be Canadians today.   Which means we'd have universal health care and we could have ended slavery without a fight.  It's also probable that we never would have fought a war of aggression with Mexico. 



Batcat said:


> I don’t imagine the racial minorities in this nation would be as happy living in the thousand year rule of the third Reich.



Um, except would there be a Third Reich in such an alternate history. 


So here's the short version. 

1777 - George Washington and pals end up at the ends of Ropes.
1830- Slavery is banned in the British Empire. 
1867 - British North America is organized as a Dominion with self-government (Much like Canada and Australia are today) 
1914 - The Dominion of North America joins the Allies in the European War.  WIth the additional manpower and industry, the war is brought to a quick end, thereby making the Allies less vindictive towards Germany.  The Kaiser stays in power, and Germany continues to progress towards constitutional monarchy.  The Tsar is never toppled and Russia progresses towards a constitutional Monarchy.  
1930 - A barely known street bum dies of venereal disease in the streets of Munich.  His name was Adolf Hitler.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 30, 2021)

2aguy said:


> Gun Deaths...



Guy, you can keep posting this horseshit, but it doesn't make any of it true. 

Get back to me when you have an argument that isn't NRA spooge


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 30, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Gun Deaths...
> ...




Nothing that I post is from the NRA......you moron.


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 30, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Batcat said:
> 
> 
> > You have what I consider a very distorted view of early American history. Of course you feel I have the distorted view.
> ...




If we hadn't broken off World War 1 would still be going on......and when hitler came to power he would now be in control of Russia and all the way to Britain....


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 30, 2021)

hadit said:


> Do you realize that you just supported a major argument from the pro-gun side? When a criminal faces higher consequences, he tends to limit his criminal activities. You yourself said "Burglary, you might not even go to jail for tha. Home invasion, you go to jail for 20 years even if no one gets hurt." to explain why burglars don't invade if they think someone's home. Using that same logic (again yours), if a criminal knows he faces 20 years for using a gun to commit a crime, he's less likely to do so.



No, guy, nothing of the sort.  If you are desperate enough to commit a crime with a gun, you probably aren't thinking that far ahead. 

Most gun deaths are exactly that... spur of the moment fits of anger that the killer almost always regrets...


----------



## Hollie (Jun 30, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Batcat said:
> 
> 
> > An active abolition movement does not mean slavery was illegal. The 1619 project is bullshit.
> ...


You can congratulate yourself that the democrat party was the party of slave holders / rapists which insisted:

"When they said, "Liberty and Justice for all", they didn't mean black people
When they said, "All men are crated equal', they didn't mean black people.
When they said, "the right to keep and bear arms", they didn't mean black people.''


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 30, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> > Do you realize that you just supported a major argument from the pro-gun side? When a criminal faces higher consequences, he tends to limit his criminal activities. You yourself said "Burglary, you might not even go to jail for tha. Home invasion, you go to jail for 20 years even if no one gets hurt." to explain why burglars don't invade if they think someone's home. Using that same logic (again yours), if a criminal knows he faces 20 years for using a gun to commit a crime, he's less likely to do so.
> ...




You don't know what you are talking about.....


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 30, 2021)

Hollie said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Batcat said:
> ...




He calls the Founders slave rapists...then backs the actual political party founded by slave owners who wanted slavery so bad, they started the Civil War.....and he doesn't understand how stupid that makes him look....


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 30, 2021)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> Right, when kids get rowdy, the store owner pulls out his gun and tries to kill them. Yes, armed robbery does happen often, but it's only local news at best. This is why you believe it never happens at all. You think that a store owner defending himself with deadly force would be national news. Well it isn't. It happens so often they'd have to be reporting on such attempted robberies every day. It's like all the murders in your city. Since it happens nearly all the time, it's not national news any longer.



Actually, most murders are domestic arguments, not crime.  This is another lie the NRA tells. 



Ray From Cleveland said:


> How many times have I gotten into a traffic accident that was my fault? None, but that's no reason not to carry auto insurance. And I was only using myself as an example of the millions of CCW holders in this country.



Yes, millions of nuts, thousands of deaths... Good work.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 30, 2021)

2aguy said:


> He calls the Founders slave rapists...then backs the actual political party founded by slave owners who wanted slavery so bad, they started the Civil War.....and he doesn't understand how stupid that makes him look....



1860's Democrats have nothing to do with the modern ones. 

We threw all the racists assholes out in 1968 and Tricky Dick welcomed them with open arms.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Jun 30, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 1860's Democrats have nothing to do with the modern ones.
> 
> We threw all the racists assholes out in 1968 and Tricky Dick welcomed them with open arms.



  And yet, to this day, it is the Democraps that openly promote blatant racism, and support policies to that end, while continuing to falsely accuse their opposition of doing so.

  The form of their racism may have changed, but it remains the Democraps who are, have always been, and will always be the true party of racism.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 30, 2021)

2aguy said:


> If we hadn't broken off World War 1 would still be going on......and when hitler came to power he would now be in control of Russia and all the way to Britain....



Um, okay... not really.  

World War 1 was already grinding down to exhaustion by 1918.  The Central Powers didn't fall to Allied invasion, they fell to internal revolutions...  Meanwhile, they had already toppled the Tsar and teh French Army was already starting to mutiny.    

Now, had America stayed part of the Empire/Commonwealth, that would have meant that we'd have gotten into the war in 1914.  The Kaiser probably would have thought twice about that prospect.  The Germans were very keen on trying to keep the US neutral in WWI.  It wasn't until 1917 that the generals, bouyed by the collapse of Russia, convinced the Kaiser to engage in unrestricted submarine warfare against any ships going to the Allies.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 30, 2021)

Bob Blaylock said:


> And yet, to this day, it is the Democraps that openly promote blatant racism, and support policies to that end, while continuing to falsely accuse their opposition of doing so.
> 
> The form of their racism may have changed, but it remains the Democraps who are, have always been, and will always be the true party of racism.


Mormon Bob, you belong to a cult that calls dark skin a curse from God.  YOu really don't get to lecture people on racism.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Jun 30, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Mormon Bob, you belong to a cult that calls dark skin a curse from God. YOu really don't get to lecture people on racism.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Jun 30, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Mormon Bob, you belong to a cult that calls dark skin a curse from God. YOu really don't get to lecture people on racism.



  And you, Incel Joe are an actual, blatant racist.  Do something about the huge beam in your own eye before you fuss about the mote that you imagine in mine.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 30, 2021)

Bob Blaylock said:


> And you, @Incel Joe are an actual, blatant racist. Do something about the huge beam in your own eye before you fuss about the mote that you imagine in mine.



No, guy, I'm really not.  I've dated women outside my own race, have had them as bosses and subordinates.  Now, you might think, No, you are is a great argument, but it really isn't. 

And you belong to a fucked up racist cult... but you keep pretending that the people who founded your cult weren't really, really awful people.


----------



## Hollie (Jun 30, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > He calls the Founders slave rapists...then backs the actual political party founded by slave owners who wanted slavery so bad, they started the Civil War.....and he doesn't understand how stupid that makes him look....
> ...


Actually, 1860's democrats have everything to do with modern Democrat racism. Democrats have even expanded their race hate to include whitey, when whitey is the wrong kind of whitey.


----------



## Batcat (Jun 30, 2021)

2aguy said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...


Our history has enough problems without the liberals making up false history to pander to the blacks to insure they stay on the Democratic Plantation.


----------



## Batcat (Jun 30, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Batcat said:
> 
> 
> > You have what I consider a very distorted view of early American history. Of course you feel I have the distorted view.
> ...


Canada never became a major world power because of British rule. 

Under the British we likely would have never expanded westward. The French would never have gave Britain the Louisiana Purchase. The Mexican American War would have never occurred. We would be lucky to be half the size we are today. 

Hitler would have defeated the Brits and we would be speaking German today.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 30, 2021)

Hollie said:


> Actually, 1860's democrats have everything to do with modern Democrat racism. Democrats have even expanded their race hate to include whitey, when whitey is the wrong kind of whitey.



Okay, you tell yourself that... White fragility much. 

No wonder you think you need a gun. The world terrifies you. 



Batcat said:


> Canada never became a major world power because of British rule.
> 
> Under the British we likely would have never expanded westward. The French would never have gave Britain the Louisiana Purchase. The Mexican American War would have never occurred. We would be lucky to be half the size we are today.
> 
> Hitler would have defeated the Brits and we would be speaking German today.


.
Well, if France lost the Napoleonic wars, they probably wouldn't have had a choice.  The Dominion of America would have taken it as a war prize.  

Avoiding the illegal, immoral Mexican-American War would have been a good thing.  

It would also be unlikely Russia could have kept Alaska from being annexed. 

Hitler never would have come to power in such an alternate timeline... it's unlike his parents even would have fucked inthat timeline.


----------



## Deplorable Yankee (Jun 30, 2021)

It's all bullshit they don't care


Watch


 kids in cages at the border!


See
crickets


I don't know who this dork is or what he's even about
All ya need is the first couple minutes


He pretty much nails it




It goes for most issues...why?
Comrade ......The issue is never the issue...the issue is always the revolution


----------



## Deplorable Yankee (Jun 30, 2021)




----------



## Hollie (Jun 30, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Actually, 1860's democrats have everything to do with modern Democrat racism. Democrats have even expanded their race hate to include whitey, when whitey is the wrong kind of whitey.
> ...


It's funny how the rabid leftists hope to ignore the history of their ideology. It was the Republican Party that cane to prominence in the late civil war years as a counter to the racist fanaticism of the slave-owning Democrats in the American South.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 found Republicans as committed advocates. 80 percent of Republicans supported the Civil Rights Act against 63 percent of Democrats supporting the law. 

Look forward to today. look at the disasters if Democrat run cities.  So much of the crime and poverty   that black Americans experience today is seen in the large cities across the country. And, almost every one of these cities—from Los Angeles to Portland to Chicago to Baltimore to New York to Chicago are Democratic Party dystopias.


----------



## hadit (Jun 30, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> > Do you realize that you just supported a major argument from the pro-gun side? When a criminal faces higher consequences, he tends to limit his criminal activities. You yourself said "Burglary, you might not even go to jail for tha. Home invasion, you go to jail for 20 years even if no one gets hurt." to explain why burglars don't invade if they think someone's home. Using that same logic (again yours), if a criminal knows he faces 20 years for using a gun to commit a crime, he's less likely to do so.
> ...


Source for that assertion?

Remember, you tried to make the case that a criminal will modify his behavior based on the consequences of that behavior. Same thing here then, a criminal knowing he'll get an automatic 20 years for using a gun will be less likely to do it. Your logic.


----------



## Batcat (Jul 1, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Well, if France lost the Napoleonic wars, they probably wouldn't have had a choice. The Dominion of America would have taken it as a war prize.
> 
> Avoiding the illegal, immoral Mexican-American War would have been a good thing.
> 
> ...


I wonder if there is anything to the parallel universe theory. If so many of the alternate histories discussed in this thread might be true in a near universe.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 1, 2021)

Hollie said:


> It's funny how the rabid leftists hope to ignore the history of their ideology. It was the Republican Party that cane to prominence in the late civil war years as a counter to the racist fanaticism of the slave-owning Democrats in the American South.



Actually, it was the before the Civil War that the GOP came to prominance, but their hands were hardly clean. They wanted to round up all the blacks and ship them back to Africa.  After the civil war, they pretty much forgot about the issue of civil rights when they signed on to the comprimise of 1876 that ended reconstruction and allowed the institution of Jim Crow to happen. 



Hollie said:


> The Civil Rights Act of 1964 found Republicans as committed advocates. 80 percent of Republicans supported the Civil Rights Act against 63 percent of Democrats supporting the law.


Right. Now, here's the thing, and try to pay attention.  AFTER LBJ signed the CRA of 1964, he lamented that he lost the South for a Generation.  In 1964's election, Five Deep South States voted for Goldwater, who was otherwise rejected by the rest of the country because he was nuts.  In 1968 the South either went for Geo. Wallace's independent campaign or signed up for Tricky Dick.  By 1972, the Republicans had fully embraced Southern Racists and they've been winning the South ever since. 



Hollie said:


> Look forward to today. look at the disasters if Democrat run cities. So much of the crime and poverty that black Americans experience today is seen in the large cities across the country. And, almost every one of these cities—from Los Angeles to Portland to Chicago to Baltimore to New York to Chicago are Democratic Party dystopias.



Okay, let's look at that. 

There are five reasons why Crime is so bad in the cities (all cities, not just Democratic ones).  Besides the fact they have higher concentrations of people, and therefore more crime. 

Those are - addiction, poverty, mental illness, racism and gun proliferation.  

Well, addiction - The GOP has pushed the War on Drugs long after everyone has concluded it doesn't work. We've flooded our prisons with mostly poor people of color (white people like Rush Limbaugh get rehab) and rehab programs for poor people like Methadone are impossible to get because the Republicans in Congress keep slashing programs to give tax cuts to rich people. 

poverty- Again- Republicans keep trying to slash poverty relief programs or pervert them to make their rich donors richer. 

Mental Illness - I'm willing to put blame on both sides for this one.  Liberals for shutting down the mental hospitals because they were "mean" and Republicans for refusing to adequately fund outpatient programs. 

Racism- Again- it's been the GOP Brand since Tricky Dick. Trump just says the quiet part out loud. 

Which brings us to gun proliferation.  Cities have tried to limit or ban guns in their city limits, but the NRA keeps going to congress to weaken national gun laws or goes to court to fight any gun bans.  

Case in point, my own home town.  We banned guns in 1984, and in the 1990's, gun violence started to decline.  Then in 2010, the National Rampage Association went to SCOTUS and got a victory in the McDonald case.   Pretty much overnight, gun stores started popping up all over Chicago and our murder rate doubled in a decade. 

It's not the cities are a dystopia, it's the whole country.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 1, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > It's funny how the rabid leftists hope to ignore the history of their ideology. It was the Republican Party that cane to prominence in the late civil war years as a counter to the racist fanaticism of the slave-owning Democrats in the American South.
> ...


It's pretty typical for rabid leftists to sidestep and dodge the the history, past and present, of their ''party of racial hatreds''. From long before the Civil War and for every day since, the democrat party, the party of Jim Crow, has been race baiting and the party looking for new victims of their hate and retrogression.

Which brings us to the present. The past year has shown the very worst elements of democrat Marxism / racial hatreds that inspire the party. Crime is exploding, especially in democrat controlled cities because of the policies they put in place. Democrat run dystopias are a fixture of the crime and race hate that defines big cities across the country.   

You can congratulate yourselves for the crime and property destruction that has accompanied the policies the rabid dems have put in place. The big, democrat run cities are getting exactly the results the dems had planned for.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 1, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > It's funny how the rabid leftists hope to ignore the history of their ideology. It was the Republican Party that cane to prominence in the late civil war years as a counter to the racist fanaticism of the slave-owning Democrats in the American South.
> ...




Wrong.....

LBJ was a racist, who voted against every Civil Rights act that came along when he was in the congress and voted against the anti-lynching law...

Meanwhile, Barry Goldwater was a Civil Rights hero....you idiot.

LBJ’s Democratic Plantation › American Greatness
https://amgreatness.com/2018/09/02/lbjs-democratic-plantation/
*there is a man who, according to a memo filed by FBI agent William Branigan, seems to have been in the Ku Klux Klan. This memo was only revealed in recent months, with the release of the JFK Files.*
*

Lyndon Johnson opposed every civil rights proposal considered in his first 20 years as lawmaker

"He had been a congressman, beginning in 1937, for eleven years, and for eleven years he had voted against every civil rights bill –

against not only legislation aimed at ending the poll tax and segregation in the armed services but even against legislation aimed at ending lynching: a one hundred percent record," Caro wrote.


"Running for the Senate in 1948, he had assailed President" Harry "Truman’s entire civil rights program (‘an effort to set up a police state’)…Until 1957, in the Senate, as in the House, his record – by that time a twenty-year record – against civil rights had been consistent," Caro wrote.

=========

The Party of Civil Rights | National Review

The Party of Civil Rights

The depth of Johnson’s prior opposition to civil-rights reform must be digested in some detail to be properly appreciated.

 In the House, he did not represent a particularly segregationist constituency (it “made up for being less intensely segregationist than the rest of the South by being more intensely anti-Communist,” as the New York Times put it), but Johnson was practically antebellum in his views.

 Never mind civil rights or voting rights: In Congress, Johnson had consistently and repeatedly voted against legislation to protect black Americans from lynching.


As a leader in the Senate, Johnson did his best to cripple the Civil Rights Act of 1957; not having votes sufficient to stop it, he managed to reduce it to an act of mere symbolism by excising the enforcement provisions before sending it to the desk of President Eisenhower.


Johnson’s Democratic colleague Strom Thurmond nonetheless went to the trouble of staging the longest filibuster in history up to that point, speaking for 24 hours in a futile attempt to block the bill. The reformers came back in 1960 with an act to remedy the deficiencies of the 1957 act, and Johnson’s Senate Democrats again staged a record-setting filibuster.

In both cases, the “master of the Senate” petitioned the northeastern Kennedy liberals to credit him for having seen to the law’s passage while at the same time boasting to southern Democrats that he had taken the teeth out of the legislation.



Johnson would later explain his thinking thus: “These Negroes, they’re getting pretty uppity these days, and that’s a problem for us, since they’ve got something now they never had before: the political pull to back up their uppityness. Now we’ve got to do something about this — we’ve got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference.”

Read more at: The Party of Civil Rights
=============

Goldwater.....

Barry M. Goldwater: The Most Consequential Loser in American Politics

Goldwater treated all people the same. As a private citizen, he flew mercy missions to Navaho reservations, never asking for recognition or accepting payment. He felt that “the red man seemed as much—if not more—a part of Arizona and America as any white or black person.”[20] Moreover, a few weeks after Goldwater was discharged from the Army in November 1945, Democratic Arizona Governor Sidney Preston Osborn asked him to organize the Arizona Air National Guard. One of Goldwater’s first recommendations, soon approved, was to desegregate the unit. Goldwater’s integration of the state’s Air National Guard took place more than two years before President Harry Truman integrated the U.S. armed forces.

Goldwater was an early member of the Arizona chapters of both the NAACP and the National Urban League, even making up the latter’s operating deficit when it was getting started. Later as a Senator, he desegregated the Senate cafeteria in 1953, demanding that his black legislative assistant, Kathrine Maxwell, be served along with every other Senate employee after learning she had been denied service.

In the mid-1970s, a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, investigating improper operations of the intelligence community in the United States, proposed that transcripts of the FBI tapes about Martin Luther King Jr.’s alleged indiscretions be published. An outraged Goldwater declared he would not be a party to destroying King’s reputation and strode out of the committee room. A fellow Senator recalled that Goldwater’s protest “injected some common sense into the proceedings,” and the electronic surveillance transcripts were not released.[21]

That his opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was based on constitutional grounds and not political considerations was underscored in the final week of the fall campaign.

Speaking in Columbia, South Carolina, Goldwater condemned segregation and declared that government must treat “all men as equal in the arena of law and civil order.”[22] He pledged if elected President to implement all provisions of the act. His forthright pro-civil rights speech was televised on 87 stations throughout the South.

---

NPR Wrong on Goldwater '64, Civil Rights, Say 4 Who Were There

As for the Republican nominee's position on the Civil Rights Act, Goldwater had said he would vote for passage if Section II on public accommodations and Section VII on equal employment opportunity were removed. With his view reinforced by a detailed memorandum from Phoenix lawyer and future Chief Justice William Rehnquist, Goldwater felt these sections were unconstitutional, were unenforceable without a federal police force, and would lead to the creation of racial quotas and affirmative action. 

"He was absolutely right about [the two sections of the Civil Rights Act] and they did lead to precisely what Goldwater and most conservatives were afraid of," said Tom Winter, then executive editor of Human Events, who would join Ryskind as its co-owner a year later. As for the "extremism in the defense of liberty" speech, Winter recalled watching it from a San Francisco restaurant "and cheering it because it was clearly about freedom and fighting communism. I certainly didn't think it had anything to do with race."

https://freedomsjournalinstitute.org/uncategorized/urban-legend-goldwater-against-civil-rights/

More specifically, Goldwater had problems with title II and title VII of the 1964 bill. He felt that constitutionally the federal government had no legal right to interfere in who people hired, fired; or to whom they sold their products, goods and services. He felt that “power” laid in the various states, and with the people. He was a strong advocate of the tenth amendment. Goldwater’s constitutional stance did not mean he agreed with the segregation and racial discrimination practiced in the South. To the contrary, he fought against these kinds of racial divides in his own state of Arizona. He supported the integration of the Arizona National guard and Phoenix public schools.[4] Goldwater was, also, a member of the NAACP and the Urban League.[5]*
*His personal feelings about discrimination are enshrined in the congressional record where he states, “I am unalterably opposed to discrimination or segregation on the basis of race, color, or creed or on any other basis; not only my words, but more importantly my actions through years have repeatedly demonstrated the sincerity of my feeling in this regard…”[6]. And, he would continued to holdfast to his strongly felt convictions that constitutionally the federal government was limited in what it could do, believing that the amoral actions of those perpetuating discrimination and segregation would have to be judged by those in that community. Eventually, the states government and local communities would come to pressure people to change their minds. Goldwater’s view was that the civil disobedience by private citizens against those business establishments was more preferable than intervention by the feds. He, optimistically, believed that racial intolerance would soon buckle under the economic and societal pressure.*


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 1, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > It's funny how the rabid leftists hope to ignore the history of their ideology. It was the Republican Party that cane to prominence in the late civil war years as a counter to the racist fanaticism of the slave-owning Democrats in the American South.
> ...




Actual history.....

Again...you are the one voting for the party created by actual slave rapists.......

The Myth of the Racist Republicans - Claremont Review of Books

*Electoral Patterns*
*In all these ways, the gop appears as the national party of the middle-class, not of white solidarity. And it is this interpretation, and not the myth, that is supported by the voting results. The myth's proponents highlight, and distort, a few key electoral facts: Southern white backlash was most heated in the 1960s, especially in the Deep South. It was then and there that the GOP finally broke through in the South, on the strength of Goldwater's appeals to states' rights. Democrats never again won the votes of most Southern whites. So Goldwater is said to have provided the electoral model for the GOP.

But hidden within these aggregate results are patterns that make no sense if white solidarity really was the basis for the GOP's advance. These patterns concern which Southern votes the GOP attracted, and when. How did the GOP's Southern advance actually unfold? We can distinguish between two sub-regions. 

The Peripheral South—Florida, Texas, Tennessee, Virginia, North Carolina, and Arkansas—contained many growing, urbanizing "New South" areas and much smaller black populations. 

Race loomed less large in its politics. In the more rural, and poorer, Deep South—Alabama, Mississippi, Georgia, South Carolina, and Louisiana —black communities were much larger, and racial conflict was much more acute in the 1950s and '60s. Tellingly, the presidential campaigns of Strom Thurmond, Goldwater, and Wallace all won a majority of white votes in the Deep South but lost the white vote in the Peripheral South.

4/30/18

https://www.dailywire.com/news/30054/note-kanye-no-republicans-didnt-turn-party-racism-ben-shapiro

Sean Trende of RealClearPolitics agrees: he says that the GOP gradually increased its support in the south from 1928 to 2010. As Dan McLaughlin summarizes, “As late as 2010, there were still states like Alabama and North Carolina that were voting in their first Republican legislative majorities since Reconstruction — something that would have happened overnight in the late 60s if the partisan realignment had been driven by lockstep white voting loyalties on racial lines.”
Second, it was southern Democrats fighting against the Civil Rights movement for the most part. In 1948 and 1968, insurgent Democrats launched anti-civil rights presidential campaigns. Civil rights bills required more Republican than Democratic support.
Finally, the myth of the southern strategy also suggests that today’s southerners vote for Republicans because they’re more racist than northerners. There’s no evidence to that effect, either. According to Gallup, “Southern Americans' ratings of race relations are currently about average when compared with those in other parts of the country.” The most segregated areas of the south are in major metropolitan areas — which tend to vote more heavily Democratic than their surrounding areas.*
*So don’t believe the hype, Kanye. The racist Democrats who propelled Democrats to victory remained Democrats.*


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 1, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > It's funny how the rabid leftists hope to ignore the history of their ideology. It was the Republican Party that cane to prominence in the late civil war years as a counter to the racist fanaticism of the slave-owning Democrats in the American South.
> ...




Wrong, the reason violence is rampant in democrat party controlled cities...?

Fatherless homes.

Democrat party war on police.

Democrat party education policies that trap black children in horrible, democrat party controlled schools.

Democrat party criminal justice policies.

Democrat party tax policies that drive out businesses and increase poverty.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 1, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > It's funny how the rabid leftists hope to ignore the history of their ideology. It was the Republican Party that cane to prominence in the late civil war years as a counter to the racist fanaticism of the slave-owning Democrats in the American South.
> ...




Shit head......there are zero gun stores in the City of Chicago...you idiot.  You can't even get that right....you moron.


----------



## ClaireH (Jul 1, 2021)

NoNukes said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > NoNukes said:
> ...


I tend to make assumptions at times so please clarify- are you saying that criminals will get rid of their guns if they were told to turn them in? Maybe in another alternative universe, but please feel free to correct me if I’m wrong about your opinion. That is what you’re implying -that a gun-free zone means that criminals (tens of thousand out looking for crimes of convenience-aka looking for sitting ducks) obey the laws. Highly doubtful.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 1, 2021)

2aguy said:


> Wrong.....
> 
> LBJ was a racist, who voted against every Civil Rights act that came along when he was in the congress and voted against the anti-lynching law...



Yeah, he only signed the VOting Rights Act, and the CRA's of 1964 and 1968, which were considered pivotal steps in Human rights.  



2aguy said:


> Meanwhile, Barry Goldwater was a Civil Rights hero....you idiot.



Yeah, who amazing only got 6% of the Black vote.   Did blacks just "miss" his heroism?


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 1, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Wrong.....
> ...




Moron....he only signed them after the actual hard work was done and again, he voted against all the other real Civil Rights acts when his kkk brothers in the democrat party were murdering blacks and republicans......


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 1, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Wrong.....
> ...




Yeah...they missed Barry Goldwater and for the last 90 years or so they have been voting for the political party that kept their family members in chains.......


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 1, 2021)

2aguy said:


> Moron....he only signed them after the actual hard work was done and again, he voted against all the other real Civil Rights acts when his kkk brothers in the democrat party were murdering blacks and republicans......



Again- he got 94% of the black vote.  He must have done something right. 

Barry "Deep Down You know He's nuts" Goldwater got 6% of the black vote.  Ah, the good old days, when Republicans would nominate Crazy people and lose in a landslide.


----------



## NoNukes (Jul 2, 2021)

2aguy said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


Another Blacks are too stupid to know what's good for them post. Get out of here with your stupid, racist bullshit.


----------



## justinacolmena (Jul 2, 2021)

2aguy said:


> two......saving the life of a woman who is there to end the life of her baby? Odd, isn't it.....


I don't buy it. It's a hit.
The women are crying already, so touchy feely and bittersweet about ending the life of that innocent baby that might have interfered with their adult lifestyle.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 2, 2021)

2aguy said:


> Yeah...they missed Barry Goldwater and for the last 90 years or so they have been voting for the political party that kept their family members in chains.......



Actually, here's what the Democrats have done for blacks in the last 90 years. 

Ended Jim Crow
Desegregated the Armed Forces in 1948
Signed the civil rights acts of 1964 and 1968
Created social welfare programs to reduce poverty
Created an actual middle class. (We really didn't have one before 1932)
Created affirmative action programs
SIgned the voting rights act and passed the 24th Amendment. 
Elected the first black man to be President
Elected the first black woman to be Vice-President 

Here's what Barry "Deep Down You Know He's Nuts" Goldwater did for them.

.... 

Wait. Can't think of a thing.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 2, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Moron....he only signed them after the actual hard work was done and again, he voted against all the other real Civil Rights acts when his kkk brothers in the democrat party were murdering blacks and republicans......
> ...




Yes...he bought them off with the great society.....and they sold their children to the democrat party blood baths in the cities they control.



Barry Goldwater was an actual Civil Rights hero.....Lyndon Johnson was a true blue racist.....and blacks voted for the racist....and have been paying the price ever since......


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 2, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Yeah...they missed Barry Goldwater and for the last 90 years or so they have been voting for the political party that kept their family members in chains.......
> ...




The democrats didn't end jim crow....you idiot, they created it.

The republicans pushed all of the Civil Rights acts while the democrats jumped in only at the end when lyndon johnson told them if they didn't jump in....they wouldn't win elections again....

Did they reduce poverty?   No.

The first racist black man and the first racist black woman.......

And what came out of electing them based on their skin color versus their policies?   Blacks have suffered more death and destruction...you idiot.....


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 2, 2021)

NoNukes said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...




Not racist, the truth.....Barry Goldwater was a Civil Rights Hero....lyndon johnson was an out and out racist, who voted against every single Civil Rights act when he was in congress and even voted against the anti-lynching laws...you moron...

The racists are you and the democrat party...


----------



## NoNukes (Jul 2, 2021)

2aguy said:


> NoNukes said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


You are delusional.


----------



## woodwork201 (Jul 2, 2021)

2aguy said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Batcat said:
> ...


On July 3, 1776, there was no United States and every single slave in the British colonies were British slaves.  

I deleted the rest of a long draft on this topic because it's off topic but you're absolutely correct.  There were slaves on the island but few; the British did most of their slave holdings in colonies around the globe, not just North America, in order to hide the evil from the people on the British Isles.  They only started to eliminate it because they knew the United States was eliminating it.  "American" slavery is not United States slavery nearly as much as it is "British" slavery, along with others such as Dutch, French, Spanish, Portuguese, and even Africans who were the slave traders and holders in America.


----------



## woodwork201 (Jul 2, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Batcat said:
> 
> 
> > You have what I consider a very distorted view of early American history. Of course you feel I have the distorted view.
> ...



That's about the most idiotic alternative universe I've ever seen.  The reason Britain ended it's global colonization was because they lost the revolution.  Had they maintained an affordable, enriching in fact, hold on the American colonies, they may very well still be holding slaves and what is now Canada and Australia would still be colonies, as would the entire United States and probably Mexico and South America.

Like others, you blame the US for crimes by the UK and Europeans because you hate the United States and Europe is not the United States so, in comparison, they must be good. In comparison, they are not.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 3, 2021)

2aguy said:


> Yes...he bought them off with the great society.....and they sold their children to the democrat party blood baths in the cities they control.



Actually, the reason why the cities are blood baths are because you fucking gun fetishists keep letting the gun industry flood our street with guns.  




2aguy said:


> Barry Goldwater was an actual Civil Rights hero.....Lyndon Johnson was a true blue racist.....and blacks voted for the racist....and have been paying the price ever since......



I'm still waiting for you to tell me what Crazy Barry did to advance civil rights.  

I told you what LBJ did.  The CRA's of 64 and 68, the Voting Rights Act, and the Great Society.  (The Great Society was a good thing, and it benefited white people just as much as blacks. It's why you don't have to worry about being bankrupted by medical expenses after you retire.)


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 3, 2021)

woodwork201 said:


> That's about the most idiotic alternative universe I've ever seen. The reason Britain ended it's global colonization was because they lost the revolution. Had they maintained an affordable, enriching in fact, hold on the American colonies, they may very well still be holding slaves and what is now Canada and Australia would still be colonies, as would the entire United States and probably Mexico and South America.



The British didn't end their Global Colonization after the revolution of 1776.  They expanding it, taking over half of Africa, large chunks of Asia, expanding into Australia and genociding the shit out of the aborigines.  

What killed the British Empire (Good riddance) was that they couldn't control all these parts of the world AND fight wars with Germany.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 3, 2021)

woodwork201 said:


> Like others, you blame the US for crimes by the UK and Europeans because you hate the United States and Europe is not the United States so, in comparison, they must be good. In comparison, they are not.



Naw, man, I hate us for EXACTLY what we did.   We fought this revolution over these flowery ideas of equality and liberty, then we created a society based on genociding Native Americans to take their land and enslaving black people to make a few rich assholes richer.  

THEN we sent a bunch of dumb, inbred rednecks out to fight to keep slaves, and they were dumb enough to not only do it, but still be proud of doing something stupid 150 years later.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 3, 2021)

2aguy said:


> The democrats didn't end jim crow....you idiot, they created it.
> 
> The republicans pushed all of the Civil Rights acts while the democrats jumped in only at the end when lyndon johnson told them if they didn't jump in....they wouldn't win elections again....



Actually, you are a bit confused.   FDR, Harry Truman and JFK did more to advance civil rights than Eisenhower and the Republicans did.  

Now, this is what you don't get about modern politics.   The big shift that happened after Herbert Hoover lost was that lots of working class northerners joined the Democratic Party because they realized that the Republicans were only out for the rich.  This lead to a 50 year Democratic dominance of American politics where we fixed most of the problems of the country and made it the greatest in the world.  What made Ike a great president is that he realized we needed to go forward, not back.  

Then Republicans came along, starting with Nixon and Reagan, and fucked it up.  Why advance people when you can play them against each other?  

Now, prior to 1932, the majority of blacks voted for the GOP. The ones who were allowed to vote, anyway, most of them weren't.  In 1932, they realized the GOP really didn't know what it was doing, and voted for FDR, but the GOP could still count on getting about 35% of the black vote.  

Then your boy Barry opposed the Civil Rights act, not necessarily because he was a racist, (although he probalby was) but because he didn't want to see that kind of federal expansion.   Blacks responded by voting 94% for LBJ.  

But you guys point to 10% of blacks voting for Trump because he was on TV and famous, and say, "See, see, we're starting to turn blacks away from the Democrats!!!"


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 3, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Yes...he bought them off with the great society.....and they sold their children to the democrat party blood baths in the cities they control.
> ...




The reason democrat party cities are blood baths is the democrat party keeps releasing violent gun offenders.......the politicians make the laws that them off the hook, the judges give them bail, no cash bail, or home monitoring and the democrat party prosecutors plea bargain away the gun charges...

Then the democrat party attacks the police forcing them to stop pro-active policing....you idiot..

95% of our gun crime problem in cities controlled by the democrat party is due to their policies......


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 3, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Yes...he bought them off with the great society.....and they sold their children to the democrat party blood baths in the cities they control.
> ...




Barry Goldwater....

Barry M. Goldwater: The Most Consequential Loser in American Politics

*Goldwater treated all people the same. 

As a private citizen, he flew mercy missions to Navaho reservations, never asking for recognition or accepting payment.


He felt that “the red man seemed as much—if not more—a part of Arizona and America as any white or black person.”[20] 

Moreover, a few weeks after Goldwater was discharged from the Army in November 1945, Democratic Arizona Governor Sidney Preston Osborn asked him to organize the Arizona Air National Guard. 

One of Goldwater’s first recommendations, soon approved, was to desegregate the unit. Goldwater’s integration of the state’s Air National Guard took place more than two years before President Harry Truman integrated the U.S. armed forces.*

*Goldwater was an early member of the Arizona chapters of both the NAACP and the National Urban League, even making up the latter’s operating deficit when it was getting started. Later as a Senator, he desegregated the Senate cafeteria in 1953, demanding that his black legislative assistant, Kathrine Maxwell, be served along with every other Senate employee after learning she had been denied service.*
*
In the mid-1970s, a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, investigating improper operations of the intelligence community in the United States, proposed that transcripts of the FBI tapes about Martin Luther King Jr.’s alleged indiscretions be published.*

* An outraged Goldwater declared he would not be a party to destroying King’s reputation and strode out of the committee room. A fellow Senator recalled that Goldwater’s protest “injected some common sense into the proceedings,” and the electronic surveillance transcri**pts were not released.[21]
*
*That his opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was based on constitutional grounds and not political considerations was underscored in the final week of the fall campaign.*

*Speaking in Columbia, South Carolina, Goldwater condemned segregation and declared that government must treat “all men as equal in the arena of law and civil order.”[22] He pledged if elected President to implement all provisions of the act. His forthright pro-civil rights speech was televised on 87 stations throughout the South.*
*
---

NPR Wrong on Goldwater '64, Civil Rights, Say 4 Who Were There

As for the Republican nominee's position on the Civil Rights Act, Goldwater had said he would vote for passage if Section II on public accommodations and Section VII on equal employment opportunity were removed. With his view reinforced by a detailed memorandum from Phoenix lawyer and future Chief Justice William Rehnquist, Goldwater felt these sections were unconstitutional, were unenforceable without a federal police force, and would lead to the creation of racial quotas and affirmative action. 

"He was absolutely right about [the two sections of the Civil Rights Act] and they did lead to precisely what Goldwater and most conservatives were afraid of," said Tom Winter, then executive editor of Human Events, who would join Ryskind as its co-owner a year later. As for the "extremism in the defense of liberty" speech, Winter recalled watching it from a San Francisco restaurant "and cheering it because it was clearly about freedom and fighting communism. I certainly didn't think it had anything to do with race."

https://freedomsjournalinstitute.org/uncategorized/urban-legend-goldwater-against-civil-rights/

More specifically, Goldwater had problems with title II and title VII of the 1964 bill. He felt that constitutionally the federal government had no legal right to interfere in who people hired, fired; or to whom they sold their products, goods and services. He felt that “power” laid in the various states, and with the people. He was a strong advocate of the tenth amendment. Goldwater’s constitutional stance did not mean he agreed with the segregation and racial discrimination practiced in the South. To the contrary, he fought against these kinds of racial divides in his own state of Arizona. He supported the integration of the Arizona National guard and Phoenix public schools.[4] Goldwater was, also, a member of the NAACP and the Urban League.[5]*
*His personal feelings about discrimination are enshrined in the congressional record where he states, “I am unalterably opposed to discrimination or segregation on the basis of race, color, or creed or on any other basis; not only my words, but more importantly my actions through years have repeatedly demonstrated the sincerity of my feeling in this regard…”[6]. And, he would continued to holdfast to his strongly felt convictions that constitutionally the federal government was limited in what it could do, believing that the amoral actions of those perpetuating discrimination and segregation would have to be judged by those in that community. Eventually, the states government and local communities would come to pressure people to change their minds. Goldwater’s view was that the civil disobedience by private citizens against those business establishments was more preferable than intervention by the feds. He, optimistically, believed that racial intolerance would soon buckle under the economic and societal pressure.*


You idiot......


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 3, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Yes...he bought them off with the great society.....and they sold their children to the democrat party blood baths in the cities they control.
> ...




For his entire career Lyndon Johnson fought against Civil Rights for Blacks....you moron........and only fell in line at the absolute end because he knew if he didn't, the democrats would neve win elections....since they couldn't beat or murder enough blacks to keep them from voting....

LBJ’s Democratic Plantation › American Greatness
https://amgreatness.com/2018/09/02/lbjs-democratic-plantation/
there is a man who, according to a memo filed by FBI agent William Branigan, seems to have been in the Ku Klux Klan. This memo was only revealed in recent months, with the release of the JFK Files.


Lyndon Johnson opposed every civil rights proposal considered in his first 20 years as lawmaker

"He had been a congressman, beginning in 1937, for eleven years, and for eleven years he had voted against every civil rights bill –

*against not only legislation aimed at ending the poll tax and segregation in the armed services but even against legislation aimed at ending lynching: a one hundred percent record," Caro wrote.*


"Running for the Senate in 1948, he had assailed President" Harry "Truman’s entire civil rights program (‘an effort to set up a police state’)…Until 1957, in the Senate, as in the House, his record – by that time a twenty-year record – against civil rights had been consistent," Caro wrote.

=========

The Party of Civil Rights | National Review

*The Party of Civil Rights*

*The depth of Johnson’s prior opposition to civil-rights reform must be digested in some detail to be properly appreciated.*
*
 In the House, he did not represent a particularly segregationist constituency (it “made up for being less intensely segregationist than the rest of the South by being more intensely anti-Communist,” as the New York Times put it), but Johnson was practically antebellum in his views.

**Never mind civil rights or voting rights: In Congress, Johnson had consistently and repeatedly voted against legislation to protect black Americans from lynching.*
*
*
*As a leader in the Senate, Johnson did his best to cripple the Civil Rights Act of 1957; *

*not having votes sufficient to stop it, he managed to reduce it to an act of mere symbolism by excising the enforcement provisions before sending it to the desk of President Eisenhower.


Johnson’s Democratic colleague Strom Thurmond nonetheless went to the trouble of staging the longest filibuster in history up to that point, speaking for 24 hours in a futile attempt to block the bill. The reformers came back in 1960 with an act to remedy the deficiencies of the 1957 act, and Johnson’s Senate Democrats again staged a record-setting filibuster.
*
*In both cases, the “master of the Senate” petitioned the northeastern Kennedy liberals to credit him for having seen to the law’s passage while at the same time boasting to southern Democrats that he had taken the teeth out of the legislation.*
*

*
*Johnson would later explain his thinking thus: “These Negroes, they’re getting pretty uppity these days, and that’s a problem for us, since they’ve got something now they never had before: the political pull to back up their uppityness. Now we’ve got to do something about this — we’ve got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference.”*


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 3, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > The democrats didn't end jim crow....you idiot, they created it.
> ...




You really are an idiot....


----------



## Hollie (Jul 3, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> woodwork201 said:
> 
> 
> > Like others, you blame the US for crimes by the UK and Europeans because you hate the United States and Europe is not the United States so, in comparison, they must be good. In comparison, they are not.
> ...



Wow. Good for you. You describe the stereotypical self-loathing leftist. A self-loathing democrat who described the history of the democrat party of slavery.  You also describe the stereotypical self-loathing phony who exploits all the benefits of the society you claim to loathe. A cavalcade of self-loathing as you pound away on your keyboard spreading your message of self-hate. Sell your possessions, donate the money to Al Sharpton and live in poverty. You will feel better about yourself. You can trust me.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 3, 2021)

2aguy said:


> The reason democrat party cities are blood baths is the democrat party keeps releasing violent gun offenders.......the politicians make the laws that them off the hook, the judges give them bail, no cash bail, or home monitoring and the democrat party prosecutors plea bargain away the gun charges...



No, guy, the reason they are blood baths is because the National Rampage Association makes it too easy to get a gun in this country.  Period.

If locking people up were the answer, we'd be there.  We already lock up 2 million people. 



2aguy said:


> For his entire career Lyndon Johnson fought against Civil Rights for Blacks....you moron........and only fell in line at the absolute end because he knew if he didn't, the democrats would neve win elections....since they couldn't beat or murder enough blacks to keep them from voting....



So you wrote that whole long essay, and you couldn't point out one thing Barry Goldwater did, EVER to advance civil rights.  You just made a shitload of excuses for him.  Point was, LBJ delivered the goods.  Barry stood in the way.  That's why black people voted against him. 

That and he was fucking nuts and probably would have blown up the world. 

It should be pointed out that the states where they did murder black people for trying to vote were the ones that went for Goldwater.  



2aguy said:


> Johnson’s Democratic colleague Strom Thurmond nonetheless went to the trouble of staging the longest filibuster in history up to that point, speaking for 24 hours in a futile attempt to block the bill.



Funny thing. When Strom Thurmond left the Democratic party, the Republicans WELCOMED HIM WITH OPEN ARMS. 



Hollie said:


> Wow. Good for you. You describe the stereotypical self-loathing leftist. A self-loathing democrat who described the history of the democrat party of slavery. You also describe the stereotypical self-loathing phony who exploits all the benefits of the society you claim to loathe. A cavalcade of self-loathing as you pound away on your keyboard spreading your message of self-hate. Sell your possessions, donate the money to Al Sharpton and live in poverty. You will feel better about yourself. You can trust me.



Wow- So um, are you going to pretend that Native American Genocide and Slavery didn't happen? 

Sure, I take advantages to the benefits of this society.   I think everyone should have them.  What a crazy idea.


----------



## meaner gene (Jul 3, 2021)

woodwork201 said:


> There were slaves on the island but few; the British did most of their slave holdings in colonies around the globe, not just North America, in order to hide the evil from the people on the British Isles.  *They only started to eliminate it because they knew the United States was eliminating it. *  "American" slavery is not United States slavery nearly as much as it is "British" slavery, along with others such as Dutch, French, Spanish, Portuguese, and even Africans who were the slave traders and holders in America.


Europe started the process of abolishing slavery, while America put slavery into place with constitutional protections, such as guaranteeing the continuation of slavery until at least 1808.

_In 1803, Denmark-Norway became the first country in Europe to ban the African slave trade._

_In 1807,  Britain abolished the Atlantic slave trade,_









						Slave Trade Act 1807 - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 3, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > The reason democrat party cities are blood baths is the democrat party keeps releasing violent gun offenders.......the politicians make the laws that them off the hook, the judges give them bail, no cash bail, or home monitoring and the democrat party prosecutors plea bargain away the gun charges...
> ...




You never explain how locking up a violent gun criminal, the ones actually using their guns for crime and murder......and then letting them back out.....lowers the crime rate......


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 3, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > The reason democrat party cities are blood baths is the democrat party keeps releasing violent gun offenders.......the politicians make the laws that them off the hook, the judges give them bail, no cash bail, or home monitoring and the democrat party prosecutors plea bargain away the gun charges...
> ...




You really are stupid....I listed what he did, and you pretend I didn't.......you are an idiot.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 3, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > The reason democrat party cities are blood baths is the democrat party keeps releasing violent gun offenders.......the politicians make the laws that them off the hook, the judges give them bail, no cash bail, or home monitoring and the democrat party prosecutors plea bargain away the gun charges...
> ...




There was no genocide....the primary cause of death among Indians in this country was disease because they did not have immunity to European, and likely, African, diseases...

Slavery happened because Africans and Europeans created the transatlantic slave trade.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 3, 2021)

meaner gene said:


> woodwork201 said:
> 
> 
> > There were slaves on the island but few; the British did most of their slave holdings in colonies around the globe, not just North America, in order to hide the evil from the people on the British Isles.  *They only started to eliminate it because they knew the United States was eliminating it. *  "American" slavery is not United States slavery nearly as much as it is "British" slavery, along with others such as Dutch, French, Spanish, Portuguese, and even Africans who were the slave traders and holders in America.
> ...




Dipshit......they profited from the slave trade by trading with the South for cotton and other products.......Norway and Britain didn't have actual slaves on their soil, so just ending the shipping of slaves was no big deal...considering they created the transatlantic slave trade in the first place.......


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 3, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > The reason democrat party cities are blood baths is the democrat party keeps releasing violent gun offenders.......the politicians make the laws that them off the hook, the judges give them bail, no cash bail, or home monitoring and the democrat party prosecutors plea bargain away the gun charges...
> ...




You moron...

The lie about dixie crats changing parties...

*What happened to all those racist Dixiecrats that, according to the progressive narrative, all picked up their tents and moved from the Democratic Party to the Republican Party? Actually, they exist only in the progressive imagination.

This is the world not as it is but as progressives wish it to be. Of all the Dixiecrats who broke away from the Democratic Party in 1948, of all the bigots and segregationists who voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964, I count just two—one in the Senate and one in the House—who switched from Democrat to Republican.

In the Senate, that solitary figure was Strom Thurmond. In the House, Albert Watson. The constellation of racist Dixiecrats includes Senators William Murray, Thomas P. Gore, Spessard Holland, Sam Ervin, Russell Long, Robert Byrd, Richard Russell, Olin Johnston, Lister Hill, John C. Stennis, John Sparkman, John McClellan, James Eastland, Herman Talmadge, Herbert Walters, Harry F. Byrd, George Smathers, Everett Jordan, Allen Ellender, A. Willis Robertson, Al Gore Sr., William Fulbright, Herbert Walters, W. Kerr Scott, and Marion Price Daniels.

The list of Dixiecrat governors includes William H. Murray, Frank Dixon, Fielding Wright, and Benjamin Laney. I don’t have space to include the list of Dixiecrat congressmen and other officials. Suffice to say it is a long list. And from this entire list we count only two defections.

Thus the progressive conventional wisdom that the racist Dixiecrats became Republicans is exposed as a big lie.

The Dixiecrats remained in the Democratic Party for years, in some cases decades. Not once did the Democrats repudiate them or attempt to push them out.


Segregationists like Richard Russell and William Fulbright were lionized in their party throughout their lifetimes, as of course was Robert Byrd, who died in 2010 and was eulogized by leading Democrats and the progressive media.*
*The Switch That Never Happened: How the South Really Went GOP › American Greatness*
*==*=========


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 3, 2021)

2aguy said:


> You never explain how locking up a violent gun criminal, the ones actually using their guns for crime and murder......and then letting them back out.....lowers the crime rate......



I kind of don't have to.  

I just have to point out that the Prison-Industrial Complex doesn't reduce crime.   Time to try something better. 

We lock up the murderers, that's not the problem.  

We can't lock up every disorganized punk who gets caught with a gun he shouldn't have.  We'd run out of room in the jails pretty quickly, and frankly, I don't feel like spending 20% of my income supporting the Prison Industrial Complex. 



2aguy said:


> There was no genocide....the primary cause of death among Indians in this country was disease because they did not have immunity to European, and likely, African, diseases...
> 
> Slavery happened because Africans and Europeans created the transatlantic slave trade.



Slavery happened because the Europeans tried to enslave the natives, and they were dying off so fast from disease and overwork they had to bring in Africans to replace them. 



2aguy said:


> You really are stupid....I listed what he did, and you pretend I didn't.......you are an idiot.



Someone needs to tell you how to organize your information.  Half of your list was slandering LBJ (Who, by the way was listed # 11 in a survey of Historians of Presidents) before you came up with petty stuff like "Let his secretary eat at the Senate Lunch Room" and "Didn't want to release tapes of MLK after he was dead. (Which happened after he lost 96% of the black vote.)   Then you came up with weak sauce like, "He would have been fine with the CRA of 64 except for the things that gave it teeth."


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 3, 2021)

2aguy said:


> You moron...
> 
> The lie about dixie crats changing parties...
> 
> ...



We weren't talking about the actual office holders, we were talking about the Bubba Rednecks who supported them.  The Bubba rednecks all figured they could vote for Republicans better than a new breed of Democrat who said, "You know, black people are okay, sometimes." and other radical ideas.  

We chased out the bigots, you welcomed them with open arms.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 3, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > The reason democrat party cities are blood baths is the democrat party keeps releasing violent gun offenders.......the politicians make the laws that them off the hook, the judges give them bail, no cash bail, or home monitoring and the democrat party prosecutors plea bargain away the gun charges...
> ...


So, yes, you exploit the advantages of the ''Great Satan''. 

It's obvious your weepy eyed, pompous bloviating about ''_.we created a society based on genociding Native Americans to take their land and enslaving black people to make a few rich assholes richer.'', _means the poor oppressed American Indians and blacks are reduced to mere talking points for the benefit of the rabid left.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 3, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > You moron...
> ...


"We chased out the bigots"?

The rabid leftists did nothing of the kind. The democrat party; the party of slavery and Jim Crow, has always exploited race baiting as a weapon. The rabid left has moved from hatred and revulsion of blacks to hatred and revulsion of whites. It's really remarkable to see the rabid leftists hate themselves, hate each other and hate their miserable lives as they fawn over those who burn their cities to the ground.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 3, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > The reason democrat party cities are blood baths is the democrat party keeps releasing violent gun offenders.......the politicians make the laws that them off the hook, the judges give them bail, no cash bail, or home monitoring and the democrat party prosecutors plea bargain away the gun charges...
> ...


Its not at all easy to legally purchase a gun. That's the falsehood typically portrayed by rabid leftists. 

On the other hand, criminals aren't bothered by laws because, well, criminals don't obey laws. It's comically tragic to see rabid leftists whine and moan about gun crime when the rabid leftists flail their Pom Poms for defunding police, not charging criminals for their crimes, no requirement for bail and basically making heroes of criminals.

How did that Portland ''summer of love'l turn out?


Why not riot and loot in democrat cities? There's no reason not to. 









						Crooked Manhattan DA Cy Vance Refuses to Prosecute Protest-Related Arrests "In the Interest of Justice"
					

Crooked Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance, Jr. on Friday announced the DA’s office will not prosecute protest-related arrests “in the interest of justice.” Cy Vance has been working around the clock to get his hands on President Trump’s tax records, but he will not prosecute violent...




					www.thegatewaypundit.com
				













						Portland DA Declines to Prosecute Host of Riot-Related Offenses, Citing ‘Depth of Emotion’ Surrounding Racial Justice | National Review
					

Violent unrest has plagued the city since the death of George Floyd in May.




					www.nationalreview.com
				






It just goes on and on. Rabid dems love their criminal heroes.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 4, 2021)

Hollie said:


> So, yes, you exploit the advantages of the ''Great Satan''.
> 
> It's obvious your weepy eyed, pompous bloviating about ''_.we created a society based on genociding Native Americans to take their land and enslaving black people to make a few rich assholes richer.'', _means the poor oppressed American Indians and blacks are reduced to mere talking points for the benefit of the rabid left.



Well, yeah, except when we try to do something about it on the left, like affirmative action or police reform, you guys whine about how we don't love America.

I love America, warts and all...  But all that bad stuff in our history happened and we need to own up to it.



Hollie said:


> Its not at all easy to legally purchase a gun. That's the falsehood typically portrayed by rabid leftists.
> 
> On the other hand, criminals aren't bothered by laws because, well, criminals don't obey laws. It's comically tragic to see rabid leftists whine and moan about gun crime when the rabid leftists flail their Pom Poms for defunding police, not charging criminals for their crimes, no requirement for bail and basically making heroes of criminals.



Okay, here's the thing.

James "Joker" Holmes
Adam Lanza's Mom
Stephen Craig Paddock
Seung-Hui Cho
Omar Mateen
Nikolas Cruz
Steven Kazmierczak


these guys were not criminals who got their guns illegally.  They are guys who went to a gun store, plopped down a pile of money and were able to walk out with enough guns to murder lots of people.

Now, I suspect that if you went ahead and actually investigated the single shooters like the mass shooters, you'd find they had just as little trouble getting their guns.


----------



## NoNukes (Jul 4, 2021)

2aguy said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


I saw it happen.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 4, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > So, yes, you exploit the advantages of the ''Great Satan''.
> ...


Strange that the rabid left believes ''doing something about it'', involves encouraging criminals to become repeat offenders. Defunding police, not charging criminals for their crimes, no requirement for bail and basically making heroes of criminals is not ''doing something about it''.

OK, here's the thing,









						Many Portland rioters will see their criminal cases dropped by leftist DA
					

Multnomah County District Attorney Mike Schmidt, leaning on a group of community representatives he called his transition team, announced Tuesday that his office will drop most of the charges filed against protesters. His prosecutors won’t pursue demonstrators accused of interfering with police...




					www.gopusa.com
				












						‘We Will Not Prosecute’: Left-Wing Prosecutors, Many Backed By Soros Cash, Implement Soft-On-Crime Policies Across America
					

Left-wing prosecutors have implemented soft-on-crime approaches to criminal justice across America, in some instances making it a matter of policy not to prosecute specific crimes.




					dailycaller.com
				












						New Soros-Backed L.A. County D.A. Issues Directive To Not Prosecute Numerous Crimes, Eliminates Bail | The Daily Wire
					






					www.dailywire.com
				





The list goes on but rabid leftists don't get it.

Now, I suspect that if you research the facts, you will need more deflection and sidestepping to press the rabid leftist agenda.









						FBI stats show 5 times more murders by knives than rifles in 2018
					

The Federal Bureau of Investigation released crime statistics for 2018, indicating knives were more than five times as likely to be used as murder than




					americanmilitarynews.com
				





Apparently, we need an ''assault knife'' ban.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 4, 2021)

Hollie said:


> Strange that the rabid left believes ''doing something about it'', involves encouraging criminals to become repeat offenders. Defunding police, not charging criminals for their crimes, no requirement for bail and basically making heroes of criminals is not ''doing something about it''.
> 
> OK, here's the thing,



Why do you avoid my point that most gun criminals get their guns legally?  Because it's really easy to get a gun.  So can we now admit you conceded that point before we move on to your next thing.  Fine. Concession noted 

For the Portland Rioters.. no point bringing them to trial if you can't get convictions.  My suspiscion, most of the Bubba Rednecks who stormed the capitol on 1/6 will never see the inside of a jail cell, either.  It's very difficult to get a 

Bail Reform. I'm all for it.  Frankly, cash bail is just another wonderful example of white privilege.  White people who commit violent crimes get bail while they wait for their lawyers to work out a good deal for them.  Poor people who commit non-violent crimes languish in prison for months until their overworked public defenders cop a deal. 

here's a crazy idea.  No-cash bail for non-violent offenders and no bail at all for violent offenders.  

Oh, yeah, George Soros is not hiding under your bed... Just though you'd like to know.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 4, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > So, yes, you exploit the advantages of the ''Great Satan''.
> ...




They all went through mandatory, federal background checks, you lying asshole.....your God, the government, failed in all of those cases......the gun stores did federal background checks and the incompetent government failed to list crimes or allowed repeat offenders off the hook so their crimes weren't on record...you idiot.....

Your God failed...not the gun stores.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 4, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Strange that the rabid left believes ''doing something about it'', involves encouraging criminals to become repeat offenders. Defunding police, not charging criminals for their crimes, no requirement for bail and basically making heroes of criminals is not ''doing something about it''.
> ...




They don't get their guns easily, your God, the government, keeps screwing up.......by either not documenting their crimes or letting them off the hook...the gun stores do their jobs......doing the federally mandated background checks...but if the government fails to report the crimes that are known, they don't show up on the background check, you idiot.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 4, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Strange that the rabid left believes ''doing something about it'', involves encouraging criminals to become repeat offenders. Defunding police, not charging criminals for their crimes, no requirement for bail and basically making heroes of criminals is not ''doing something about it''.
> ...



Why do you make the fraudulent claim ''most gun criminals get their guns legally?''

The pattern of behavior shared by so much of the rabid left is their propensity for lies and fraudulent claims. The facts are clear that legal gun owners are not gun criminals.









						Here Are 8 Stubborn Facts on Gun Violence in America
					

In the wake of the tragic murder of 17 innocent students and teachers at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, students, educators, politicians, and activists are searching for solutions to prevent future school shootings. As emotions morph from grief to anger to resolve, it...




					www.heritage.org
				













						PolitiFact - Is most gun crime committed by those who illegally possess guns?
					

U.S. Rep. John Faso says he opposes some gun-control measures because they target the wrong people. Laws that limit the




					www.politifact.com
				



"The vast majority of crime that is gun related is committed by people who illegally are possessing that firearm."



Here's something from the Washington Post


			https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/07/27/new-evidence-confirms-what-gun-rights-advocates-have-been-saying-for-a-long-time-about-crime/
		


New evidence confirms what gun rights advocates have said for a long time about crime​
Lawful gun owners commit less than a fifth of all gun crimes, according to a novel analysis released this week by the University of Pittsburgh.

In the study, led by epidemiologist Anthony Fabio of Pittsburgh's Graduate School of Public Health, researchers partnered with the Pittsburgh Bureau of Police to trace the origins of all 893 firearms that police recovered from crime scenes in the year 2008.

They found that in approximately 8 out of 10 cases, the perpetrator was not a lawful gun owner but rather in illegal possession of a weapon that belonged to someone else.



 Crime across the country is spiraling and that's especially true in the large, democrat run dystopias.

Here's a fun fact:








						Democrats Run America's Top 20 Crime-Ridden Cities - Tennessee Star
					

Annoyed that Senate Democrats are blocking a police reform bill, President Donald Trump said Wednesday that the 20 U.S. cities with the highest crime rates are all run by Democrats.




					tennesseestar.com
				




Here is the Neighborhood Scout ranking of the most crime-ridden cities and their mayors.

*1. Detroit*

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): *20.0*

Odds of being a victim: *1 in 50*

Mayor: Michael Edward Duggan, Democrat

2. *Memphis, Tennessee*

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): *19.5*

Odds of being a victim: *1 in 51*

Mayor: Jim Strickland, Democrat

3. *Birmingham, Alabama*

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): *19.3*

Odds of being a victim: *1 in 52*

Mayor: Randall Woodfin, Democrat

4. *Baltimore*

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): *18.5*

Odds of being a victim: *1 in 54*

Mayor: Jack Young, Democrat

5.* Flint, Michigan*

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): *18.3*

Odds of being a victim: *1 in 55*

Mayor: Karen Weaver, Democrat

6. *St. Louis *

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): *18.2*

Odds of being a victim: *1 in 55*

Mayor: Lyda Krewson, Democrat

7. *Danville, Illinois*

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): *18.0*

Odds of being a victim: *1 in 55*

Mayor: Ricky Williams Jr. (nonpartisan election)

8. *Saginaw, Michigan*

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): *16.7*

Odds of being a victim: *1 in 60*

Mayor: Floyd Kloc (nonpartisan election)

9. *Wilmington, Delaware *

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): *16.3*

Odds of being a victim: *1 in 61*

Mayor: Mike Purzycki, Democrat

10. *Camden, New Jersey*

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): *16.2*

Odds of being a victim: *1 in 62*

Mayor: Francisco Moran, Democrat

11. *Pine Bluff, Arkansas*

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): *16.0*

Odds of being a victim: *1 in 62*

Mayor: Shirley Washington, Democrat

12. *Kansas City, Missouri*

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): *15.9*

Odds of being a victim: *1 in 63*

Mayor: Quinton Lucas, Democrat

13.* San Bernardino, California*

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): *15.3*

Odds of being a victim: *1 in 65*

Mayor: John Valdivia, Democrat

14. *Alexandria, Louisiana *

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): *14.6*

Odds of being a victim: *1 in 68*

Mayor: Jacques Roy, Democrat

15. *Little Rock, Arkansas *

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): *14.6*

Odds of being a victim: *1 in 68*

Mayor: Frank Scott Jr., Democrat

*16. Cleveland*

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): *14.5*

Odds of being a victim: *1 in 69*

Mayor: Frank Jackson, Democrat

17. *Milwaukee *

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): *14.3*

Odds of being a victim: *1 in 70*

Mayor: Tom Barrett, Democrat

*18. Stockton, California *

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): *14.2*

Odds of being a victim: *1 in 70*

Mayor: Michael Tubbs, Democrat

19. *Monroe, Louisiana*

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): *14.1*

Odds of being a victim: *1 in 71*

Mayor: James Earl Mayo, Democrat

20. *Chester, Pennsylvania*

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): *14.0*

Odds of being a victim: *1 in 71*

Mayor: Thaddeus Kirkland, Democrat

– – –


----------



## Hollie (Jul 4, 2021)

So... what happens when democrats,

defund police,

turn violent criminals loose on the public

make heroes of criminal sociopaths

Threaten to seize legally owned firearms

Well, it is predictable.





__





						2021 Gun Sales Reach 22.2 Million: Here’s the Top State
					





					www.msn.com
				






Rabid dems. Best gun sales people on the planet.

And, lets make no mistake, these gun sales are driven by rabid dem policies.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 4, 2021)

2aguy said:


> They all went through mandatory, federal background checks, you lying asshole.....your God, the government, failed in all of those cases......the gun stores did federal background checks and the incompetent government failed to list crimes or allowed repeat offenders off the hook so their crimes weren't on record...you idiot.....
> 
> Your God failed...not the gun stores.



The government didn't give this fool a gun.  The gun store did. 

Like I said.  Let the victims of gun violence sue the gun stores... you'd be amazed how quick they clean up their acts.  

"Well, he passed a background check"
"He dyed his hair orange and was cackling like a crazy person!"  



Hollie said:


> Why do you make the fraudulent claim ''most gun criminals get their guns legally?''
> 
> The pattern of behavior shared by so much of the rabid left is their propensity for lies and fraudulent claims. The facts are clear that legal gun owners are not gun criminals.



Because you haven't proven otherwise. 

Every last mass shooter got his guns legally.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 4, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > They all went through mandatory, federal background checks, you lying asshole.....your God, the government, failed in all of those cases......the gun stores did federal background checks and the incompetent government failed to list crimes or allowed repeat offenders off the hook so their crimes weren't on record...you idiot.....
> ...




No...moron, your "God" government was supposed to put criminal records into the system....your "God" was supposed to arrest and convict people who commit crimes........

The FBI and the Air Force failed they system.......obama's "Promise Program," kept another shooter from having a criminal record that would have stopped him from getting a gun..

Those are not failures of the gun stores...the gun stores did their job, they did what you shit heads wanted, they did the federally mandated background checks for buying a gun.....

Since your "god" failed to put in criminal records, since your "God" failed to arrest and convict shooters for other crimes on some left wing fantasy policy.....the gun store found no criminal record when they had the FBI do their criminal background check on the gun buyer......

The gun stores did their jobs......your "God," failed.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 4, 2021)

Hollie said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...




Great work....


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 4, 2021)

2aguy said:


> No...moron, your "God" government was supposed to put criminal records into the system....your "God" was supposed to arrest and convict people who commit crimes........
> 
> The FBI and the Air Force failed they system.......obama's "Promise Program," kept another shooter from having a criminal record that would have stopped him from getting a gun..
> 
> Those are not failures of the gun stores...the gun stores did their job, they did what you shit heads wanted, they did the federally mandated background checks for buying a gun.....



again, the gun store made the decision to look a crazy person in the eye, and say, "Well, yup, he looks like someone who should totally have a gun." 

That's the primary point of failure, buddy.  

So let's say we got rid of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), which was imposed after gun stores sold guns to Malvo and Mohammed, a couple of guys who were in the system as a minor and a felon.  A jury found the gun seller liable, but then Congress swooped in and gave them blanket immunity. 

You have no faith in government... fine.  Let the Gun Industry run background checks themselves... and then be held accountable when they sell to the wrong people.


----------



## meaner gene (Jul 4, 2021)

Hollie said:


> Well, it is predictable.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Haven't you seen the pattern.  No matter who is president, no matter what the policies are, the gun manufacturers come up with new and novel reasons to convince people to buy more gun$$$$$.









						Gun Sales and Manufacturing Statistics [2022]
					

Curious how the gun companies are doing these days? Let's just say business is booming. Check out the data and these gun sales stats now!




					gununiversity.com
				




2010	14,409,616
2011	16,454,951
2012	19,592,303
2013	21,093,273
2014	20,968,547
2015	23,141,970
2016	27,538,673
2017	25,235,215
2018	26,181,936
2019	28,369,750
2020	39,695,315


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 4, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > No...moron, your "God" government was supposed to put criminal records into the system....your "God" was supposed to arrest and convict people who commit crimes........
> ...




Again....they did the federally mandated background check...

Your "God" government, failed to upload criminal records that should have been in the background check which would have denied the gun, and they failed to arrest and convict because of left wing policies about not arresting and convicting criminals who commit felonies.....

That is on your God, not the gun stores.

Gun stores do not have blanket immunity....if they break the law they can be sued....what the Lawful Commerce in Arms Act does is prevent left wing, democrat party operatives from starting fake lawsuits to bankrupt gun makers and stores who did not break the law...


----------



## meaner gene (Jul 4, 2021)

2aguy said:


> ...  and they failed to arrest and convict because of left wing policies about not arresting and convicting criminals who commit felonies.....


I call BULLSHIT.

The BLM protesters who were identified, that committed felonies,  were arrested, indicted, and now await trial.


----------



## meaner gene (Jul 4, 2021)

2aguy said:


> Gun stores do not have blanket immunity....if they break the law they can be sued....what the Lawful Commerce in Arms Act does is prevent left wing, democrat party operatives from starting fake lawsuits to bankrupt gun makers and stores who did not break the law...



You mean liked the makers and distributors of oxycontin?

_ States argue that these companies marketed these drugs in a misleading way, downplaying the risks and exaggerating the benefits. They also claim distributors supplied millions of pills when they should have realized there was a problem and the drugs were being abused._









						Opioid lawsuits generate payouts, controversy
					

In the biggest opioid case to date, Purdue Pharma, manufacturer of OxyContin, reached a tentative settlement last week with 23 states and attorneys representing roughly 2,000 local governments. The deal would have Purdue Pharma file for bankruptcy and pay as much as $12 billion over time, with...




					www.americanbar.org
				




Had pharmaceuticals been shielded like the gun makers and dealers, they wouldn't have to pay either.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 4, 2021)

meaner gene said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > ...  and they failed to arrest and convict because of left wing policies about not arresting and convicting criminals who commit felonies.....
> ...



You don't know what you are talking about...

First...they dropped charges against the majority of blm protestors....everywhere...

Second.....when we talk about the Florida high school shooting, the obama "Promise Program," was used as an excuse to not arrest and convict the shooter of several previous law breaking actions...bringing knives and bullets onto his high school campus, which would have given him a criminal record, which would have prevented him from getting the rifle......also, the local police had over 32 interactions with him and his family, and again, the "Promise Program," was used to keep from arresting him...


Third.....democrat party policies in the cities they control release violent, known, repeat gun offenders over and over again......


----------



## meaner gene (Jul 4, 2021)

meaner gene said:


> I call BULLSHIT.
> 
> The BLM protesters who were identified, that committed felonies,  were arrested, indicted, and now await trial.





2aguy said:


> You don't know what you are talking about...
> 
> First...they dropped charges against the majority of blm protestors....everywhere...


That's because all those protesters were charged with minor misdemeanors or violations.  NOT felonies.

The same thing happens after most protests.  Where the police sweep the crowd charging them with things like failure to disburse, curfew violations, or 3rd degree trespass.  After checking their criminal record, they're released with a desk appearance ticket.  And instead of clogging the courts with minor violations, they instead concentrate on those who committed felonies.


----------



## meaner gene (Jul 4, 2021)

2aguy said:


> Second.....when we talk about the Florida high school shooting, the obama "Promise Program," was used as an excuse to not arrest and convict the shooter of several previous law breaking actions...bringing knives and bullets onto his high school campus, which would have given him a criminal record, which would have prevented him from getting the rifle......


Check the law. That wouldn't have stopped him.  Possession of a knife or bullets, etc would be misdemeanors that don't carry sentences of over a year.

_Virginia knife law is wordy, restrictive, and complicated by local ordinances across the state. ... It is a Class 4 Misdemeanor to have in one's possession a switchblade knife or ballistic knife with the intent to sell, barter, or transfer the item._

And background checks only cover felonies, violent misdemeanors, and domestic violence.









						Background Checks for Guns: What Do You Need to Know? | CriminalWatchDog
					

As a trusted name in the space, you can rely on CriminalWatchDog’s answers to these frequently asked background check questions.




					www.criminalwatchdog.com


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 4, 2021)

meaner gene said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Second.....when we talk about the Florida high school shooting, the obama "Promise Program," was used as an excuse to not arrest and convict the shooter of several previous law breaking actions...bringing knives and bullets onto his high school campus, which would have given him a criminal record, which would have prevented him from getting the rifle......
> ...




Yeah...again...

*Cruz’s threats to the teens could constitute aggravated cyberstalking, a felony, said Louis, the former Miami-Dade prosecutor. They could also violate state law against issuing written threats to kill.*
*
“You have no right to say to somebody, ‘I’m going to kill you,’ ” Louis said.

Richard Della Fera, a Miami defense attorney, agreed. And he said the lack of investigation into what was clearly a crime was troubling.
*
*“If law enforcement saw the messages and could identify the person who was sending them, the ball got dropped when the investigation didn’t go any further,” said Della Fera, who has handled high-profile cases of people accused of posting violent material online.

Most important: Being charged with aggravated cyberstalking could have prevented Cruz from possessing the weapon he used to kill 17 people.*

*A condition of bond for felony stalking charges in Broward is the surrender of all firearms.

“He would be required to surrender any firearms that he had,” Della Fera said. “He wouldn’t have had the firearm.”
-----*

*Cruz could also have been charged federally.*
*
In September, he wrote “I’m going to be a professional school shooter” on a YouTube channel. The comment would have been enough to charge Cruz with threatening to injure another person, a felony, according to an official in the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Miami.
*
*The comment was reported to the FBI. But a lackluster investigation did not identify Cruz as its author.*



			https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/broward/article201887629.html


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 4, 2021)

meaner gene said:


> meaner gene said:
> 
> 
> > I call BULLSHIT.
> ...




Except for the Jan. 6 protestors...the ones who calmly walked the hallways and took selfies........they are still in federal prison....for trespassing offences...


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 4, 2021)

meaner gene said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Second.....when we talk about the Florida high school shooting, the obama "Promise Program," was used as an excuse to not arrest and convict the shooter of several previous law breaking actions...bringing knives and bullets onto his high school campus, which would have given him a criminal record, which would have prevented him from getting the rifle......
> ...




And this one...

*In fact, Kelley, who served in logistics readiness at Holloman Air Force Base in New Mexico from 2010 to 2014, received a bad conduct discharge, according Air Force spokesperson Ann Stefanek. *
*
Kelley was court-martialed in 2012 for two counts of assault on his then-wife and assault on their child, Stefanek said. In addition to the bad conduct discharge, Kelley also received a reduction in rank and confinement for 12 months.
---
The Air Force tells CBS News Kelley's case was a general court martial, the most serious level of military trial proceedings, reserved for allegations similar to felonies in civilian jurisdictions. 
--------
*
*Texas and federal laws prohibit those with domestic violence convictions from owning firearm.** The military is supposed to report to the FBI, for the purposes of prohibiting firearm purchases, convictions on domestic violence charges, as well as convictions that carry maximum potential sentences of more than a year in confinement. It is unclear if the FBI was notified about Kelley's case, which fit both conditions.*









						Texas church shooting: How was Devin Patrick Kelley discharged from the Air Force?
					

Sutherland Springs shooter Devin Patrick Kelley received a bad conduct discharge from the U.S. Air Force, a less severe penalty than dishonorable discharge, which would have barred him from owning firearms




					www.cbsnews.com


----------



## meaner gene (Jul 4, 2021)

2aguy said:


> *Cruz’s threats to the teens could constitute aggravated cyberstalking, a felony, said Louis, the former Miami-Dade prosecutor. They could also violate state law against issuing written threats to kill.*


Cyberstalking requirement:

_“Course of conduct” means a pattern of conduct composed of a series of acts over a period of time,_

Did he threaten the same person, over a period of time?


----------



## meaner gene (Jul 4, 2021)

2aguy said:


> Except for the Jan. 6 protestors...the ones who calmly walked the hallways and took selfies........they are still in federal prison....for trespassing offences...


Again I call BULLSHIT.

Nobody on January 6th faced ONLY trespass charges.  And the only ones still in jail are those the judges ruled were a threat to others.  Even the woman who stole Nancy Pelosi's laptop was let out of jail.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 4, 2021)

meaner gene said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > *Cruz’s threats to the teens could constitute aggravated cyberstalking, a felony, said Louis, the former Miami-Dade prosecutor. They could also violate state law against issuing written threats to kill.*
> ...




There was enough to arrest him...they didn't .....


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 4, 2021)

meaner gene said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Except for the Jan. 6 protestors...the ones who calmly walked the hallways and took selfies........they are still in federal prison....for trespassing offences...
> ...




No...they are being held so that the democrats can pretend they are a threat....


----------



## Hollie (Jul 4, 2021)

meaner gene said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Well, it is predictable.
> ...


Look at the percentage increase in 2020 vs. 2019. Wasn't 2020 the ''summer of love'' in Portland and dem controlled cities were burning?

Democrats. Best firearm salespeople on the planet.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 4, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > No...moron, your "God" government was supposed to put criminal records into the system....your "God" was supposed to arrest and convict people who commit crimes........
> ...


Again, falsehoods and misinformation from the rabid leftist. 

The gun store owner is not required to be a practioning psychiatrist and make judgements about a persons mental health. 

Your pompous blathering about ''the gun store made the decision to look a crazy person in the eye''... is just leftist hysteria and misinformation. Identify a single source that confirms the gun store owner sold a firearm to someone they believed was a ''crazy person''. 

Identify a single source that documents the gun buyer ''acting crazy''. My suspicion is that you can't even define the terms you use. 

Stereotypical rabid leftists tend to be big on falsehoods, hysteria and misinformation while coming up short on facts.


----------



## meaner gene (Jul 4, 2021)

meaner gene said:


> Cyberstalking requirement:
> 
> _“Course of conduct” means a pattern of conduct composed of a series of acts over a period of time,_
> 
> Did he threaten the same person, over a period of time?





2aguy said:


> There was enough to arrest him...they didn't .....



The standard for arrest is reasonable suspicion.  
You need to provide he met the standard for indictment and conviction of a felony.   As in repeated behavior over a period of time.

It's like the difference between evading taxes for a couple of tax returns resulting in a fine.  And doing the same thing for 15 years, resulting in a felony.


----------



## meaner gene (Jul 4, 2021)

meaner gene said:


> Again I call BULLSHIT.
> 
> And the only ones still in jail are those the judges ruled were a threat to others.





2aguy said:


> No...they are being held so that the democrats can pretend they are a threat....


Are you referring to the Qanon shaman?  

In that ruling, Lamberth cited comments Angeli made in an interview with the CBS News show “60 Minutes+” that the judge said showed Angeli did not show remorse nor understand the gravity of his actions.

That he didn’t know what he did wrong meant that he could repeat the behavior if released, Lamberth ruled.

“Defendant's perception of his actions on January 6 as peaceful, benign, and well-intentioned shows a detachment from reality," Lamberth wrote.


----------



## ClaireH (Jul 4, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > The increase in gun homicide in Sweden is closely linked to criminal milieux in socially disadvantaged areas,” the report said, noting that shooting deaths had more than doubled between 2011 and 2019 and now accounted for 40% of violent deaths.
> ...


Do you need to separate suicides by gun deaths in those total gun death stats? Asking for a friend The point is somebody who is determined to commit suicide and uses a gun to do so is most likely still going to commit suicide using another means. I read that suffocation is the 2nd cause of suicide in the states, so likely those would increase significantly along with intentional OD’s, 
use of knives and other means. In order for an estimated “total gun homicides” stat to be valid, you need to first separate the two.


----------



## ClaireH (Jul 4, 2021)

woodwork201 said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


You know reading your post made me think of a recent prison documentary that reveals how most federal prisons have their criminals separated intentionally according to their specific divisions- blacks hang with blacks only, whites same thing, hispanics same. Watching one of the documentaries a prison warden was asked about how this happened and he said that the inmates  enforce it, so the prisons allow it. That was an eye-opener for me, but relative to this thread there’s got to be a positive correlation there because these racial divisions result in more shankings and internal infighting and one-upping. The craziest part in my mind is that prison administrators and guards allow for these pod divisions letting the the pod bosses rule the roost basically.


----------



## meaner gene (Jul 4, 2021)

ClaireH said:


> The point is somebody who is determined to commit suicide and uses a gun to do so is most likely still going to commit suicide using another means. I read that suffocation is the 2nd cause of suicide in the states, so likely those would increase significantly along with intentional OD’s,
> use of knives and other means.











						Lethality of Suicide Methods
					

Case Fatality Rates by Suicide Method, 8 U.S. States, 1989-1997 The bar graph below shows “case fatality” (the percent of people who die in a suicide attempt) for several methods of suicide. It is …




					www.hsph.harvard.edu
				




suicide by firearm is 82.5% effective
OD is only 1.5%

Plus how long it takes is also controlling.  Long slow methods often bring a change of heart.  While actions that can't be aborted once commenced, like firearms or jumping are usually fatal.


----------



## ClaireH (Jul 4, 2021)

meaner gene said:


> ClaireH said:
> 
> 
> > The point is somebody who is determined to commit suicide and uses a gun to do so is most likely still going to commit suicide using another means. I read that suffocation is the 2nd cause of suicide in the states, so likely those would increase significantly along with intentional OD’s,
> ...


MeanGene  your source is outdated from 1980 something to ‘97. I’m going to come back to your comment with more recent findings, but it will be a while I have something coming up here to do. I am not arguing about that high stat for effective outcome with a gun, but just offhand and not checking first, that OD stat seems really low particularly with new, potent drugs made available in the market since the 90’s.


----------



## ClaireH (Jul 4, 2021)

meaner gene said:


> ClaireH said:
> 
> 
> > The point is somebody who is determined to commit suicide and uses a gun to do so is most likely still going to commit suicide using another means. I read that suffocation is the 2nd cause of suicide in the states, so likely those would increase significantly along with intentional OD’s,
> ...


2aGuy- my apologies for being slightly off-topic but I hope you recognize the bottom-line connection about taking out suicides by guns to have a better assessment of “total gun death” claims.

The following information questions that 1.5% effective OD rate” MGene and supports that currently it’s a much higher stat without question-if we’re talking unintentional and intentional ODs together or intentional OD’s alone.

Synthetic fentanyl has majorly increased global and US suicides. Until blue state governments/governors take responsibility for what they’re allowing to happen in their inner cities, and deal with these fentanyl profiteers they’ll be partly responsible for high numbers of fentanyl deaths. Maybe some of these blue state secretly think that’s the way to get rid of drug users, I don’t know but it’s backwards thinking. The drug cartels benefit financially from it without concern over consequences and their illegal profit margins continue to soar.








						CDC reports a record 81,000 drug overdose deaths in the US in a 12-month period
					

Drug overdoses have been rising for decades, but data collected by the CDC shows that overdose deaths accelerated significantly in the first months of the pandemic.



					www.wsws.org


----------



## woodwork201 (Jul 4, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Yes...he bought them off with the great society.....and they sold their children to the democrat party blood baths in the cities they control.
> ...


The Great Society benefited no one except government.  Poverty among whites and blacks - and every one else for that matter - has increased significantly.  The US government spends approximately $75,000 per family of four on poverty elimination programs but that same family would be out of poverty, if they had zero other income or wages, if the government simply gave them $26,500.  This is why the programs will never end and the war never won.  Too many bureaucrats are making a living, many getting wealthy, by keeping the poor poor.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 4, 2021)

meaner gene said:


> Haven't you seen the pattern. No matter who is president, no matter what the policies are, the gun manufacturers come up with new and novel reasons to convince people to buy more gun$$$$$.



Quite right.  The Gun Industry has a whole business model based on scaring people like Hollie and 2TinyGuy.  



2aguy said:


> Again....they did the federally mandated background check...
> 
> Your "God" government, failed to upload criminal records



Okay, you are just repeating yourself here, buddy. I concede the point. Background checks are inadequate. They are inadequate by design.  The NRA would be very upset if they were adequate, which is why they fight allocating enough money to make them adequate. 

So we can either make them adequate or we can shrug our shoulders and say, "Enjoy your active shooter drill today, Little Sally!  Did you bring your bullet proof backpack?"  

For sane people, just living with the gun crazies isn't much of an option.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 4, 2021)

2aguy said:


> Gun stores do not have blanket immunity....if they break the law they can be sued....what the Lawful Commerce in Arms Act does is prevent left wing, democrat party operatives from starting fake lawsuits to bankrupt gun makers and stores who did not break the law...



if they didn't break the law, they shouldn't have anything to worry about.  

The problem is, the conduct of the gun industry is the problem.  They don't CARE if Joker Holmes gets a gun.  In fact, part of their business model is giving Joker Holmes a gun so all you guys soil yourselves and want guns, too.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 4, 2021)

2aguy said:


> Second.....when we talk about the Florida high school shooting, the obama "Promise Program," was used as an excuse to not arrest and convict the shooter of several previous law breaking actions...bringing knives and bullets onto his high school campus, which would have given him a criminal record, which would have prevented him from getting the rifle......also, the local police had over 32 interactions with him and his family, and again, the "Promise Program," was used to keep from arresting him...



So are you saying we should deny people gun ownership because the police had interactions with their family?  

I mean, I don't have a big problem with this.  I wish someone had taken a loot at Nancy Lanza's family before they sold her enough guns to fight the Zombie Apocalypse.   But then maybe we should have asked why she needed that many guns to start with.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 4, 2021)

woodwork201 said:


> The Great Society benefited no one except government. Poverty among whites and blacks - and every one else for that matter - has increased significantly. The US government spends approximately $75,000 per family of four on poverty elimination programs but that same family would be out of poverty, if they had zero other income or wages, if the government simply gave them $26,500. This is why the programs will never end and the war never won. Too many bureaucrats are making a living, many getting wealthy, by keeping the poor poor.



Um, no, actually it hasn't.  

Here, check this out.  





The poverty rate DECREASED after the great society and has never exceeded its 1960 levels, even when it spiked during Republican Recessions.  

The problem is, that when you count the Great Society, you are leaving out the parts of it that benefited middle class white people, like Medicare and Unemployment insurance.   The main purpose is not to lift the poor out of poverty, but to keep the middle class OUT of poverty.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 4, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> meaner gene said:
> 
> 
> > Haven't you seen the pattern. No matter who is president, no matter what the policies are, the gun manufacturers come up with new and novel reasons to convince people to buy more gun$$$$$.
> ...


You seem rather confused. I support Constitutionsl rights. Quite clearly, it is you who cowers before the gun lobby. You seen consumed by trembling fear of the Constitution.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Jul 4, 2021)

Hollie said:


> You seem rather confused. I support Constitutionsl rights. Quite clearly, it is you who cowers before the gun lobby. You seen consumed by trembling fear of the Constitution.



  Criminals such as Incel Joe really hate it when actual human beings are armed, and prepared to defend themselves against his kind.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 5, 2021)

Hollie said:


> You seem rather confused. I support Constitutionsl rights. Quite clearly, it is you who cowers before the gun lobby. You seen consumed by trembling fear of the Constitution.



Naw, I just don't think we should let crazy people own guns because a bunch of slave rapists who shit in chamber pots couldn't clearly define a militia.  

The Constitution is not a suicide pact.  This insanity that we should let Joker Holmes have a machine gun and a 100 round clip because the Founders said he could is just.... nuts.  



Bob Blaylock said:


> Criminals such as @Incel Joe really hate it when actual human beings are armed, and prepared to defend themselves against his kind.



Naw, man, what I hate is that when a crazy person is able to get a machine gun and walk into a pre-school and mow down a bunch of children.  You apparently seem fine with this, Mormon Bob.  

So who loves criminals?


----------



## Hollie (Jul 5, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > You seem rather confused. I support Constitutionsl rights. Quite clearly, it is you who cowers before the gun lobby. You seen consumed by trembling fear of the Constitution.
> ...


Naw, I don't think letting self-hating leftists arbitrarily and selectively erase portions of the Constitution is such a good idea. The democrat slave rapists who went to war to keep their slave raping lifestyle will disagree.

History has shown us that the leftist styled government-dependent citizenry is dangerous. In Germany, the “commonsense” 1928 gun control laws of the Weimar Republic preceded the beginning of Hitler’s rampage by a decade. In Turkey, “reasonable” gun control laws enacted in 1911 permitted the extermination of two million Turkish Christians a few years later. In the Soviet Union government atrocities were preceded by “reasonable and commonsense” firearms registration, followed eventually by gun confiscation and then by the extermination of a despised minority population.

So, when radical, mentally deficient leftists speak of “fundamentally transforming” this country, and their intention is to act outside the constitutional framework, or worse, to remove Constitutional protections, the population should be wary. When radical, racist democrats begin to push for strict new “commonsense and reasonable” gun control laws, including national firearms registration in the name of “public safety,” the citizenry should be concerned..


----------



## Hollie (Jul 5, 2021)

Bob Blaylock said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > You seem rather confused. I support Constitutionsl rights. Quite clearly, it is you who cowers before the gun lobby. You seen consumed by trembling fear of the Constitution.
> ...


I'm curious to see when angry, self-hating, anti-gun Joe is going to demand that Hunter Biden be hauled up in front of an arrest warrant for lies on a federal gun purchase application. 

Odd how radical leftists are so pro-crime.


----------



## Jarlaxle (Jul 5, 2021)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> Everybody ended up alive is a bad thing?  What's a good thing to you, this guy murdering this woman and perhaps never getting caught?


Yes. Joey believes a woman who has been murdered is morally superior to a woman whose attacker has acquired a sucking chest wound


----------



## Jarlaxle (Jul 5, 2021)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> Facts are not racism. Are you calling the FBI racists?  Facts are facts until you find evidence those facts are wrong.



Joey cares nothing for facts.



> WTF are you talking about?  The police don't even go in Muslim areas in France because they fear for their lives.



Another fact Joey cares nothing for.



> You could have 500 million guns in this country, and it wouldn't change a thing.



We probably do...if anything, that number might be low.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 5, 2021)

meaner gene said:


> ClaireH said:
> 
> 
> > The point is somebody who is determined to commit suicide and uses a gun to do so is most likely still going to commit suicide using another means. I read that suffocation is the 2nd cause of suicide in the states, so likely those would increase significantly along with intentional OD’s,
> ...




Wrong....Japan has strict gun control...only their criminals and cops have easy access to guns and their suicide rate is far higher than ours...they use trains, household cleaning products and tall buildings.....


----------



## Jarlaxle (Jul 5, 2021)

NoNukes said:


> You post so much shit without saying where it is from. Probably from some gun website.


There are links in damn near every post he makes, you mental midget!


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 5, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Second.....when we talk about the Florida high school shooting, the obama "Promise Program," was used as an excuse to not arrest and convict the shooter of several previous law breaking actions...bringing knives and bullets onto his high school campus, which would have given him a criminal record, which would have prevented him from getting the rifle......also, the local police had over 32 interactions with him and his family, and again, the "Promise Program," was used to keep from arresting him...
> ...




Not interactions....violent domestic abuse that they ignored....


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 5, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > You seem rather confused. I support Constitutionsl rights. Quite clearly, it is you who cowers before the gun lobby. You seen consumed by trembling fear of the Constitution.
> ...




You vote for the political party that was created by slave owners, you dumb shit.......a party that owned slaves, started the Civil War to keep slaves, started jim crow, poll taxes, literacy tests .......and it's members started the ku klux klan....

So you can stop pretending to be a noble human, you are a vile left wing racist.


----------



## Jarlaxle (Jul 5, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> NRA horseshit.
> 
> Here's how we can tell that number is horseshit. According to the FBI, only 200 gun homicides a year by civilians are ruled as "Self-Defense".



Irrelevant distraction.



> Now, what we are to believe is that a bunch of tiny-dicked gun wankers like 2AGuy are out there, gently stroking their guns dreaming of the happy day they finally get to shoot themselves a darkie who was mildly threatening.  And this happens 1,500,000 times, according to CompensatingGuy.



Pure projection...garnished, as usual, with Joey's typical grade-school insults.



> And in 1,499,800 of those cases, nobody dies.
> 
> Yes, in 1,499,800 cases, the Gun Wankers were able to either show enough restraint to not fire their guns, or miss badly, and in most of those cases, the criminal was deterred merely by the sight of a gun to give up on whatever they were planning to do.



You actually stumble over the truth here...but as usual, you just ignore it and keep going.



> Keeping in mind, you'd have to be pretty desperate to start with to risk jail in committing a crime to start with.



Are you on some sort of drugs, boy?


----------



## Jarlaxle (Jul 5, 2021)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Yeah, guy, sorry, listening to you gun wankers, it's just not possible to believe you'd show that much restraint. Not the way you guys all cheered for Zimmerman when he shot an unarmed child buying candy.
> ...


Joey is a disciple of Goebbels and likes the Big Lie. If you repeat it often enough, it becomes accepted as truth.


----------



## Jarlaxle (Jul 5, 2021)

woodwork201 said:


> I was just curious; could you please provide some feedback on your opinion about JoeB131?



He is the darkest example of pure and undiluted *evil* on this site. Joey is evil on the level of Beria, or Heydrich, or Blokhin.


----------



## Jarlaxle (Jul 5, 2021)

hadit said:


> She walked away without harm. That is a good thing. You do realize, don't you, that you are trying to make the case that it would have been better for her to have no one there to stop the guy from killing her. That is your bottom line, and demonstrates why I've said multiple times that you don't really like women all that much.



Joey actually believes that. To push his agenda, Joey WANTS AND NEEDS violence. Joey MUST HAVE mass shootings. Joey CELEBRATES dead children. Joey truly is pure and undiluted evil.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Jul 5, 2021)

Hollie said:


> I'm curious to see when angry, self-hating, anti-gun Joe is going to demand that Hunter Biden be hauled up in front of an arrest warrant for lies on a federal gun purchase application.
> 
> Odd how radical leftists are so pro-crime.



  It is rather obvious that Incel Joe is on the side of subhuman criminals filth, and against that of actual human beings.  Whatever he might claim about who and what he is notwithstanding, I think it is clear enough what he really is; that it is his own kind whose side he takes.

  It is an error to expect any consistency or rationality in his positio9ns, other that that they will be consistent with his hatred of all that is good and decent, and his love of that which is evil and destructive and insane.  Beyond that, he has no trouble taking one position to this end in one circumstances, and taking another that directly contradicts the first, in another circumstances, if each position is consistent with his purposes.


----------



## woodwork201 (Jul 5, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Naw, I just don't think we should let crazy people own guns because a bunch of slave rapists who shit in chamber pots couldn't clearly define a militia.
> 
> The Constitution is not a suicide pact.  This insanity that we should let Joker Holmes have a machine gun and a 100 round clip because the Founders said he could is just.... nuts.


Actually, those very thoughtful men, did happen to live in a period before indoor plumbing and the Crapper - just as did your own ancestors.  The difference is that your ancestors, the jackass, still can't use indoor plumbing.

And they very clearly defined the militia: Every man capable of bearing arms.

Here's some reading material on the topic:








						TOP 25 MILITIA QUOTES (of 161) | A-Z Quotes
					

Enjoy our militia quotes collection. Best militia quotes selected by thousands of our users!




					www.azquotes.com
				








JoeB131 said:


> Naw, man, what I hate is that when a crazy person is able to get a machine gun and walk into a pre-school and mow down a bunch of children.  You apparently seem fine with this, Mormon Bob.
> 
> So who loves criminals?



I missed that story; when did a crazy person get a machine gun and mow down a bunch of children at pre-school?


----------



## Jarlaxle (Jul 5, 2021)

Hollie said:


> Gee, whiz. I hadn't realized you were the spokes-loon for ''most of us''. Have you read that in just the last year, there are more than 5 million new gun owners in the US. That spike in ownership is attributed to the leftist lowlife policies of defunding police, coddling criminals and the refusal of leftist DA's to prosecute crime.
> 
> Those new gun owners are sick and tired of being held hostage to leftist crime fetishists.


My wife is teaching a safety class to new gun owners right now.

Edit: whoops, no, she finished about 20 minutes ago.


----------



## Jarlaxle (Jul 5, 2021)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Actually, what started the last one was bunch of slave-raping assholes didn't want to pay their fair share in taxes.
> ...


He's in shit-cago...his neighbor is probably a gangbanger.


----------



## Jarlaxle (Jul 5, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Gun Deaths...
> ...


Joey-to-English translation: "Being unable to refute any of the facts, I will now chug prune juice, drop trou, and spin in a circle, blasting explosive diarrhea in all directions."


----------



## Jarlaxle (Jul 5, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Wrong.....
> ...


Like you, LBJ was a fan of the Big Lie...repeat it enough and people believe it.


----------



## Jarlaxle (Jul 5, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Yeah...they missed Barry Goldwater and for the last 90 years or so they have been voting for the political party that kept their family members in chains.......
> ...



Of course not...then again, you're pretty stupid.

Off the top of my head with no research, Goldwater...
Desegregated the Senate cafeteria.
Integrated the Arizona National Guard. (Years before Truman integrated the military.)


----------



## Jarlaxle (Jul 5, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Gun stores do not have blanket immunity....if they break the law they can be sued....what the Lawful Commerce in Arms Act does is prevent left wing, democrat party operatives from starting fake lawsuits to bankrupt gun makers and stores who did not break the law...
> ...



See, that's a lie. You want to be able to put them out of business for doing nothing illegal.



> The problem is, the conduct of the gun industry is the problem.  They don't CARE if Joker Holmes gets a gun.  In fact, part of their business model is giving Joker Holmes a gun so all you guys soil yourselves and want guns, too.


That's another lie, as you project your own beliefs on others.

You probably belong in a mental ward.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 5, 2021)

Hollie said:


> Naw, I don't think letting self-hating leftists arbitrarily and selectively erase portions of the Constitution is such a good idea. The democrat slave rapists who went to war to keep their slave raping lifestyle will disagree.



Well, since you brought it up, the point was, the founding slave rapists never meant for the slaves to have guns.   A few slaves like Nat Turner grabbed some guns and started slave revolts, they pretty much panicked and hunted them all down.  



Hollie said:


> History has shown us that the leftist styled government-dependent citizenry is dangerous. In Germany, the “commonsense” 1928 gun control laws of the Weimar Republic preceded the beginning of Hitler’s rampage by a decade.


Obviously, you flunked history.  The Weimar Republic instituted gun laws, but the Nazis revoked most of them because they saw gun ownership as a symbol of Aryan "manliness".   And those Germans never raised their guns against the Nazis...  they fought for Hitler down to the last old man and little boy.  



Hollie said:


> In Turkey, “reasonable” gun control laws enacted in 1911 permitted the extermination of two million Turkish Christians a few years later.


Also false. 









						'A Little Gun History'
					

An Internet post cites facts and figures purporting to prove that the worst genocides of the twentieth century were the result of gun control laws.




					www.snopes.com
				




_With regard to gun ownership, non-Muslims had never been legally permitted to privately own weapons under Ottoman rule (though some did), but military conscription laws enacted by a newly constituted government (the so-called “Young Turks”) between 1908 and 1914 put guns in the hands of tens of thousands of Armenians drafted to fight for the empire in World War I. After suffering military losses early on in that war, the government blamed the Armenians, whom they accused of treachery and subversion, and on that pretext embarked on a program of disarming and eradicating the Armenian population as a whole._




Hollie said:


> In the Soviet Union government atrocities were preceded by “reasonable and commonsense” firearms registration, followed eventually by gun confiscation and then by the extermination of a despised minority population.


Again, utter bullshit. 




Hollie said:


> So, when radical, mentally deficient leftists speak of “fundamentally transforming” this country, and their intention is to act outside the constitutional framework, or worse, to remove Constitutional protections, the population should be wary.


Naw, man, what we are wary of is that we have to rework our whole society around the easy access to guns. 

I don't worry about what happened in other countries a century ago.. I worry about what happens in this country NOW.   Where we all have to live with the fear that some maniac might start shooting up the mall or church or school we are attending, because the Founding Slave Rapists couldn't define a militia clearly. 




Hollie said:


> When radical, racist democrats begin to push for strict new “commonsense and reasonable” gun control laws, including national firearms registration in the name of “public safety,” the citizenry should be concerned..



Naw, the radical is the person who thinks that Joker Holmes has a god given right to a gun.  That's actually a radical position, and it wasn't the case for most of our history.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 5, 2021)

Jarlaxle said:


> Of course not...then again, you're pretty stupid.
> 
> Off the top of my head with no research, Goldwater...
> Desegregated the Senate cafeteria.
> Integrated the Arizona National Guard. (Years before Truman integrated the military.)



Yeah, those are minor and stupid.   The bigger thing was, ditchweed, is that he opposed the 1964 Civil Rights Act that ended Jim Crow.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 5, 2021)

Bob Blaylock said:


> It is rather obvious that @Incel Joe is on the side of subhuman criminals filth, and against that of actual human beings. Whatever he might claim about who and what he is notwithstanding, I think it is clear enough what he really is; that it is his own kind whose side he takes.
> 
> It is an error to expect any consistency or rationality in his positio9ns, other that that they will be consistent with his hatred of all that is good and decent, and his love of that which is evil and destructive and insane. Beyond that, he has no trouble taking one position to this end in one circumstances, and taking another that directly contradicts the first, in another circumstances, if each position is consistent with his purposes.



So let me get this straight, Mormon Bob. ..  You consider mass shooters to be "good and decent"?  

I don't want criminals to have guns... but I don't want crazy people to have them either.  

The gun industry is the ones selling guns to criminals, not me.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 5, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Naw, I don't think letting self-hating leftists arbitrarily and selectively erase portions of the Constitution is such a good idea. The democrat slave rapists who went to war to keep their slave raping lifestyle will disagree.
> ...




With just about every post, you lie.....

*Obviously, you flunked history.  The Weimar Republic instituted gun laws, but the Nazis revoked most of them because they saw gun ownership as a symbol of Aryan "manliness".   And those Germans never raised their guns against the Nazis...  they fought for Hitler down to the last old man and little boy

The national socialists used the gun registration lists....implemented in the 1920s, to take guns away from the very people they planned on murdering, the Jews, political enemies and the various groups they planned on targeting for death....so you anti-gun extremists keep pedaling the lie that the national socialists increased gun ownership...you idiots*


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 5, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Naw, I don't think letting self-hating leftists arbitrarily and selectively erase portions of the Constitution is such a good idea. The democrat slave rapists who went to war to keep their slave raping lifestyle will disagree.
> ...




You vote for the political party of the actual slave rapists........the democrat party...when the other Founders voted to end slavery, the people who would later become the democrat party voted to keep slavery.....you moron....

*I don't worry about what happened in other countries a century ago.. I worry about what happens in this country NOW. Where we all have to live with the fear that some maniac might start shooting up the mall or church or school we are attending, because the Founding Slave Rapists couldn't define a militia clearly.*

*Number of mass public shootings in 2019.....

10

2020......

1

Total number of people killed in mass public shootings in 2019?

73

Number of people killed by deer every year?

200

Number of people killed falling off of ladders?

300

Number of people killed by lawn mowers.....?

Between 90-100*

Meanwhile, Americans use their legal guns 1.1 million times a year to stop rapes, robberies, stabbings, beatings, and murder.....according to the Centers for Disease Control......1.5 million times a year if you use the Department of Justice numbers....


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 5, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Jarlaxle said:
> 
> 
> > Of course not...then again, you're pretty stupid.
> ...




Barry Goldwater supported all the other Civil Rights acts which Lydnon Johnson voted against...you idiot...

Why was Goldwater opposed to portions of the one Civil Rights Act?

NPR Wrong on Goldwater '64, Civil Rights, Say 4 Who Were There
Urgent: Do You Back Trump or Hillary? Vote Here Now!

============





*The conservative ascendency of 1964 saw the nomination of Barry Goldwater, a western libertarian who had never been strongly identified with racial issues one way or the other, but who was a principled critic of the 1964 act and its extension of federal power. *

*Goldwater had supported the 1957 and 1960 acts but believed that Title II and Title VII of the 1964 bill were unconstitutional, based in part on a 75-page brief from Robert Bork. *

*But far from extending a welcoming hand to southern segregationists, he named as his running mate a New York representative, William E. Miller, who had been the co-author of Republican civil-rights legislation in the 1950s.*


----------



## woodwork201 (Jul 5, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> meaner gene said:
> 
> 
> > Haven't you seen the pattern. No matter who is president, no matter what the policies are, the gun manufacturers come up with new and novel reasons to convince people to buy more gun$$$$$.
> ...



I doubt seriously that 2aguy or Hollie are scared.  Without asking them to confirm or deny, my guess is that they have the tools that they need to protect themselves and their families, whether at home or on the streets.  It's really people like you who are scared; your hoplophobia is consuming you and others on the left.  For many, though, leftist pro-crime policies have scared them such that 8.4 million people who had never owned a gun purchased their first gun in 2020.  A full 40% of all gun sales in 2020 were first-time gun buyers.









						First-Time Gun Buyers Grow to Nearly 5 Million in 2020
					

NSSF updated retail survey-based estimates and concluded that nearly 5 million Americans purchased a firearm for the very first time in 2020.




					www.nssf.org
				












						Boom: 21M guns sold in 2020, up 60%, women, blacks top buyers
					

The firearms industry had its best year ever as concerns over safety due to the coronavirus crisis, and political battles drove a 60% spike, according to the leading gun trade group.




					www.washingtonexaminer.com
				




Illinois had 5.6 million background checks in 2020, almost double the next-highest state.  NBC News credits that to Chicago crime and Illinoisans desire to protect themselves from rising crime.









						Women, seniors, liberals, stock up on guns amid fears of 'bloody' election and unrest
					

“Whichever way this election goes, it could get really scary, and it could get bloody,” said a 61-year-old woman who started taking shooting classes this summer. “I want to be armed and dangerous.”




					www.nbcnews.com
				




40% of the new gun owners are women.   That's over 3 million women, very many of them black women, who are less afraid today.

Gun purchases by black Americans are up 58.2% over 2019 - which was a record year in itself.  

The trend is continuing for 2021.  6 out of 10 days with the most background checks are in March of 2021.  7 out of 10 of weeks with the most background checks were in 2021 while 9 out of 10 of those weeks were in 2020 or 2021.  Expect another 5 million plus first time gun owners in 2021.

Very many of the first-time gun owners are liberal Biden voters.  Many describe the feeling of security that they have once they bought a gun.  That's why one of the best things that gun-rights supporters can do is to take a liberal to the range.  You should try it yourself, JoeB131.  A trip to the range might be very enlightening for you.


----------



## NoNukes (Jul 5, 2021)

Jarlaxle said:


> NoNukes said:
> 
> 
> > You post so much shit without saying where it is from. Probably from some gun website.
> ...


Not all links are good links you moron.


----------



## Jarlaxle (Jul 5, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Yeah, those are minor and stupid.   The bigger thing was, ditchweed, is that he opposed the 1964 Civil Rights Act that ended Jim Crow.


See, that's another lie.


----------



## Jarlaxle (Jul 5, 2021)

NoNukes said:


> Jarlaxle said:
> 
> 
> > NoNukes said:
> ...


OK, now you're just lying.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 5, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Naw, I don't think letting self-hating leftists arbitrarily and selectively erase portions of the Constitution is such a good idea. The democrat slave rapists who went to war to keep their slave raping lifestyle will disagree.
> ...


As you like to bring up the history of slavery and Jim Crow, you must be so proud of the party of democrats;  the party of slavery and Jim Crow. Racist demagogues in the democrat party, even now, are far more concerned with maintaining their followers in Antifah and various Marxist groups for the control they hope to exert. Stoking racial divides is what democrats do.

Naw, man. You seem to have missed important history. I suppose at your leftist madrassah, they weren't real accurate with history lessons.









						How the Nazis Used Gun Control | National Review
					

The perennial gun-control debate in America did not begin here. The same arguments for and against were made in the 1920s in the chaos of Germany’s Weimar Republic, which opted for gun registration…



					www.nationalreview.com
				




_"In 1931, Weimar authorities discovered plans for a Nazi takeover in which Jews would be denied food and persons refusing to surrender their guns within 24 hours would be executed. They were written by Werner Best, a future Gestapo official. In reaction to such threats, the government authorized the registration of all firearms and the confiscation thereof, if required for “public safety.” The interior minister warned that the records must not fall into the hands of any extremist group.

In 1933, the ultimate extremist group, led by Adolf Hitler, seized power and used the records to identify, disarm, and attack political opponents and Jews. Constitutional rights were suspended, and mass searches for and seizures of guns and dissident publications ensued. Police revoked gun licenses of Social Democrats and others who were not “politically reliable.”_

Naw, man. We can see clear parallels of rabid democrat policies that are taken right from the history of Nazi Germany. Naw, man. The history is clear that totalitarian regimes such as Nazi's and Democrats want a disarmed population because that population is more controllable.

From the link above:

 ''_During the five years of repression that followed, society was “cleansed” by the National Socialist regime. Undesirables were placed in camps where labor made them “free,” and normal rights of citizenship were taken from Jews. The Gestapo banned independent gun clubs and arrested their leaders. Gestapo counsel Werner Best issued a directive to the police forbidding issuance of firearm permits to Jews.

In 1938, Hitler signed a new Gun Control Act. Now that many “enemies of the state” had been removed from society, some restrictions could be slightly liberalized, especially for Nazi Party members. But Jews were prohibited from working in the firearms industry, and .22 caliber hollow-point ammunition was banned.''_




As we see with regularity, your skewed version of democrat history is one of phony narratives and invented circumstances.

You might want to find a source other that the loony, conspiracy theeory addled ''snopes.com''.









						Armenian Genocide Didn't Happen by Accident | Stephen P. Halbrook
					

Hundreds of news stories have been written during the past month reporting on the 100-year anniversary of one of the darkest events in world history, a two-year killing spree that claimed the lives of an estimated 800,000 to 1.5 million Armenians.  Virtually none of these news stories, however...




					www.independent.org
				




"_While the remnant of the Ottoman Empire, today’s Turkey, disputes many of the details having to do with the Armenian genocide, most historians agree on certain basic facts. First, that the Christian Armenians had long been denied basic rights under the Ottomans’ Muslim law. Second, they were excluded from participation in the government. And third, Ottoman law made it a crime to possess a firearm without government permission. The Armenians, as British traveler H. F. B. Lynch wrote in 1901, were “rigorously prohibited from possessing firearms.”_

Naw, man. Here again we see that historical confluence of totalitarian regimes and their disarming of the ''undesireable'' portion of the population that will be oppressed or removed.


Naw,man. Obviously you don't worry about what happened in other countries a century ago. Your understanding of history is so shallow, you find it impossible to make connections to what happened just in the 20th century to what the rabid democrats are trying to do today. It's the same script.  You have been given examples of leftist, totalitarian regimes which set the model for the democrat party.


----------



## NoNukes (Jul 5, 2021)

Jarlaxle said:


> NoNukes said:
> 
> 
> > Jarlaxle said:
> ...


Just telling the truth. His sources are laughable. You Are really letting yourself down


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 5, 2021)

2aguy said:


> With just about every post, you lie.....
> 
> *Obviously, you flunked history. The Weimar Republic instituted gun laws, but the Nazis revoked most of them because they saw gun ownership as a symbol of Aryan "manliness". And those Germans never raised their guns against the Nazis... they fought for Hitler down to the last old man and little boy
> 
> The national socialists used the gun registration lists....implemented in the 1920s, to take guns away from the very people they planned on murdering, the Jews, political enemies and the various groups they planned on targeting for death....so you anti-gun extremists keep pedaling the lie that the national socialists increased gun ownership...you idiots*



No, gun nut.   The German Jews really weren't the issue in the Holocaust.  Most of them had the good sense to flee Germany before the war started.  In fact, 75% of Germany and Austria's Jews survived the war because they got the fuck out of the way.  

Most of the Jews who were killed were in Poland, Hungary and Russia....  

Now, the Jews in the Warsaw ghetto had guns... but they didn't even TRY taking on the Nazis until 1944 when they heard the Red Army was close.  Stalin just sat by and laughed as they were all slaughtered, because the Germans had TANKS.  

You see, if you want to own a gun because you think you are going to chase away a criminal, that's almost sensible if you ignore the fact that you are 43 times more likely to kill a family member with that gun. 

But your chances of ever overthrowing the government with a gun is absolutely zero.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 5, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > With just about every post, you lie.....
> ...



"But your chances of ever overthrowing the government with a gun is absolutely zero.''

That's true when the totalitarian regimes strip the population of firearms.

Hey, isn't that what the 19th and 20th century totalitarian regimes actually did? (rhetorical question)

Hey, isn't that what the totalitarian regime of the democrats is trying to do? (rhetorical question).


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 5, 2021)

Hollie said:


> As you like to bring up the history of slavery and Jim Crow, you must be so proud of the party of democrats; the party of slavery and Jim Crow. Racist demagogues in the democrat party, even now, are far more concerned with maintaining their followers in Antifah and various Marxist groups for the control they hope to exert. Stoking racial divides is what democrats do.



Not really.  The Democrats threw out the Southern Inbreds in 1964, and the Republicans welcomed them with open arms.  



Hollie said:


> Naw, man. You seem to have missed important history. I suppose at your leftist madrassah, they weren't real accurate with history lessons.



sorry, the Nazis loved guns as much as you do.   That's the thing.  

Germans had plenty of guns.  The Jews didn't, but the funny thing is, there really weren't a whole lot of Jews in Germany to start with.  Like less than 1% of the population.  

But the 99% of Germans who could have all the guns they wanted, very few of them rose up against Hitler.  The July 22 plot was a complete fiasco that failed in hours.  

You see, all your ranting about "government". . Government is US.   Every bad behavior of a government was enthusiastically supported by the people.  

The average Turk HATED Armenians...  They weren't loyal to the Sultan and really fell down on the job fighting the Russians. 

The average German HATED Jews.   You think Hitler said, "Let's get the Jews" and anyone actually objected?  Of course they didn't.   Martin Luther, the father of Lutheranism, wrote a book called "The Jews and their Lies".   There really wasn't a pro-Jewish German political party.  

So, no, I don't think you having a gun protects you from government.  What it does is put us at a risk that one of you nuts are going to go around shooting people because the voices in your head tell you to.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 5, 2021)

Hollie said:


> "But your chances of ever overthrowing the government with a gun is absolutely zero.''
> 
> That's true when the totalitarian regimes strip the population of firearms.
> 
> Hey, isn't that what the 19th and 20th century totalitarian regimes actually did? (rhetorical question)



Actually, they rarely did and never had to. Germans had plenty of guns and they used them to fight for Hitler to the last old man and little boy.  

This is the point you don't get.   No government exists without the tacit support of it's people.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Jul 5, 2021)

Jarlaxle said:


> You [Incel Joe] probably belong in a *mental ward*.



  I think you may have misspelled _“prison”_.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 5, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > As you like to bring up the history of slavery and Jim Crow, you must be so proud of the party of democrats; the party of slavery and Jim Crow. Racist demagogues in the democrat party, even now, are far more concerned with maintaining their followers in Antifah and various Marxist groups for the control they hope to exert. Stoking racial divides is what democrats do.
> ...


You throw ''phacts'' around like you're playing midget tossing.

On the other hand,





__





						This Is How Many Guns Were Sold in Your State Last Month
					





					www.msn.com
				




U.S. gun sales in the first six months of 2021 surged 15% to 22,243,220 from the same six months last year. This makes it the largest first half of the year figure since sales were first recorded in 1998.



Thank you, democrats. You're the best gun salespeople on the planet.


----------



## Jarlaxle (Jul 5, 2021)

NoNukes said:


> Just telling the truth. His sources are laughable. You Are really letting yourself down


You would not know the truth if it marched past you playing _Thriller_ on a pink flugelhorn.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 5, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > "But your chances of ever overthrowing the government with a gun is absolutely zero.''
> ...


Actually, the history of totalitarian regimes making it illegal for undesirables to own guns and often  confiscating guns is a well documented portion of history. I gave you links to the data. You respond with your usual, ''nuh uh, naw man, ..... because I say so'' nonsense.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 5, 2021)

Bob Blaylock said:


> I think you may have misspelled _“prison”_.



Yeah, that Joe guy, committing all those crimes. 

Like when he was convicted of selling fake Divining Rods in NY in 1825.
Or convicted of Bank Fraud in Ohio in the Kirtland Bank scandal in 1837
Or when he was inciting terrorism in Missouri in 1838 leading his bands of "Danites".
Or when he was locked up for Polygamy in 1845... oh, wait they took him out and shot him before he could run somewhere else. 

Oh, wait... That wasn't JoeB131... That was Joseph Smith, the founder of Mormonism. 

(This is a bunch of history of your sick, demented cult they didn't teach you about in Temple, I'm sure.)


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 5, 2021)

Hollie said:


> Actually, the history of totalitarian regimes making it illegal for undesirables to own guns and often confiscating guns is a well documented portion of history. I gave you links to the data. You respond with your usual, ''nuh uh, naw man, ..... because I say so'' nonsense.



But it was all crap...  that was the thing.  If anything, gun proliferation makes a totalitarian regime more likely, because the armed thugs don't bother with little things called "elections".  

You know, like Mussolini's March on Rome.  









						March on Rome - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## Hollie (Jul 5, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Actually, the history of totalitarian regimes making it illegal for undesirables to own guns and often confiscating guns is a well documented portion of history. I gave you links to the data. You respond with your usual, ''nuh uh, naw man, ..... because I say so'' nonsense.
> ...


Wow. Insightful response, ''it was all crap''.

Rather strange how totalitarian regimes have a common theme of disarming the population. 

You obviously missed it but Hitler and Stalin both noticed the lack of world reaction to the slaughter of Turkish Christians and planned accordingly. Unarmed civilians are easy prey for totalitarian regimes and the criminal element. The democrats know this. They use the ''assault weapon" slogan as a means to disarm Americans, by forceable confiscation if necessary. Yet, it's a laughable joke when Biden's pick for ATF director cannot even define what an ''asdault weapon'' is. 

Ask yourself a simple question: Were the Armenians, the Jews, the Soviet citizen treated better, or worse, after they were disarmed and made helpless by the totalitarian oppressors who thereafter held an absolute government monopoly on armed violence? The answer is too obvious to require elaboration.

Let me guess. You believe the radical islamists in the 'squad' have your best interests at heart.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 5, 2021)

Hollie said:


> Rather strange how totalitarian regimes have a common theme of disarming the population.



Except they really don't.   But I guess if you think repeating the same mantras work, have at it. 

That's kind of how cults work.  



Hollie said:


> Ask yourself a simple question: Were the Armenians, the Jews, the Soviet citizen treated better, or worse, after they were disarmed and made helpless by the totalitarian oppressors who thereafter held an absolute government monopoly on armed violence? The answer is too obvious to require elaboration.



The problem is, it's just not true.  That's the thing. 

The Armenians were never armed.  The Jews in Germany had bigger problems than gun ownership, and most Soviets actually benefited from Stalin's rule. It's why he's considered Russias third greatest historical figure. 

If you actually knew anything about history, you'd know most history is a lot more complicated.  


So let's take the obvious example, the Jews in Germany.  Let's say they kept their guns.   And let's say the first day the SS comes to round them up, what happens? 

Oh. Wait.  Here's what happens.  Dr. Goebbels gets in the radio and says how brave Germans were shot in the back by Cowardly Jews.   Then they come back with tanks.   

In fact, that is EXACTLY what happened in the Warsaw Ghetto.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 5, 2021)

Leftists are in denial. Thats the thing. I can't help but notice you offered nothing but the usual unsupported opinion as opposed to actual data. The Jews in Germany had problems. They were stripped of any means to defend themselves.  Those Stalin chose to purge had similarly been stripped of means to defend themselves.

Not surprisingly, you see Stalin as a totalitarian hero. Most of the world sees him as a violent sociopath. Odd how leftists find admiration for sociopaths.

If you knew anything about history, you would know that leftist sociopaths inflicted untold harm on humanity. Leftists and their contemporaries in communism will work themselves into a froth at the reading or hearing of the damage their ideology inflicts upon humanity. They’re determined to protect their favored ism against logical or moral assaults. The mere suggestion that leftism _requires_ a Stalin – that it elevates a Stalin to power as surely as the leftist 'squad' barely manages a collective 75 IQ – is enough to provoke leftists into their safe space of ''.... because I say so'', because they're ignorant of the pain they have inflicted. So they whine and moan about _“Socialism works, it was the fault of Donald Trump!”_ Absolutely anything rather than admit that their ism brings about the same horrendous consequences each and every time it’s tried.


----------



## NoNukes (Jul 6, 2021)

Jarlaxle said:


> NoNukes said:
> 
> 
> > Just telling the truth. His sources are laughable. You Are really letting yourself down
> ...


Those of you on the right forget what truth is after 4 years of Trump's lies.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 6, 2021)

Hollie said:


> Leftists are in denial. Thats the thing. I can't help but notice you offered nothing but the usual unsupported opinion as opposed to actual data. The Jews in Germany had problems. They were stripped of any means to defend themselves.



Actually, they were stripped of all rights. 

I noticed you skipped around my discussion of what would have happened if the Jews of Germany had guns.  

Not that it matters.  Most of the Jews killed in the Holocaust weren't German Jews, they were Jews from the countries Germany conquered. Those countries had guns, AND STILL LOST.  



Hollie said:


> Those Stalin chose to purge had similarly been stripped of means to defend themselves.
> 
> Not surprisingly, you see Stalin as a totalitarian hero. Most of the world sees him as a violent sociopath. Odd how leftists find admiration for sociopaths.



No, I don't see him as a hero, but Russians do. 









						Stalin’s Approval Rating Among Russians Hits Record High – Poll - The Moscow Times
					

A record 70 percent of Russians approve of Soviet leader Josef Stalin’s role in Russian history, according to a poll published by the independent Levada Center pollster on Tuesday.




					www.themoscowtimes.com
				




The difference between heroes and monsters is the difference between winners and losers.   All the leaders in WWII did truly awful things, including our own.  Hitler and Mussolini are reviled today because they lost. Churchill, FDR and Stalin are glorified today because they won.   The Japanese are a whole different story, they are kind of in denial about the whole war.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 6, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Leftists are in denial. Thats the thing. I can't help but notice you offered nothing but the usual unsupported opinion as opposed to actual data. The Jews in Germany had problems. They were stripped of any means to defend themselves.
> ...


You noticed I skipped around your conjecture of what would have happened if the German Jews had guns. Sorry, but the self-entitled all-knowing, all-seeing clairvoyant leftist who rewrites history with the ''... because I say so'', meme is not worth anyone's time.

It's fine if you agree that Stalin was a hero. That's not surprising as leftists often view sociopaths as heroes.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 6, 2021)

Hollie said:


> You noticed I skipped around your conjecture of what would have happened if the German Jews had guns. Sorry, but the self-entitled all-knowing, all-seeing clairvoyant leftist who rewrites history with the ''... because I say so'', meme is not worth anyone's time.



Uh, okay.  Well, did you think that Dr. Goebbels was going to give a "fair and balanced" view of the shootout between a Jewish person and the SS?  

Let me give you a hint.  The ministry of propaganda used to publish a "Criminal Jew Report".  The Nazis had the German people convinced the Jews did a bunch of things they didn't do.. imagine if they did manage to murder a German soldier or policeman?  

This is the whole problem with the crazies who think "I needs my guns to fights the government".  The government will always have better guns and usually more public support.  




Hollie said:


> It's fine if you agree that Stalin was a hero. That's not surprising as leftists often view sociopaths as heroes.



Again, you guys support Trump... that's a sociopath.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 6, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > You noticed I skipped around your conjecture of what would have happened if the German Jews had guns. Sorry, but the self-entitled all-knowing, all-seeing clairvoyant leftist who rewrites history with the ''... because I say so'', meme is not worth anyone's time.
> ...


Um, okay,. I see you abandoned your claim to the all-knowing, all-seeing leftist who can predict future events. 

Let me enlighten you. The historical fact is that the worst of the leftist  dystopias had a pattern of disarming the public to allow the worst atrocities. 

The Founders of this country knew of government tyranny and oppression. 

"What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance. Let them take arms."
_- Thomas Jefferson, letter to James Madison, December 20, 1787_

Again. Your delicate leftist feelings are hurt.


----------



## NoNukes (Jul 6, 2021)

Hollie said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...


Jefferson had no idea of a country with such a powerful military.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 6, 2021)

NoNukes said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...


Wow. Kinda' stating the obvious there. 


One can argue far better that having come from oppressive theocracies themselves, the Founding Fathers were very much aware of the dangers of unbridled government.


----------



## NoNukes (Jul 6, 2021)

Hollie said:


> NoNukes said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...


A shame that you needed the obvious stated to you.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 6, 2021)

NoNukes said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > NoNukes said:
> ...


I didn't. 

I'm surprised you didn't realize the Founders recognized the dangers that governments can impose on the citizenry. 

The entire constitution defines rules that limit the government's involvement in the citizen's lives. It is clearly a muzzle on the state's ability to dictate to the citizenry what it can and cannot do within the paradigm of the federal mandate. Certainly rule of law is to be enforced, but that is also controlled at the local level. It does not take any stretch of imagination to understand that the framers of the constitution intended to place limits such that government is restrained from interfering with individual freedoms, such as the freedom to bear arms.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 6, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > With just about every post, you lie.....
> ...



You refuse to give up the lie.....you are not 43 times more likely to be killed by your own gun....you know this, yet you still put it out there.....

Kellerman who did the study that came up with the 43 times more likely myth, was forced to do the research over when other academics pointed out how flawed his methods were....he then changed the 43 times number to 2.7, but he was still using flawed data to get even that number.....

Below is the study where he changed the number from 43 to 2.7 and below that is the explanation as to why that number isn't even accurate.

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199310073291506

After controlling for these characteristics, we found that keeping a gun in the home was strongly and independently associated with an increased risk of homicide (adjusted odds ratio, 2.7;

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


Nine Myths Of Gun Control

Myth #6 "A homeowner is 43 times as likely to be killed or kill a family member as an intruder"

To suggest that science has proven that defending oneself or one's family with a gun is dangerous, gun prohibitionists repeat Dr. Kellermann's long discredited claim: "a gun owner is 43 times more likely to kill a family member than an intruder." [17] This fallacy , fabricated using tax dollars, is one of the most misused slogans of the anti-self-defense lobby.

The honest measure of the protective benefits of guns are the lives saved, the injuries prevented, the medical costs saved, and the property protected not Kellermann's burglar or rapist body count.

Only 0.1% (1 in a thousand) of the defensive uses of guns results in the death of the predator. [3]

Any study, such as Kellermann' "43 times" fallacy, that only counts bodies will expectedly underestimate the benefits of gun a thousand fold.

Think for a minute. Would anyone suggest that the only measure of the benefit of law enforcement is the number of people killed by police? Of course not. The honest measure of the benefits of guns are the lives saved, the injuries prevented, the medical costs saved by deaths and injuries averted, and the property protected. 65 lives protected by guns for every life lost to a gun. [2]

*Kellermann recently downgraded his estimate to "2.7 times," [18] but he persisted in discredited methodology. He used a method that cannot distinguish between "cause" and "effect." His method would be like finding more diet drinks in the refrigerators of fat people and then concluding that diet drinks "cause" obesity.*


Also, he studied groups with high rates of violent criminality, alcoholism, drug addiction, abject poverty, and domestic abuse .


From such a poor and violent study group he attempted to generalize his findings to normal homes

*Interestingly, when Dr. Kellermann was interviewed he stated that, if his wife were attacked, he would want her to have a gun for protection.[19] Apparently, Dr. Kellermann doesn't even believe his own studies.


-----
*

Public Health and Gun Control: A Review



Since at least the mid-1980s, Dr. Kellermann (and associates), whose work had been heavily-funded by the CDC, published a series of studies purporting to show that persons who keep guns in the home are more likely to be victims of homicide than those who don¹t.

In a 1986 NEJM paper, Dr. Kellermann and associates, for example, claimed their "scientific research" proved that defending oneself or one¹s family with a firearm in the home is dangerous and counter productive, claiming* "a gun owner is 43 times more likely to kill a family member than an intruder."8

In a critical review and now classic article published in the March 1994 issue of the Journal of the Medical Association of Georgia (JMAG), Dr. Edgar Suter, Chairman of Doctors for Integrity in Policy Research (DIPR), found evidence of "methodologic and conceptual errors," such as prejudicially truncated data and the listing of "the correct methodology which was described but never used by the authors."5 *

Moreover, the gun control researchers failed to consider and underestimated the protective benefits of guns.

Dr. Suter writes: "The true measure of the protective benefits of guns are the lives and medical costs saved, the injuries prevented, and the property protected ‹ not the burglar or rapist body count.

Since only 0.1 - 0.2 percent of defensive uses of guns involve the death of the criminal, any study, such as this, that counts criminal deaths as the only measure of the protective benefits of guns will expectedly underestimate the benefits of firearms by a factor of 500 to 1,000."5

In 1993, in his landmark and much cited NEJM article (and the research, again, heavily funded by the CDC), Dr. Kellermann attempted to show again that guns in the home are a greater risk to the victims than to the assailants.4 Despite valid criticisms by reputable scholars of his previous works (including the 1986 study), Dr. Kellermann ignored the criticisms and again used the same methodology.

*He also used study populations with disproportionately high rates of serious psychosocial dysfunction from three selected state counties, known to be unrepresentative of the general U.S. population.

For example, 

53 percent of the case subjects had a history of a household member being arrested, 

31 percent had a household history of illicit drug use, 32 percent had a household member hit or hurt in a family fight, and 

17 percent had a family member hurt so seriously in a domestic altercation that prompt medical attention was required. 
Moreover, both the case studies and control groups in this analysis had a very high incidence of financial instability.*

In fact, in this study, gun ownership, the supposedly high risk factor for homicide was not one of the most strongly associated factors for being murdered.

*Drinking, illicit drugs, living alone, history of family violence, living in a rented home were all greater individual risk factors for being murdered than a gun in the home. One must conclude there is no basis to apply the conclusions of this study to the general population.*

All of these are factors that, as Dr. Suter pointed out, "would expectedly be associated with higher rates of violence and homicide."5

*It goes without saying, the results of such a study on gun homicides, selecting this sort of unrepresentative population sample, nullify the authors' generalizations, and their preordained, conclusions can not be extrapolated to the general population.*

Moreover, although the 1993 New England Journal of Medicine study purported to show that the homicide victims were killed with a gun ordinarily kept in the home, the fact is that as Kates and associates point out 71.1 percent of the victims were killed by assailants who did not live in the victims¹ household using guns presumably not kept in that home.6


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 6, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > With just about every post, you lie.....
> ...




More...

http://reason.com/archives/2016/01/05/you-know-less-than-you-think-a/1

Is Having a Gun in the Home Inherently Deadly?

The idea that keeping a gun in the home puts owners and their families at elevated risk first rose to prominence in a 1993 _New England Journal of Medicine_ article by Arthur Kellermann and his colleagues. "Although firearms are often kept in homes for personal protection," they concluded, "this study shows that the practice is counterproductive."

*The study has many flaws. In addition to the predictable failure to establish causality, there's a more glaring irregularity: *
*

Slightly less than half of the murders Kellermann studied were actually committed with a gun (substantially less than the national average in 1993 of around 71 percent). 
*
*And even in those cases he failed to establish that the gun owners were killed with their own guns. *


If even a small percentage of them weren't, given that more than half of the murders were _not_committed with guns, the causal relevance of the harmed being gun owners is far less clear. (The study found that even more dangerous risks than having a gun at home included living alone, using drugs, or being a renter.)

A 2013 literature review in the journal _Aggression and Violent Behavior_, written by the University of Utrecht psychologist Wolfgang Stroebe, starts with Kellermann but rejects the idea that firearm possession is "a primary cause of either suicide or homicide." However, he writes, "since guns are more effective means for [actually killing someone] than poison or other weapons, the rate of firearm possession can be expected to be positively related to overall rates of suicide and homicide." But even then we can't be sure of causality, since guns might be the choice of people with more serious lethal intent, against themselves or others, to begin with.

*Stroebe notes that the two major post-Kellermann studies most often used to demonstrate an association between gun ownership and risk of homicide shared one of Kellermann's fatal flaws: 

They offer no information about whether the gun used to kill the gun owners was their own. 


And despite Kellermann's finding that living alone was very risky, one of the follow-ups, a 2004 study by Linda Dahlberg and colleagues, found that it was only those with roommates who faced a higher risk of a specifically gun-related homicide.*


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 6, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > As you like to bring up the history of slavery and Jim Crow, you must be so proud of the party of democrats; the party of slavery and Jim Crow. Racist demagogues in the democrat party, even now, are far more concerned with maintaining their followers in Antifah and various Marxist groups for the control they hope to exert. Stoking racial divides is what democrats do.
> ...




You are a liar....

* The Democrats threw out the Southern Inbreds in 1964, and the Republicans welcomed them with open arms. *

The lie about dixie crats changing parties...

*What happened to all those racist Dixiecrats that, according to the progressive narrative, all picked up their tents and moved from the Democratic Party to the Republican Party? Actually, they exist only in the progressive imagination.

This is the world not as it is but as progressives wish it to be. Of all the Dixiecrats who broke away from the Democratic Party in 1948, of all the bigots and segregationists who voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964, I **count just two—one in the Senate and one in the House—who switched from Democrat to Republican.**

In the Senate, that solitary figure was Strom Thurmond. In the House, Albert Watson. The constellation of racist Dixiecrats includes Senators William Murray, Thomas P. Gore, Spessard Holland, Sam Ervin, Russell Long, Robert Byrd, Richard Russell, Olin Johnston, Lister Hill, John C. Stennis, John Sparkman, John McClellan, James Eastland, Herman Talmadge, Herbert Walters, Harry F. Byrd, George Smathers, Everett Jordan, Allen Ellender, A. Willis Robertson,** Al Gore Sr., William Fulbright**, Herbert Walters, W. Kerr Scott, and Marion Price Daniels.

The list of Dixiecrat governors includes William H. Murray, Frank Dixon, Fielding Wright, and Benjamin Laney. I don’t have space to include the list of Dixiecrat congressmen and other officials. Suffice to say it is a long list. And from this entire list we count only two defections.
*
*Thus the progressive conventional wisdom that the racist Dixiecrats became Republicans is exposed as a big lie.**

The Dixiecrats remained in the Democratic Party for years, in some cases decades. Not once did the Democrats repudiate them or attempt to push them out.


Segregationists like Richard Russell and William Fulbright were lionized in their party throughout their lifetimes, as of course was Robert Byrd, who died in 2010 and was eulogized by leading Democrats and the progressive media.*
*The Switch That Never Happened: How the South Really Went GOP › American Greatness*
*===========*


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 6, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Leftists are in denial. Thats the thing. I can't help but notice you offered nothing but the usual unsupported opinion as opposed to actual data. The Jews in Germany had problems. They were stripped of any means to defend themselves.
> ...




If they had had guns...as the rest of the non-nazi supporters if they too had had guns...then the nazi blm/antifa....er.....brownshirts...would not have been able to beat, murder and burn out people who opposed them...

the only reason blm and antifa haven't gone into the suburbs to murder and beat people is they know the people here likely have guns...and will shoot them...the German people didn't have that option to deal with violent antifa and blm...er.....brownshirts......in their day....so they had to keep their heads down....


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 6, 2021)

NoNukes said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...




You mean except for the British Empire, France and Spain....you mean except for those powers of their day.....you idiot.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 6, 2021)

Hollie said:


> Um, okay,. I see you abandoned your claim to the all-knowing, all-seeing leftist who can predict future events.
> 
> Let me enlighten you. The historical fact is that the worst of the leftist dystopias had a pattern of disarming the public to allow the worst atrocities.



Well, first the Nazis and the Fascists were right wing, not left wing.  

Secondly, the whole of human history is bad governments committing atrocities, including our own.  

But I'm just waiting for you to describe the scenario where Jews with a few guns were going to stand up to the SS, SA and Wehrmacht.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 6, 2021)

2aguy said:


> If they had had guns...as the rest of the non-nazi supporters if they too had had guns...then the nazi blm/antifa....er.....brownshirts...would not have been able to beat, murder and burn out people who opposed them...



Okay, guy, get real.  The Nazis were IMMENSELY popular when they were in power.  They were Germany's bigges t political party when they formed a coalition with the Zentrum and National German People's Party (NDVM) to form the Hitler government.  When Hitler outlawed all other political parties, most of the guy in the other parties like Von Papen and Hugenberg happily joined the Nazis, then declared themselves _"mitlauferin_" after the war. 

If you want to draw a real political analogy, the real one is that the Zentrum and NDVM (Along with the Reichswehr and industrialists) really thought they could contain Hitler as a "Chancellor in Chains", kind of like all the Establishment Republicans thought they could contain Trump.  

This is the problem with putting crazy people in charge.  They are always crazier than you think they are.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 6, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Um, okay,. I see you abandoned your claim to the all-knowing, all-seeing leftist who can predict future events.
> ...


You need to concentrate when you're writing statements. A few people with guns would not stand a chance vs the SS. An armed population with a survival instinct could. You want to deny it but the German government specifically disarmed the Jewish population. You were provided the links.

The worst nightmare for the leftist gun grabbers is the notion of attempting to forcefully confiscate people's firearms. Convoys of police cars and SUVs on gun confiscation missions will be forced to travel through second amendment sanctuary counties on their way to *and from* their objectives. 

Lead the charge, sweety.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 6, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > If they had had guns...as the rest of the non-nazi supporters if they too had had guns...then the nazi blm/antifa....er.....brownshirts...would not have been able to beat, murder and burn out people who opposed them...
> ...



"This is the problem with putting crazy people in charge.  They are always crazier than you think they are.''

Yeah. Biden's politburo dystopia.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 7, 2021)

Hollie said:


> You need to concentrate when you're writing statements. A few people with guns would not stand a chance vs the SS. An armed population with a survival instinct could. You want to deny it but the German government specifically disarmed the Jewish population. You were provided the links.



Except the German Population WAS armed... that was the point.  When the SS came for the Jews, they were like, "Awesome, never liked those guys anyway."  

You guys live in this fantasy world where you fight off the government, but the reality is, the government is always, always, always going to be better armed and more proficient.  As much as you wank off to all the guns you are buying, 40% of the Gun Industry's sales are still to government agencies.  



Hollie said:


> The worst nightmare for the leftist gun grabbers is the notion of attempting to forcefully confiscate people's firearms. Convoys of police cars and SUVs on gun confiscation missions will be forced to travel through second amendment sanctuary counties on their way to *and from* their objectives.



Yeah, I know this is your wank fantasy.  It's kind of as ironic as a 1/6 Rioter beating a Capitol Policeman with a Thin Blue Line Flag.   You love the police, when they are oppressing people of color.   Otherwise they are jackbooted thugs.  



Hollie said:


> Yeah. Biden's politburo dystopia.



Uh-huh.   Frankly, Biden is a return to sanity, after the crazy shit of the last four years. 

Hey, did you see that crazy thing Biden said on Twitter last night?  Oh, wait, Biden doesn't say crazy shit on Twitter.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 7, 2021)

Except the German was not well armed until they were disarmed. 

Leftists live in a fantasy world where beneficent big government is their mommy. It cares for you, it controls you and it calms an emotional requirement that you don't have to do anything for yourselves. Eventually, your big, controlling governments become your worst nightmare as history shows us the nightmares of the 19th and 20th century socialist/ Marxist dystopias.

Biden is your savior. He has your best interests at heart. Open borders, inflation, racist social policies, ''squads'', lower wages, lower standard of living... hey, you might just get the socialist / Marxist dystopia you crave.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 7, 2021)

Hollie said:


> Except the German was not well armed until they were disarmed.



Are you kidding? They were incredibly well armed.  I mean, not as well armed as the Gun Fetishists are in America, of course, who had huge personal arsenals to fight the Zombies. 

But after WWI, most of those German soldiers went home with their weapons.  Personal weapons were so ubiquitous that the Nazis, Monarchists, Communists and Socialists were having gun battles in the street. That's why the Weimar government tried and failed to pass gun laws. 



Hollie said:


> Leftists live in a fantasy world where beneficent big government is their mommy. It cares for you, it controls you and it calms an emotional requirement that you don't have to do anything for yourselves. Eventually, your big, controlling governments become your worst nightmare as history shows us the nightmares of the 19th and 20th century socialist/ Marxist dystopias.



Yawn, ho-hum.   Another Libertarian Child heard from.  Uh, here's the thing.  I like the fact that because we take care of our elderly, I'm not going to die sometime in my 60's, or bankrupt my family taking care of me because I won't be able to work anymore.   

The very same people who whine about socialism, are the same ones who happily collect their social security, Medicare, unemployment insurance and veteran's benefits that they are "entitled to". Heck, even Trump's response to massive unemployment was to jack up the average payment for the unemployed so they would barely feel it.    Sorry, after 2020, we all became socialist and we kind of liked it.  



Hollie said:


> Biden is your savior. He has your best interests at heart. Open borders, inflation, racist social policies, ''squads'', lower wages, lower standard of living... hey, you might just get the socialist / Marxist dystopia you crave.



Frankly, I'd be happy to just have my life from 2016 back.  

You know, before Trump brought us the plagues, the riots, the business failures, massive debt, armed lunatics showing up at state capitols, double digit unemployment.  

But on, no, prices on gasoline went up for a couple of weeks, we are all doooooomed.   Doooomed, I tell you.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 7, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Except the German was not well armed until they were disarmed.
> ...


Now that's funny. The "evil Jews" were well armed. Your leftist tainted view of history is rather embarrassingly false, except for leftists. 

Odd how President Trump brought all the evils you whine about when nothing of the kind happened. 

What a strange, upside-down world that is inhabited by the conspiracy addled rabid leftist


----------



## NoNukes (Jul 7, 2021)

Hollie said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...


Conspiracy addled LEFT???? Please.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 7, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Um, okay,. I see you abandoned your claim to the all-knowing, all-seeing leftist who can predict future events.
> ...




The national socialists were left wing, not Right wing...that is another big lie from the left....because if they have tried to hide the fact that the worst government mass murders since 1917 all happened at the hands of left wing governments...the national socialist crimes were tried in public, unlike the international communists whose crimes were hidden from the world.......


Had normal Germans had guns, the national socialist party wouldn't have been able to beat and murder anyone who looked at them the wrong way....it would have limited their ability to take control of the country, as normal people could have voted for more normal political figures...

As it was.....if you crossed the national socialists, they beat you, destroyed your business and murdered you....all while the police were told to stand down.....

Just like blm and antifa brownshirts today...


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 7, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > You need to concentrate when you're writing statements. A few people with guns would not stand a chance vs the SS. An armed population with a survival instinct could. You want to deny it but the German government specifically disarmed the Jewish population. You were provided the links.
> ...




They weren't fighting the German government in the beginning, the blm/antifa.....the national socialist brown shirts........attacked and beat or murdered anyone who stood up to the party when they began their march to power...........had they been shot instead, they wouldn't have been able to accumulate as much power and more moderate political parties and figures would have had a chance......

Imagine if blm and antifa knew that the people in the rich parts of the city and the suburbs were completely disarmed.......you would have had those areas burned and looted, instead of concentrating on the poor, black areas of these democrat party controlled cities...where they have strict gun control for normal people....


----------



## woodwork201 (Jul 7, 2021)

Hollie said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...


It is not by accident that people like JoeB defend or appear ignorant of the truth around fascist and socialist or communist government takeover of power and the destruction of political enemies.  It is because they are willing to see those things happen in the United States that they provide cover for those who did it before.  They believe so fully in the Socialist/Marxist agendas that they believe a few million lives are a worthwhile loss.  They believe in the radical environmental view that the earth's population should be reduced by 90%.  What's a few billion lives among liberals?


----------



## woodwork201 (Jul 7, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > With just about every post, you lie.....
> ...



Are you fucking serious?  Jews were not the issue in the Holocaust?  Why not just say outright what you're really trying to say, that there was no Holocaust?

Choosing the time to fight doesn't mean that they couldn't or wouldn't fight.  And the Soviet Union was overthrown without a gun so don't tell me that it can't be done with a gun.  It can be done any time the people have had enough and the gun can help keep some of them alive either until they've had enough or after they've had enough.


----------



## woodwork201 (Jul 7, 2021)

2aguy said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



You have great google-fu, grasshopper.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 8, 2021)

Hollie said:


> Now that's funny. The "evil Jews" were well armed. Your leftist tainted view of history is rather embarrassingly false, except for leftists.



Naw, the German people were.   The thing is, they were perfectly fine with getting rid of the Jews, as long as they didn't have to look at it.  




Hollie said:


> dd how President Trump brought all the evils you whine about when nothing of the kind happened.



Uh, were you in a coma in 2020?  




2aguy said:


> The national socialists were left wing, not Right wing...that is another big lie from the left....because if they have tried to hide the fact that the worst government mass murders since 1917 all happened at the hands of left wing governments...the national socialist crimes were tried in public, unlike the international communists whose crimes were hidden from the world.......



Except the Nazis were of the right, and only got into power because they made common cause with the DVNP and Zentrum parties.  - the political right in Germany.  Hitler was appointed Chancellor by the Monarchist president, Von Hindenberg.  





__





						The role of the conservative elite in the Nazi rise to power – The Holocaust Explained: Designed for schools
					






					www.theholocaustexplained.org
				




_As Hitler’s votes dwindled in the November 1932 elections, the conservative elite knew that if they wanted to use Hitler and the Nazis to destroy the political left, they had to act quickly to get Hitler appointed as chancellor.

Von Papen and Oskar von Hindenburg (President Hindenburg’s son) met secretly and backed Hitler to become chancellor. A group of important industrialists, including Hjalmar Schacht and Gustav Krupp, also wrote outlining their support of Hitler to President Hindenburg.

The support of these figures was vital in Hindenburg’s decision to appoint Hitler as chancellor. Once elected, the conservative elite soon realised that they had miscalculated Hitler and his intentions._




2aguy said:


> Had normal Germans had guns, the national socialist party wouldn't have been able to beat and murder anyone who looked at them the wrong way....it would have limited their ability to take control of the country, as normal people could have voted for more normal political figures...



Normal Germans had guns.   They were the ones doing the beating. 

The problem with "normal" political figures in Germany was they weren't getting the job done.  Germany had 12 Chancellors in the period between 1918 and 1933.   Germany's experiment with democracy was an unmitigated failure long before Hitler got there.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 8, 2021)

woodwork201 said:


> Are you fucking serious? Jews were not the issue in the Holocaust? Why not just say outright what you're really trying to say, that there was no Holocaust?



Go back and read what I said.  GERMAN JEWS.  GERMAN JEWS were not the ones who got turned into lampshades and bars of soap.  They mostly fled Germany before the war started.   Most of the Jews that were killed were from Poland, Russia and the Balkans.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 8, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Now that's funny. The "evil Jews" were well armed. Your leftist tainted view of history is rather embarrassingly false, except for leftists.
> ...




The national socialists were socialists......they wanted the government to control the means of production and life at all levels...you moron.....that is left wing, not Right wing...


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 8, 2021)

2aguy said:


> The national socialists were socialists......they wanted the government to control the means of production and life at all levels...you moron.....that is left wing, not Right wing...



Except that isn't what happened.  The big industrialists, who supported Hitler to the hilt, kept control of their companies and profited from the war.  After the war, very few of them were held to account, unfortunately.  I think they put a Krupp on trial, but it was the wrong Krupp and they had to let him go.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 9, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > The national socialists were socialists......they wanted the government to control the means of production and life at all levels...you moron.....that is left wing, not Right wing...
> ...




They ran their companies at the direction of the nazi party, you idiot.....


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 10, 2021)

2aguy said:


> They ran their companies at the direction of the nazi party, you idiot.....



Uh, yeah, kind of how lockheed runs their company at the direction of Washington.  

Germany was a fine example of the kind of Military-Industrial Complex Ike warned us about.  

But that was when Republicans were sane.


----------



## woodwork201 (Jul 10, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > They ran their companies at the direction of the nazi party, you idiot.....
> ...


You realize that Ike's warning was after the German war machine had been crushed, right?


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 11, 2021)

woodwork201 said:


> You realize that Ike's warning was after the German war machine had been crushed, right?



Yes. 

He saw how the Military Industrial Complex of Germany led them into two world wars.  

He saw how the marriage of industrialism and militarism could lead our country down the wrong path.  






How the GOP went from THIS guy to Trump is kind of depressing.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 11, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Now that's funny. The "evil Jews" were well armed. Your leftist tainted view of history is rather embarrassingly false, except for leftists.
> ...


Naw. The leftist rewriting / invention of history is a wonder to behold. After the humiliating concessions to the Allies after WW1, Germany was not well armed. 

Naw. You were in a leftist hissy fit in 2020 when President Trump was making historic gains for the middle class, was controlling the border and was making the US a formidable force in world politics. 

Just think, the leftists now have the laughing stock of coma Joe and 'what border' Harris. The differences between contemporary Leftist activists and those of previous years are only significant by degree of harmthey cause, but some idiocies stand above the rest: contemporary Leftist activism is founded entirely upon envy and self-hate. The rationales presented for their wokeness, CRT, retrogression, endorsement of Antifah, lawlesness are too ridiculous, too flimsy to withstand any serious defense.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 12, 2021)

Hollie said:


> Naw. The leftist rewriting / invention of history is a wonder to behold. After the humiliating concessions to the Allies after WW1, Germany was not well armed.



They weren't allowed to have Battleships or a standing army.  Private gun ownership wasn't an issue, and the leadership turned a blind eye when most of these soldiers took their guns home with them.  It's why Germany had running street battles between various factions all through the 1920's.  



Hollie said:


> Naw. You were in a leftist hissy fit in 2020 when President Trump was making historic gains for the middle class, was controlling the border and was making the US a formidable force in world politics.


Uh, we were a joke in world politics...  Trump was a clown on the world stage. 

As far as his "Gains" for the middle class. 
500,000 dead
65 million jobs lost
200,000 businesses closed. 
Riots in the street.  

But he threw some Mexican kids into cages, and that made you feel all warm inside. 




Hollie said:


> Just think, the leftists now have the laughing stock of coma Joe and 'what border' Harris. The differences between contemporary Leftist activists and those of previous years are only significant by degree of harmthey cause, but some idiocies stand above the rest: contemporary Leftist activism is founded entirely upon envy and self-hate. The rationales presented for their wokeness, CRT, retrogression, endorsement of Antifah, lawlesness are too ridiculous, too flimsy to withstand any serious defense.



If you are such a fragile white person that CRT threatens you, that's kind of your problem.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 12, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Naw. The leftist rewriting / invention of history is a wonder to behold. After the humiliating concessions to the Allies after WW1, Germany was not well armed.
> ...


Naw. The German population was simply not well armed. You can rattle on with your usual, ".... because I say so'' nonsense, but that does nothing to bolster a bankrupt argument.

Naw. Lefties were a joke on the world stage. President Trump knew how to get concessions from Mexico on immigration, he knew how to deal economically with the Chinese and he knew how to face down Putin.

A partial list.​





						Trump Administration Accomplishments – The White House
					






					trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov
				



Unprecedented Economic Boom​*Before the China Virus invaded our shores, we built the world’s most prosperous economy.*


America gained 7 million new jobs – more than three times government experts’ projections.
Middle-Class family income increased nearly $6,000 – more than five times the gains during the entire previous administration.
The unemployment rate reached 3.5 percent, the lowest in a half-century.
Achieved 40 months in a row with more job openings than job-hirings.
More Americans reported being employed than ever before – nearly 160 million.
Jobless claims hit a nearly 50-year low.
The number of people claiming unemployment insurance as a share of the population hit its lowest on record.
Incomes rose in every single metro area in the United States for the first time in nearly 3 decades.
*Delivered a future of greater promise and opportunity for citizens of all backgrounds.*


Unemployment rates for African Americans, Hispanic Americans, Asian Americans, Native Americans, veterans, individuals with disabilities, and those without a high school diploma all reached record lows.
Unemployment for women hit its lowest rate in nearly 70 years.
Lifted nearly 7 million people off of food stamps.
Poverty rates for African Americans and Hispanic Americans reached record lows.
Income inequality fell for two straight years, and by the largest amount in over a decade.
The bottom 50 percent of American households saw a 40 percent increase in net worth.
Wages rose fastest for low-income and blue collar workers – a 16 percent pay increase.
African American homeownership increased from 41.7 percent to 46.4 pe

Your comatose Joe is a laughing stock.


It really is remarkable how self-hating and retrograde the CRT groupies really are. I think people get it, the CRT cultists envision an assembly-line production of little self-hating Leftists. That begins in the public schools, continues in the universities, and is enforced by “diversity” officers paid by America’s employers. Fortunately, an increasing number of American parents are gritting their teeth, accepting the financial and practical difficulties, and removing their children from that system.” There may be hope after all that education of American children will continue in spite of the leftist rascists.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Jul 12, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Trump was a clown on the world stage.
> 
> As far as his "Gains" for the middle class.
> 500,000 dead
> ...



  It was Democraps who created the fraudulent #CoronaHoax2020, out of a massively-exaggerated routine flu outbreak.

  It was Democraps who engaged in massive fraud to cook up the 500,000 claimed dead form this fake scamdemic.

  It was Democraps who exploited this scam for their own political gain, seizing power and maliciously sabotaging the economy.

  It is Democraps who continue to try to cast the blame for the results of their own outrageously corrupt and disastrous policies on Trump in particular, and Republicans in general.

  And it is Democrapic useful idiots who are stupid enough to believe all this bullshit from their masters.

  And those sure as Hell were not Republicans that we've seen rioting and looting for the past few years, nor taking the side of the subhuman pieces of shit who have been engaging in that behavior.

  Your side totally owns all of the shit that you're trying to blame on your opposition.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 12, 2021)

Hollie said:


> Naw. The German population was simply not well armed. You can rattle on with your usual, ".... because I say so'' nonsense, but that does nothing to bolster a bankrupt argument.




I'm not the one who says so, HIstorians do. 









						The Hitler gun control lie
					

Gun rights activists who cite the dictator as a reason against gun control have their history dangerously wrong




					www.salon.com
				








Hollie said:


> Naw. Lefties were a joke on the world stage. President Trump knew how to get concessions from Mexico on immigration, he knew how to deal economically with the Chinese and he knew how to face down Putin.



Uh, Putin walked all over him...  As for China... The Trade gap with China Actually INCREASED on Trump's watch. 







Hollie said:


> Unprecedented Economic Boom​*Before the China Virus invaded our shores, we built the world’s most prosperous economy.*
> 
> 
> America gained 7 million new jobs – more than three times government experts’ projections.



Did the virus have little landing craft, that they hit the beaches with?  

Trump was the first president since Herbert Hoover to post a net jobs loss.  



Hollie said:


> Middle-Class family income increased nearly $6,000 – more than five times the gains during the entire previous administration.



Wow, a whole $6000?  



Hollie said:


> The unemployment rate reached 3.5 percent, the lowest in a half-century.



Again, nothing to do with Trump, more to do with the fact boomers are retiring faster than millenials can replace them.   Also, Trump had the highest unemployment rate since the Great Depression. 



Hollie said:


> Achieved 40 months in a row with more job openings than job-hirings.



The Titanic was making excellent time until it hit the iceberg



Hollie said:


> More Americans reported being employed than ever before – nearly 160 million.



Again, meaningless, as there were more Americans total... or do you want to give Trump credit for that.  

He also presided against the greatest loss of life since WWII.  



Hollie said:


> It really is remarkable how self-hating and retrograde the CRT groupies really are. I think people get it, the CRT cultists envision an assembly-line production of little self-hating Leftists. That begins in the public schools, continues in the universities, and is enforced by “diversity” officers paid by America’s employers. Fortunately, an increasing number of American parents are gritting their teeth, accepting the financial and practical difficulties, and removing their children from that system.” There may be hope after all that education of American children will continue in spite of the leftist rascists.



Yes, heaven forbid their little white sensibilities learn that slavery and Native American Genocide were things that happened.  

Frankly, I went to Catholic Schools for 12 years.  You could imagine what a shock it was for me when I got to college and found out the world doesn't work the way the Catholics said it did.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 12, 2021)

Bob Blaylock said:


> It was Democraps who created the fraudulent #CoronaHoax2020, out of a massively-exaggerated routine flu outbreak.
> 
> It was Democraps who engaged in massive fraud to cook up the 500,000 claimed dead form this fake scamdemic.


So let me get this straight.  Covid is a hoax, but Magic Underwear is totally real.   Got it.  


Bob Blaylock said:


> It was Democraps who exploited this scam for their own political gain, seizing power and maliciously sabotaging the economy.
> 
> It is Democraps who continue to try to cast the blame for the results of their own outrageously corrupt and disastrous policies on Trump in particular, and Republicans in general.



Except that Trump's trade policies were the ones that weakened the economy to start with.  Long before anyone heard of Covid, if you worked in manufacturing, you knew supply chains were strained because of Trump's tariffs and trade wars.  

So, yeah, when these companies had to shut down assembly lines for a couple of weeks (and that's all the shutdowns were for, a couple of weeks) an already weakened economy collapsed in on itself. 






Bob Blaylock said:


> And it is Democrapic useful idiots who are stupid enough to believe all this bullshit from their masters.
> 
> And those sure as Hell were not Republicans that we've seen rioting and looting for the past few years, nor taking the side of the subhuman pieces of shit who have been engaging in that behavior.
> 
> Your side totally owns all of the shit that you're trying to blame on your opposition.



Uh, here was the thing.  We didn't have riots in years past- not major, nation wide ones that lasted for months - under Obama or Bush or Clinton - because those guys had the good sense to realize that you don't pat a thug cop on the back like he did a good job when he guns down a black child.  You let people know that is wrong and you say something about it.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 12, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Naw. The German population was simply not well armed. You can rattle on with your usual, ".... because I say so'' nonsense, but that does nothing to bolster a bankrupt argument.
> ...


Typical dishonesty from the self-hating leftist. The trade deficit with China was built decades before under leftist, democrats. That deficit exploded under Obama and coma Joe. 

More dishonesty. Salon is supermarket tabloid. 

Otherwise, the leftist "math is racist" cult is quickly being met with state bans on teaching the sociopathy of leftist self-hate. I get it, you hate yourself and you want others to embrace your self-hate. Antifah is always looking for more self hating whiteys.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 12, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Bob Blaylock said:
> 
> 
> > It was Democraps who created the fraudulent #CoronaHoax2020, out of a massively-exaggerated routine flu outbreak.
> ...


Naw, here's the thing. It was leftist mayors / governors in large cities who encouraged and abetted the leftist riots. 

You would rather not address the "summer of love" or leftist DA's refusing to prosecute the rioters and looters.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 12, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Naw. The German population was simply not well armed. You can rattle on with your usual, ".... because I say so'' nonsense, but that does nothing to bolster a bankrupt argument.
> ...




You keep using the lie about hitler increasing gun ownership.....a dodge you shitheads have been trying to use for years.

hitler took guns away from the people he planned on murdering.....you know this, since you have been shown this over and over again....


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Jul 12, 2021)

2aguy said:


> You keep using the lie about hitler increasing gun ownership.....a dodge you shitheads have been trying to use for years.
> 
> hitler took guns away from the people he planned on murdering.....you know this, since you have been shown this over and over again....



Incel Joe is clear about who it is from whom he wants to take guns away.  He's made it clear enough before that he has no interest in taking them away from subhuman criminal pieces of shit like himself, only from law-abiding human beings.

  I think this is quite enough to discern what his true motives and intentions are.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 13, 2021)

Hollie said:


> Typical dishonesty from the self-hating leftist. The trade deficit with China was built decades before under leftist, democrats. That deficit exploded under Obama and coma Joe.



Again, I realize math is hard, but look at the chart.  The Deficit with China increased from 347 BILLION in 2016 (The last year of Obama) to 427 Billion in 2018.  It got worse.  



Hollie said:


> Otherwise, the leftist "math is racist" cult is quickly being met with state bans on teaching the sociopathy of leftist self-hate. I get it, you hate yourself and you want others to embrace your self-hate. Antifah is always looking for more self hating whiteys.


Uh, sorry, man, acknowledging history isn't self-hate.  The question I have to ask is why you are terrified of history?  (We can already see you struggle with math.) 



Hollie said:


> Naw, here's the thing. It was leftist mayors / governors in large cities who encouraged and abetted the leftist riots.
> 
> You would rather not address the "summer of love" or leftist DA's refusing to prosecute the rioters and looters.



Sure, I'll address it.  For 10 years, black people have asked NICELY for us to clean up our police departments every time a black person is murdered by a thug with a badge.  Colin Kapernaeck took a knee in peaceful protest, and we as a country pretty much ruined his career.  

Now, TRUMP RIOTS(TM)  happened for a reason.  Part of the reason was that we ignored the problem. Part of the reason is we had an openly racist president who had encouraged the bad behavior.  Part of the reason was the level of anxiety caused by TRUMP PLAGUE(TM) and TRUMP RECESSION(TM) already had the country on edge.  We were knee deep in gasoline, all it took was for someone to light a match.





Whoops. 

Now, lots of people have been arrested for rioting, and a few of them will be convicted... but the reality is, it's really not very easy to convict people of mob action, which is why it rarely happens. 

You need to look up the whole "Chicago 7" trial for that one. 



2aguy said:


> You keep using the lie about hitler increasing gun ownership.....a dodge you shitheads have been trying to use for years.
> 
> hitler took guns away from the people he planned on murdering.....you know this, since you have been shown this over and over again....



A few problems with that. First, the vast majority of German people who had their gun rights restored he didn't plan to murder.   If you take away rights from 1% and give it to the other 99%, you are increasing rights, not taking them away.   




Bob Blaylock said:


> is clear about who it is from whom he wants to take guns away. He's made it clear enough before that he has no interest in taking them away from subhuman criminal pieces of shit like himself, only from law-abiding human beings.
> 
> I think this is quite enough to discern what his true motives and intentions are.



Uh, guy, you gun nuts manage to kill 39,000 a year and injure another 70,000.  So much for "Law abiding".


----------



## Hollie (Jul 13, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Typical dishonesty from the self-hating leftist. The trade deficit with China was built decades before under leftist, democrats. That deficit exploded under Obama and coma Joe.
> ...


Again. Leftists struggle with contingent history. Again, trade deficits under President Trump didn't just blossom overnight. They were the result of trade policies that preceded his administration. What administration preceded the the Trump administration? Rabid leftists will spend their entire miserable lives with one one slogan: “I blame Trump”.

The history of self-hating leftism is a history defined by self-hate and retrogression. Your debilitating disease of “I blame Trump” is focused on the ills fostered by rabid leftist policy. The S_ummer of Love_™ was a uniquely leftist event. It was encouraged and abetted by leftists. The riots of 2020 were almost exclusively the domain of democrat run cities where democrat Mayors and DA’s refused to prosecute criminals.

It’s hilarious now we hear from the leftists who whine about “them there poor blacks”. This coming from democrats, the party of slavery. Yeah, blacks asked politely in democrat run cities by killing other blacks. Where was the black President for 8 years who did nothing?

What a shame. Leftists had such advantages in fomenting crime in black neighborhoods under democrat administrations.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 13, 2021)

Hollie said:


> Again. Leftists struggle with contingent history. Again, trade deficits under President Trump didn't just blossom overnight. They were the result of trade policies that preceded his administration. What administration preceded the the Trump administration? Rabid leftists will spend their entire miserable lives with one one slogan: “I blame Trump”.


Trade deficits exist because consumers and companies find it cheaper to buy stuff from China.  

The point was, Trump imposed a bunch of tariffs and goofy laws, and our trade deficit with China INCREASED on his watch.  That despite the fact that a lot of the labor market is moving away from China to places like Vietnam.  

So Trump complained about the problem, but the problem got worse on his watch.   He not only didn't reduce the trade gap with China, it probably contributed to the recession of 2020.  




Hollie said:


> The history of self-hating leftism is a history defined by self-hate and retrogression. Your debilitating disease of “I blame Trump” is focused on the ills fostered by rabid leftist policy. The S_ummer of Love_™ was a uniquely leftist event. It was encouraged and abetted by leftists. The riots of 2020 were almost exclusively the domain of democrat run cities where democrat Mayors and DA’s refused to prosecute criminals.



Actually, we had demonstration out here in the Republican Suburb I live in.  Not sure what backwards part of Jesusland you live in, but most of the country was outraged by what happened to Geo. Floyd. 




Hollie said:


> It’s hilarious now we hear from the leftists who whine about “them there poor blacks”. This coming from democrats, the party of slavery. Yeah, blacks asked politely in democrat run cities by killing other blacks. Where was the black President for 8 years who did nothing?



Actually, Obama did quite a lot. For instance, he championed police reform, working with a number of major cities on reform policies and reaching consent decrees to stop certain practices.  Trump threw all those agreements out the minute he and Sessions got in. 









						Fact check: Obama administration implemented several police and prison reforms
					

Did President Barack Obama's administration put in place police and prison reforms?



					www.usatoday.com


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Jul 13, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > hitler took guns away from the people he planned on murdering.....you know this, since you have been shown this over and over again....
> ...



  I guess it takes an Incel Joe level of fucked-up-in-the-head-and-soul to see it as a positive to empower 99% of the population, and disempower 1%, preparatory to committing massive human rights abuses, up to and including mass genocide, against that 1%.

  I very much doubt if anyone who is at all familiar with you is the least bit surprised to see this sort of twisted logic from you.




JoeB131 said:


> Bob Blaylock said:
> 
> 
> > Incel Joe is clear about who it is from whom he wants to take guns away. He's made it clear enough before that he has no interest in taking them away from subhuman criminal pieces of shit like himself, only from law-abiding human beings.
> ...



  It is not us law-abiding human beings who are doing all this killing.  It is you subhuman criminal pieces of shit who are doing it.

  Your obvious interest is in making it safer and easier for your subhuman kind to prey on human beings.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 13, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Again. Leftists struggle with contingent history. Again, trade deficits under President Trump didn't just blossom overnight. They were the result of trade policies that preceded his administration. What administration preceded the the Trump administration? Rabid leftists will spend their entire miserable lives with one one slogan: “I blame Trump”.
> ...


As we see, self-hating leftists tend to be fact-challenged. The US trade deficit with China shrank under President Trump. Overall, the trade deficit in 2020 increased because ot the pandemic.









						US trade deficit up to $67.1 billion in August, 14-year high
					

WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. trade deficit rose in August to the highest level in 14 years. The Commerce Department reported Tuesday that the gap between the goods and services the United States sells and what it buys abroad climbed 5...




					apnews.com
				





Actually, Obama did very little regarding crime. Even that bastion of leftist idiocy knew Obama's failings.









						Where change never came: Obama's hometown | CNN
					

President Obama returns to Chicago for his farewell address, but the hope and change he spoke of here in 2008 never came.




					www.google.com
				




Leftism. It's a disease.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 13, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Typical dishonesty from the self-hating leftist. The trade deficit with China was built decades before under leftist, democrats. That deficit exploded under Obama and coma Joe.
> ...




Moron........you try your best to hide the truth......it doesn't matter who he gave gun rights too, if they were part that supported the murder of the group that he took the guns away from...you idiot.......nice dodge, you lying asshat....

Gun nuts don't kill 39,000 people....criminals murdered 10,235 people, mostly criminals...almost all criminals......in 2019, and the rest were suicides....your lying about that every single time you post it is why we don't trust you or the other anti-gun zealots......you are insane and irrational.....you can't be trusted with power or control....


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 13, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Typical dishonesty from the self-hating leftist. The trade deficit with China was built decades before under leftist, democrats. That deficit exploded under Obama and coma Joe.
> ...




The criminal who resisted arrest on the ground didn't die from the knee....he died from 3 blocked arteries, an enlarged heart...a massively enlarged heart, high blood pressure and the fact he was over dosing on fentanyl and meth.......that killed him, not the cop.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 13, 2021)

Bob Blaylock said:


> I guess it takes an @Incel Joe level of fucked-up-in-the-head-and-soul to see it as a positive to empower 99% of the population, and disempower 1%, preparatory to committing massive human rights abuses, up to and including mass genocide, against that 1%.
> 
> I very much doubt if anyone who is at all familiar with you is the least bit surprised to see this sort of twisted logic from you.



Guy, mass genocides don't happen because of governments, they happen because of people.  That you are so deranged to not see that is kind of your problem, but then again, you belong to a fucked up cult. 



2aguy said:


> The criminal who resisted arrest on the ground didn't die from the knee....he died from 3 blocked arteries, an enlarged heart...a massively enlarged heart, high blood pressure and the fact he was over dosing on fentanyl and meth.......that killed him, not the cop.



Funny, five medical experts and the jury said otherwise.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 13, 2021)

2aguy said:


> Moron........you try your best to hide the truth......it doesn't matter who he gave gun rights too, if they were part that supported the murder of the group that he took the guns away from...you idiot.......nice dodge, you lying asshat....



No truth to be hidden. The Jews were just as screwed either way, because the Nazis had tanks and regular Germans were just fine with rounding them up.  

The ironic thing is nobody cared all that much about the Jews, including the liberating allies.  Patton left them in the concentration camps and even let the SS keep guarding them. 




2aguy said:


> Gun nuts don't kill 39,000 people....criminals murdered 10,235 people, mostly criminals...almost all criminals......in 2019, and the rest were suicides....your lying about that every single time you post it is why we don't trust you or the other anti-gun zealots......you are insane and irrational.....you can't be trusted with power or control....



YOu realize that if someone kills himself with a gun, he was probably nuts and had a gun, and therefore was a gun nut, right?   As for the homicides, 83% of those were people who know each other.


----------



## Dr Grump (Jul 13, 2021)

Ray From Cleveland said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Um, yeah, they still don't have violence.
> ...


They are?








						7 "Most Dangerous Countries" in Europe where to have safe travels
					

Find out if it is dangerous to travel in those European countries. Stay safe while traveling to these great destinations in Europe




					cycloscope.net
				











						World’s most dangerous countries for 2021 revealed
					

Libya, Syria and Afghanistan among the most high-risk




					www.independent.co.uk
				



Please provide a link to your totally ridiculous assertion.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 13, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Moron........you try your best to hide the truth......it doesn't matter who he gave gun rights too, if they were part that supported the murder of the group that he took the guns away from...you idiot.......nice dodge, you lying asshat....
> ...




Moron...Patton had a war to fight, you idiot....he was actively fighting the socialists....what was he supposed to do, stop fighting the war to provide for the prisoners?  That is what support units did you fucking tool...


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 13, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Moron........you try your best to hide the truth......it doesn't matter who he gave gun rights too, if they were part that supported the murder of the group that he took the guns away from...you idiot.......nice dodge, you lying asshat....
> ...




You keep lying about the "people who know each other."   You do this because none of the facts or reality in gun ownership supports giving you the power to ban and confiscate them.

The people who "know each other," and kill each other?   Are drug dealers killing other drug dealers, drug users killing drug dealers, gang members killing rival gang members, etc. etc...............they "know," each other, and you know this fact.......but you try to hide it like the idiot you are...

70-80% of all gun murder victims are criminals murdered by other criminals...

10,235 gun murders in 2019.

That means 8,188 of the murder victims were criminals...

Of the rest...2,047, the majority of those victims are friends, family and associates accidentally killed as the criminals tried to kill their criminal friend or family member but missed and hit their baby momma, or children....or when the gang members spray the party because the rival gang member is there, those people are hit and killed because they had a gang member at their party...

If you are not a criminal....

If you are not the family member of a criminal....

If you are not a friend of a criminal....

If you don't go to party where gang members hang out...

If you don't live in a democrat party controlled city where they keep releasing violent, known, repeat gun offenders over and over again...


The odds of getting shot and killed?

2,047 out of 320 million people ..................


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 14, 2021)

2aguy said:


> Moron...Patton had a war to fight, you idiot....he was actively fighting the socialists....what was he supposed to do, stop fighting the war to provide for the prisoners? That is what support units did you fucking tool...



I was specifically talking about after the war, when Germany was occuppied, and Patton left the Jews in the camps in his zone of occupation.  It was part of the reason why Ike relieved him of command of Third Army. 





__





						George Patton
					

Encyclopedia of Jewish and Israeli history, politics and culture, with biographies, statistics, articles and documents on topics from anti-Semitism to Zionism.




					www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org
				




_After the defeat of Germany, Patton was put in charge of overseeing the displaced-persons (DP) camps in southern Germany. In a letter to Eisenhower, President Truman quoted from a report on conditions in the DP camps written by Earl Harrison. “As matters now stand, we appear to be treating the Jews as the Nazis treated them except that we do not exterminate them. They are in concentration camps in large numbers under our military guard instead of SS troops. One is led to wonder whether the German people, seeing this, are not supposing that we are following or at least condoning Nazi policy.”

Patton said of the report, “Harrison and his ilk believe that the Displaced Person is a human being, which he is not, and this applies particularly to Jews who are lower than animals.”

The “military guard” was Patton’s idea. “If they [the Jewish DPs] were not kept under guard,” he wrote in his diary, “they would not stay in the camps, would spread over the country like locusts, and would eventually have to be rounded up after quite a few of them had been shot and quite a few Germans murdered and pillaged.”_



2aguy said:


> You keep lying about the "people who know each other." You do this because none of the facts or reality in gun ownership supports giving you the power to ban and confiscate them.
> 
> The people who "know each other," and kill each other? Are drug dealers killing other drug dealers, drug users killing drug dealers, gang members killing rival gang members, etc. etc...............they "know," each other, and you know this fact.......but you try to hide it like the idiot you are...



You keep babbling this, but according to the National Gang Task Force, only 1800 murders a year are "Gang-Related"  

out of 19,500 murders (15,000 with guns).   So really, less than 10% of all murders are gang related. 

The rest- People who know each other, and an argument went bad.  

35% of murders are people killing family members.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 14, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Bob Blaylock said:
> 
> 
> > I guess it takes an @Incel Joe level of fucked-up-in-the-head-and-soul to see it as a positive to empower 99% of the population, and disempower 1%, preparatory to committing massive human rights abuses, up to and including mass genocide, against that 1%.
> ...


Wow. More of the upside world of the leftist. It wasn’t the German people who collectively decided to round up the Jews, Gypsies, Poles and throw them into concentration camps. It was the Hitler’s government that provided the ideology, logistics and manpower.

The Russian people didn’t collectively decide to round up the academics, writers, politicos, etc. under Stalin. It was the Stalin regime that provided the ideology, logistics and manpower. It was no different with Pol Pot and other dictators.

Leftism really is a disease.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 14, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Moron...Patton had a war to fight, you idiot....he was actively fighting the socialists....what was he supposed to do, stop fighting the war to provide for the prisoners? That is what support units did you fucking tool...
> ...




Moron.......criminals murder criminals, and if it isn't direct gang business they don't classify it as gang murder, you idiot.....spraying the house of a rival gang is not gang business.....you idiot.......

You don't know what you are talking about.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 14, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Moron...Patton had a war to fight, you idiot....he was actively fighting the socialists....what was he supposed to do, stop fighting the war to provide for the prisoners? That is what support units did you fucking tool...
> ...




10,258 murders with guns....according to the FBI.









						Expanded Homicide Data Table 8
					





					ucr.fbi.gov
				





90% of murders are committed by criminals....

The Criminology of Firearms
In 2004, the National Academy of Sciences reviewed 253 journal articles, 99 books, 43 government publications and some empirical research of its own about guns. The Academy could not identify any gun restriction that had reduced violent crime, suicide or gun accidents.

Why don't gun bans work? Because they rely on voluntary compliance by gun-using criminals. Prohibitionists never see this absurdity because they deceive themselves into thinking that, as Katherine Christoffel has said: "[M]ost shootings are not committed by felons or mentally ill people, but are acts of passion that are committed using a handgun that is owned for home protection."

*Christoffel, et al., are utterly wrong. The whole corpus of criminological research dating back to the 1890'sshows murderers "almost uniformly have a long history of involvement in criminal behavior," and that "[v]irtually all" murderers and other gun criminals have prior felony records — generally long ones.*

*While only 15 percent of Americans have criminal records, roughly 90 percent of adult murderers have prior adult records — exclusive of their often extensive juvenile records — with crime careers of six or more adult years including four major felonies. 

Gerald D. Robin, writing for the Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences,notes that, unlike ordinary gun owners, "the average murderer turns out to be no less hardened a criminal than the average robber or burglar."

Knowing the victim....*

Public Health and Gun Control: A Review




*For example, 

53 percent of the case subjects had a history of a household member being arrested, 

31 percent had a household history of illicit drug use, 32 percent had a household member hit or hurt in a family fight, and 

17 percent had a family member hurt so seriously in a domestic altercation that prompt medical attention was required. 
Moreover, both the case studies and control groups in this analysis had a very high incidence of financial instability.

In fact, in this study, gun ownership, the supposedly high risk factor for homicide was not one of the most strongly associated factors for being murdered.

Drinking, illicit drugs, living alone, history of family violence, living in a rented home were all greater individual risk factors for being murdered than a gun in the home. One must conclude there is no basis to apply the conclusions of this study to the general population.

All of these are factors that, as Dr. Suter pointed out, "would expectedly be associated with higher rates of violence and homicide."5

It goes without saying, the results of such a study on gun homicides, selecting this sort of unrepresentative population sample, nullify the authors' generalizations, and their preordained, conclusions can not be extrapolated to the general population.*

*Moreover, although the 1993 New England Journal of Medicine study purported to show that the homicide victims were killed with a gun ordinarily kept in the home, the fact is that as Kates and associates point out 71.1 percent of the victims were killed by assailants who did not live in the victims¹ household using guns presumably not kept in that home.6*


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Jul 14, 2021)

2aguy said:


> 90% of murders are committed by criminals....



  100%

  By definition, anyone who commits a murder is a criminal.


----------



## woodwork201 (Jul 14, 2021)

Bob Blaylock said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > 90% of murders are committed by criminals....
> ...


90% of non-suicide homicides are committed by criminals?


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 15, 2021)

Hollie said:


> Wow. More of the upside world of the leftist. It wasn’t the German people who collectively decided to round up the Jews, Gypsies, Poles and throw them into concentration camps. It was the Hitler’s government that provided the ideology, logistics and manpower.



a government most Germans enthusiastically supported.   This is what you don't seem to get.  Anti-Semitism was hardwired into German Culture previous to WWII.  

Hey, check this cartoon out. It was Published in 1919, before Hitler even got into politics.  




It shows the Jewish character stabbing the German soldier in the back.   

Then again, Trump blamed Asians for the Virus and Mexicans for the bad economy.  



Hollie said:


> The Russian people didn’t collectively decide to round up the academics, writers, politicos, etc. under Stalin. It was the Stalin regime that provided the ideology, logistics and manpower. It was no different with Pol Pot and other dictators.



Okay, let's look at that.  Who were the academics, etc. in Russia?  They were the elites, the ones who had the land while the majority of Russians were barely scraping out a living.   That's why the Russian people turned on them.  

You guys talk about Pol Pot without talking about Lon Nol and how he went along with brutal policies against the rural folks in Eastern Cambodia and turned a blind eye when the US expanded the Vietnam war into their land. 

Action. Reaction.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 15, 2021)

2aguy said:


> Moron.......criminals murder criminals, and if it isn't direct gang business they don't classify it as gang murder, you idiot.....spraying the house of a rival gang is not gang business.....you idiot.......
> 
> You don't know what you are talking about.



We aren't talking about murders of houses, guy, we are talking about murders of people.  And most murderers know their victims.... 35% of them are murdering family members,


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 15, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Moron.......criminals murder criminals, and if it isn't direct gang business they don't classify it as gang murder, you idiot.....spraying the house of a rival gang is not gang business.....you idiot.......
> ...




Even the people who murder their baby mommas are criminals with long histories of crime, you idiot.......and the majority, by your own number are criminals who know the other criminal who murders them...the drug dealer or buyer murdering the other drug dealer or buyer, the gang member shooting the other rival gang member...they all know each other you dumb ass.......


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 15, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Moron.......criminals murder criminals, and if it isn't direct gang business they don't classify it as gang murder, you idiot.....spraying the house of a rival gang is not gang business.....you idiot.......
> ...




You are an idiot...

*Christoffel, et al., are utterly wrong. The whole corpus of criminological research dating back to the 1890'sshows murderers "almost uniformly have a long history of involvement in criminal behavior," and that "[v]irtually all" murderers and other gun criminals have prior felony records — generally long ones.*

*While only 15 percent of Americans have criminal records, roughly 90 percent of adult murderers have prior adult records — exclusive of their often extensive juvenile records — with crime careers of six or more adult years including four major felonies. *


*Gerald D. Robin, writing for the Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences,notes that, unlike ordinary gun owners, "the average murderer turns out to be no less hardened a criminal than the average robber or burglar."*









						The Criminology of Firearms
					

Don Kates, The Independent Institute




					www.jurist.org


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 15, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Moron.......criminals murder criminals, and if it isn't direct gang business they don't classify it as gang murder, you idiot.....spraying the house of a rival gang is not gang business.....you idiot.......
> ...




You spew garbage......you lie in just about every post....

http://www.haciendapublishing.com/m...art-ii-gun-violence-and-constitutional-issues


Another favorite view of the gun control, public health establishment is the myth propounded by Dr. Mark Rosenberg, former head of the NCIPC of the CDC, who has written: "Most of the perpetrators of violence are not criminals by trade or profession. Indeed, in the area of domestic violence, most of the perpetrators are never accused of any crime. The victims and perpetrators are ourselves --- ordinary citizens, students, professionals, and even public health workers."(6) 

That statement is contradicted by available data, government data. The fact is that the typical murderer has had a prior criminal history of at least six years with four felony arrests in his record before he finally commits murder.



(17) The FBI statistics reveal that 75 percent of all violent crimes for any locality are committed by six percent of hardened criminals and repeat offenders.(18)


----------



## Hollie (Jul 15, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Wow. More of the upside world of the leftist. It wasn’t the German people who collectively decided to round up the Jews, Gypsies, Poles and throw them into concentration camps. It was the Hitler’s government that provided the ideology, logistics and manpower.
> ...


Naw, guy, anti Semitism isn’t “hardwired” into the population. Do you believe there is something in German DNA that predisposes the population to anti semitism? Another ridiculous conspiracy theory of the rabid leftist.

You forgot to include Jews as moneylenders in your quaint description of “elites”. You understand nothing of the history surrounding post WW1 Germany.  First, you need to understand the social and political dynamics which caused Hitler’s eventual rise to power. Following Germany’s humiliation at the end of WW I, caused in part by Allied insistence that a percentage of the land area of the German empire be annexed to various countries, and other concessions to the Allies, Germany was on the verge of collapse. It’s not difficult to envision an outspoken individual garnering recognition. It was certainly easier to blame the "Jews" for Germany's problems than it is the overall failed political maneuvering of a lame duck Republic that is chastised by having lost a war of imperialism. We’re basically examining an eccentric use of power and greed under the veil of Democracy. A hapless nation had suffered 10 years of runaway inflation and political isolation. A charismatic leader would tell the people what they wanted to hear, ie: the glory of the Fatherland, Arian supremacy, etc., etc.

I thought it was funny that the cartoon you cut and pasted is of Austrian origin, not German. Ooooooops. Throws a wet blanket on your rant.

You guys talk about coma Joe Biden and Harris as if they are the second coming of Obama, well because they are, only with a more leftist agenda.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 15, 2021)

2aguy said:


> Even the people who murder their baby mommas are criminals with long histories of crime, you idiot.......and the majority, by your own number are criminals who know the other criminal who murders them...the drug dealer or buyer murdering the other drug dealer or buyer, the gang member shooting the other rival gang member...they all know each other you dumb ass.......



Hold on, buddy, I just found a new Avi for you... 






You kind of see what you are doing here, right?   You are essentially trying to dismiss the horrific death tolls in this country by dehumanizing the victims.    



2aguy said:


> While only 15 percent of Americans have criminal records, roughly 90 percent of adult murderers have prior adult records — exclusive of their often extensive juvenile records — with crime careers of six or more adult years including four major felonies.



Which means all of nothing, Kirkenfuhrer...  The major difference is that most adults who manage to mostly keep out of trouble do so because of privilege.  

For instance, I find it amusing that a lot of the guys were have all grown up to wear Blue Lives Matter's teeshirt s are the ones who got into a lot of juvenile trouble when they were younger.   But again- white privilege... The black kid gets jail, the white kid gets probation and rehab.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 15, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Even the people who murder their baby mommas are criminals with long histories of crime, you idiot.......and the majority, by your own number are criminals who know the other criminal who murders them...the drug dealer or buyer murdering the other drug dealer or buyer, the gang member shooting the other rival gang member...they all know each other you dumb ass.......
> ...


Self-hating leftists love the “white privilege” slogan. They hate themselves, they hate each other and they hate their miserable lives so they want everyone else to hate them.

My dad loves to throw the idea of hard work and a willingness to make decisions at the self-hating leftists. I know he didn’t feel so privileged in his 30’s and 40’s, working 50 - 55 hours a week because he wanted to succeed. But after all, the leftist hacks will screech *“that’s racist™“, *_as is _math and science and personal integrity.

The debilitating disease of leftism. 
.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 15, 2021)

And now more crazy talk....



Hollie said:


> Naw, guy, anti Semitism isn’t “hardwired” into the population. Do you believe there is something in German DNA that predisposes the population to anti semitism? Another ridiculous conspiracy theory of the rabid leftist.



DNA? No.  A thousand years of culture, yes.   Martin Luther, the father of German Protestantism, wrote a book called "The Jews and their Lies".  









						On the Jews and Their Lies - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				




_In the treatise, he (Luther) argues that Jewish synagogues and schools be set on fire, their prayer books destroyed, rabbis forbidden to preach, homes burned, and property and money confiscated. They should be shown no mercy or kindness,[2] afforded no legal protection,[3] and "these poisonous envenomed worms" should be drafted into forced labor or expelled for all time.[4] He also seems to advocate their murder, writing "[W]e are at fault in not slaying them".__[5]_

This is 400 years before Hitler.  

We have the passion plays of Germany that portray the Jews as instigating the crucifixion. 









						Oberammergau Passion Play - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				




_A 2010 review in the Jewish newspaper The Forward stated: "It is undeniably true that the play was virulently antisemitic through most of its history, and that it gained an extra dose of notoriety after Hitler endorsed the 1934 production."[3] The review noted that the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) states that the play "continues to transmit negative stereotypes of Jews" and that even the Catholic Church demanded changes to the play, to bring it more in line with church policies expressed by the Second Vatican Council, 1962–1965, in the Apostolic Constitution, Nostra aetate, 4, October 28, 1965 ("[T]he Jews should not be presented as rejected or accursed by God as if this followed from Sacred Scripture"). 2000 and 2010 director Christian Stückl told "The Forward" that Jesus "lived as a Jew." Therefore, in the revised play, Jesus and his disciples pray in Hebrew. After viewing the play, the reviewer was sympathetic to its artistry and felt less offended by its message than by "Wagner's antisemitic caricatures and religious mysticism".[3] Nonetheless, the review quoted a report from the Council of Centers on Jewish-Christian Relations, which reviewed the 2010 script and objected that the play still makes use of "elements that are historically dubious" from the Gospels. The review stated that "It seems unfair" to accuse the play of anti-semitism when it recounts material in Christianity's sacred texts and noted that the ADL's national director Abe Foxman had said that if the play is "about a Crucifixion in which the Jews kill Christ, you can never clean it up enough" to avoid an anti-semitic message.__[3]_



Hollie said:


> You forgot to include Jews as moneylenders in your quaint description of “elites”. You understand nothing of the history surrounding post WW1 Germany. First, you need to understand the social and political dynamics which caused Hitler’s eventual rise to power. Following Germany’s humiliation at the end of WW I, caused in part by Allied insistence that a percentage of the land area of the German empire be annexed to various countries, and other concessions to the Allies, Germany was on the verge of collapse.


For the record.  My grandfather fought in the German Army in World War I.  He immigrated here in 1925, immigrated back in 1931 and then came back when he saw the country was going nuts.  

Yes, Germany was kind of a mess after WWI.  Part of the appeal of Hitler was that Germany's attempts at Democracy were kind of a hot mess.  There were 14 Chancellors between the Kaiser's abdication and Hitler's coming to power.  

By 1933, though, Germany had made a pretty good economic recovery, even despite the Great Depression. What brought Hitler to power was his promises of revenge...  




Hollie said:


> It’s not difficult to envision an outspoken individual garnering recognition. It was certainly easier to blame the "Jews" for Germany's problems than it is the overall failed political maneuvering of a lame duck Republic that is chastised by having lost a war of imperialism.



Gee, Trump came to power blaming the Mexicans...  and we didn't go through half the shit they did.  You give human beings too little credit.  We can do awful all by ourselves. 

But the point I am trying to get across to you, Trump didn't invent "hating Mexicans".  Hitler didn't invent "Hating Jews".  



Hollie said:


> We’re basically examining an eccentric use of power and greed under the veil of Democracy. A hapless nation had suffered 10 years of runaway inflation and political isolation. A charismatic leader would tell the people what they wanted to hear, ie: the glory of the Fatherland, Arian supremacy, etc., etc.



Again, Make America Great Again.   Not seeing much of a difference.  



Hollie said:


> I thought it was funny that the cartoon you cut and pasted is of Austrian origin, not German. Ooooooops. Throws a wet blanket on your rant.



Uh, you do realize that Austrians are... you know, German, right? They speak German.  They were part of Germany for most of history under the Holy Roman Empire, the German Confederation and the Third Reich.  

The Austrian Origin aside, the fact is, the Cartoon Jews is stabbing a a German soldier in the back.   That's the point of the Stabbed in the Back Myth.  









						Stab-in-the-back myth - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				






Hollie said:


> You guys talk about coma Joe Biden and Harris as if they are the second coming of Obama, well because they are, only with a more leftist agenda.



Actually, I'll just be happy if Joe restores sanity to the country...


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 15, 2021)

Hollie said:


> Self-hating leftists love the “white privilege” slogan. They hate themselves, they hate each other and they hate their miserable lives so they want everyone else to hate them.
> 
> My dad loves to throw the idea of hard work and a willingness to make decisions at the self-hating leftists. I know he didn’t feel so privileged in his 30’s and 40’s, working 50 - 55 hours a week because he wanted to succeed. But after all, the leftist hacks will screech *“that’s racist™“, *_as is _math and science and personal integrity.
> 
> The debilitating disease of leftism.



Actually, up until 12 years ago, I was probably more right wing than you are. 

Then I realized that my enemy wasn't the Mexican or the Black or the Gay person... it was the white guy with more money who happily screws with your life because he can.  

But I'm also a realist. I know that because I was born white and male and straight (sorry all you Wingnuts who fantasize about my sex life), I do have massive privilege in this country.  

Now, in the last post, I talked about my Grandfather... the one who fought for the Kaiser.  And yes, I'm pretty sure people called him a "Kraut" and a "Hun" and other unkind names.  But the funny thing was, even getting off that boat, in our society, by virtue of skin color, he had privilege.  

Hard work is fine.  But, shit, sweetie, we got people working two jobs to make ends meet these days.  We got people who work that 55 hours a week and then go off and drive an Uber on the weekends.  

You see, if you want to talk about that previous generation (Funny how you don't talk about how YOU work 55 hours a week), let's look at that.  

Those folks had UNIONS protecting their rights at work and making sure they made a living wage.  Things the Right Wing has been slowly dismantling...

But dumb-asses like you and DickTiny, Clinging to your guns and your bibles, don't understand who took all that away from you. 

Yeah. Let's blame the Mexicans.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 15, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Self-hating leftists love the “white privilege” slogan. They hate themselves, they hate each other and they hate their miserable lives so they want everyone else to hate them.
> ...


It’s like a watching a stereotypical, self-hating leftist announce on a public message board how much he hates himself.

But yeah, sometimes live is hard work. Wouldn’t it be great if uncle coma Joe and “Carmella” Harris just gave you free stuff?


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 16, 2021)

Hollie said:


> It’s like a watching a stereotypical, self-hating leftist announce on a public message board how much he hates himself.



Duly noted you can't argue the points made.   



Hollie said:


> But yeah, sometimes live is hard work. Wouldn’t it be great if uncle coma Joe and “Carmella” Harris just gave you free stuff?



Who asked for 'free stuff".   As I've often pointed out, white people are just fine with welfare when you call it a "Middle Class entitlement".   Medicare, Social Security, Unemployment Benefits and Veteran's Benefits make up MOST of the Federal budget.


----------



## Colin norris (Jul 16, 2021)

2aguy said:


> NoNukes said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...



You went to a lot of trouble to prove nothing. How's  your testosterone now Rambo?


----------



## Hollie (Jul 16, 2021)

Hollie said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...





JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > It’s like a watching a stereotypical, self-hating leftist announce on a public message board how much he hates himself.
> ...


As you have often pointed out, self-hating leftists tend to be rather ignorant of history. What party was it that instituted social security, Medicaid / Medicare, etc? You didn’t know it was Democrats?

Yet another bit of humor as the democrats, the party of slavery and the party of welfare entitlements now whine about evil white people using those entitlements.

Duly noted you know nothing of history.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 16, 2021)

Hollie said:


> As you have often pointed out, self-hating leftists tend to be rather ignorant of history. What party was it that instituted social security, Medicaid / Medicare, etc? You didn’t know it was Democrats?



Here's the thing, Sweetie.  Barry "Deep Down you Know He's Nuts" Goldwater tried to run against Entitlements in 1964, and he lost 44 states, including Southern States.   A white person asked him, "Why are you trying to shut down the TVA, that's our livelihood down here."  

People vote for these things because they know that they keep middle class white people from becoming POOR white people.   Not "Hard Work"... all the hard work in the world isn't going to do any good if you have to make a choice between letting Nana die or bankrupting your family to keep her alive for an extra couple of years.  

The funny thing is, before the Middle Class Entitlements came along, the average lifespan for an American was about 62 years.   Today it's close to 80.   Without getting into a longer discussion with you that would involve math, these policies are victims of their own success.  



Hollie said:


> Yet another bit of humor as the democrats, the party of slavery and the party of welfare entitlements now whine about evil white people using those entitlements.



Except no one is complaining about them using them.  That's what they are there for.  

I just point out the hypocrisy of DEMANDING your government benefits while looking down on poor people who get a pittance of assistance.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 16, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > As you have often pointed out, self-hating leftists tend to be rather ignorant of history. What party was it that instituted social security, Medicaid / Medicare, etc? You didn’t know it was Democrats?
> ...


Here’s the thing, pumpkin, while the rabid leftists whine about the evil white man and his entitlements, the leftist democrats are the party of those entitlements. Why not do the noble thing and donate your welfare check to those needy folks you whine about but care nothing for. Everyone gets it, those poor, oppressed blacks are talking points for democrats.


----------



## woodwork201 (Jul 16, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Who asked for 'free stuff".   As I've often pointed out, white people are just fine with welfare when you call it a "Middle Class entitlement".   Medicare, Social Security, Unemployment Benefits and Veteran's Benefits make up MOST of the Federal budget.



I'm curious.  If someone in the old Soviet Union (or make it Cuba so it's current today) who hates communism but eats the government's potato soup when they can get something to eat, are they hypocrites?  

Veteran's benefits are certainly not welfare.  When you have injuries or other conditions related to serving in the United States Armed Forces then the nation owes the medical treatment for those conditions or other conditions related to or resulting from those injuries.  Discussion of that as a socialist program is absolutely off the table.

Who passed Social Security and Medicare?  The government takes over 15% of a person's pay for Social Security and Medicare.  If everyone in the US saved or invested 15% for their entire working careers, and did anything at all to improve their skills above minimum wage jobs, they'd retire wealthy.  

So, back to the potato soup, surviving in a socialist or communist economy does not negate your right to argue against socialism.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 17, 2021)

Hollie said:


> Here’s the thing, pumpkin, while the rabid leftists whine about the evil white man and his entitlements, the leftist democrats are the party of those entitlements. Why not do the noble thing and donate your welfare check to those needy folks you whine about but care nothing for. Everyone gets it, those poor, oppressed blacks are talking points for democrats.



I don't get entitlements... I work two jobs and work about 80 hours a week.   I already know that I probably won't be able to maintain my lifestyle on social security, so I'm working very hard to save up enough money so I can. 

But the point clearly went over your head, snookums.   You guys whine ALL DAY about poverty relief programs, but are perfectly fine with middle class entitlements that keep middle class people from becoming poor if they are unemployed, sick or elderly.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 17, 2021)

woodwork201 said:


> I'm curious. If someone in the old Soviet Union (or make it Cuba so it's current today) who hates communism but eats the government's potato soup when they can get something to eat, are they hypocrites?


Oh, no, I feel a retarded analogy coming on...  Let's see how Corky this inbred extra chromosome idiot can get. 




woodwork201 said:


> Veteran's benefits are certainly not welfare. When you have injuries or other conditions related to serving in the United States Armed Forces then the nation owes the medical treatment for those conditions or other conditions related to or resulting from those injuries. Discussion of that as a socialist program is absolutely off the table.


Uh, dude, I served for 11 years.   Never got anywhere near a testy foreigner trying to kill me, as most veterans never do.  Have no service related disabilities or injuries. 
  I'm still entitled to all those benefits for merely sitting behind my desk filling out DA Form 3645.  

So why should I be given special benefits for 11 years of filling out requisition paperwork for the Army and not the 30 years I've spent since then filling out paperwork for various corporations?  




woodwork201 said:


> Who passed Social Security and Medicare? The government takes over 15% of a person's pay for Social Security and Medicare. If everyone in the US saved or invested 15% for their entire working careers, and did anything at all to improve their skills above minimum wage jobs, they'd retire wealthy.


Okay, let's look at that. First, they don't take 15%, they take more like 7 for most people unless you are self-employed.   The rest is provided by your employer.  

Works on the assumption that most people are good at saving and would have put that money away.  

Um.. Okay, let's look at that. 









						Here's how much debt Americans have at every age
					

"Despite recognizing that debt is dangerous waters, Americans are jumping in with both feet and struggling to stay afloat," says Emily Holbrook, director of planning for Northwestern Mutual.




					www.cnbc.com
				




The average American now has about $38,000 in personal debt, excluding home mortgages. That’s up $1,000 from a year ago, according to Northwestern Mutual’s 2018 Planning & Progress Study, which also reports that “fewer people said they carry ‘no debt’ this year compared to 2017 (23 percent vs. 27 percent).”









						Survey: A Growing Percentage Of Americans Have No Emergency Savings Whatsoever | Bankrate.com
					

Nearly four in 10 Americans believe the economy is in bad shape and some believe a recession is on the horizon. Yet many U.S. adults are unprepared for a downturn with little or no emergency savings.



					www.bankrate.com
				




Nearly three in 10 (28 percent) U.S. adults have no emergency savings, according to Bankrate’s latest Financial Security Index. One in four have a rainy day fund, but not enough money to cover three months’ worth of living expenses.

Getting into the habit of regularly saving money is critical, experts say. If you’re making automatic contributions to a 401(k) plan at work, you might as well have a portion of each paycheck deposited into a vehicle such as a high-yield savings account. Unfortunately, it’ll take a lot more than that to solve the so-called savings crisis.

So, tell me, Corky, you really think that most Americans would do somehow better if they had 6% more income to work with?  

And that's just social security.  Medicare is a mere 1%, and that gets wiped out the minute you get sick.  

Now, the reason why Medicare and Social Security are in trouble now is because they've been so successful.  In 1960, the average American life expectency was 62 years. Most people died before they ever got a chance to retire.  Now we have people regularly living into their 80's. 



woodwork201 said:


> So, back to the potato soup, surviving in a socialist or communist economy does not negate your right to argue against socialism.



Um, sure it does, if you couldn't possibly provide potato soup on your own.   That's the whole point. 

All human existence is some kind of socialism.  We all live off of goods and services provided by others labor, while other people live off our labor.  

For instance, let's take health care.  No matter if you are on Medicare, Medicaid or a private plan, you are either paying for other people's treatment if you get sick, or other people are paying for your treatment if your illness exceeds what you are paying into the system. 

The problem with a private "Capalist" plan is you get the temptation to rip off people after they've paid to give nine-figure salaries to your executives, which is exactly what outfits like Cigna and Blue Cross do.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 17, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Here’s the thing, pumpkin, while the rabid leftists whine about the evil white man and his entitlements, the leftist democrats are the party of those entitlements. Why not do the noble thing and donate your welfare check to those needy folks you whine about but care nothing for. Everyone gets it, those poor, oppressed blacks are talking points for democrats.
> ...




He didn't rescue the country from the Great Depression you idiot...FDR made it worse, he made it longer than any other Depression in our history.......you idiot.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 17, 2021)

2aguy said:


> He didn't rescue the country from the Great Depression you idiot...FDR made it worse, he made it longer than any other Depression in our history.......you idiot.



What deranged homeschool did you go to.  

Obviously, you are too young to remember the Great Depression, but I've known people who lived through it, and they had nothing but great things to say about FDR.  

Oh, recent survey of Presidential Greats... He comes in at #3 after Lincoln and Washington. 

Trump comes in at... 41.  And that's only because you have the guys who messed up and caused the Civil War on there.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 17, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Here’s the thing, pumpkin, while the rabid leftists whine about the evil white man and his entitlements, the leftist democrats are the party of those entitlements. Why not do the noble thing and donate your welfare check to those needy folks you whine about but care nothing for. Everyone gets it, those poor, oppressed blacks are talking points for democrats.
> ...


Odd that the flaming leftist is screeching about entitlements when it was leftists who enacted those programs. 

Predictable, however, that screeching leftist is whining about those evil, white, middle class people who worked and contributed to the programs they supported during their working years. 

Honestly, cupcake, it's obvious you're self-hating enough to whine about the devil white reaping the rewards of a lifetime of work but you're too selfish to give your money to those poor, oppressed folks the leftists hate almost as much as they hate themselves.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 17, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > He didn't rescue the country from the Great Depression you idiot...FDR made it worse, he made it longer than any other Depression in our history.......you idiot.
> ...




They don't know what happened...they were too busy suffering under the FDR depression to know that he caused it to get worse and to last longer with his policies....

Left wing historians?  When will you stop lying to yourself?


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 17, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Here’s the thing, pumpkin, while the rabid leftists whine about the evil white man and his entitlements, the leftist democrats are the party of those entitlements. Why not do the noble thing and donate your welfare check to those needy folks you whine about but care nothing for. Everyone gets it, those poor, oppressed blacks are talking points for democrats.
> ...




You are an idiot...

*Roosevelt's policies prolonged and deepened it.*
*
There's no doubt that Roosevelt changed the character of the American government—for the worse. Many of the reforms of the 1930s remain embedded in policy today: acreage allotments, price supports and marketing controls in agriculture, extensive regulation of private securities, federal intrusion into union-management relations, government lending and insurance activities, the minimum wage, national unemployment insurance, Social Security and welfare payments, production and sale of electrical power by the federal government, fiat money—the list goes on.

Roosevelt's revolution began with his inaugural address, which left no doubt about his intentions to seize the moment and harness it to his purposes. Best remembered for its patently false line that "the only thing we have to fear is fear itself," it also called for extraordinary emergency governmental powers.

The day after FDR took the oath of office, he issued a proclamation calling Congress into a special session. Before it met, he proclaimed a national banking holiday—an action he had refused to endorse when Hoover suggested it three days earlier.

Invoking the Trading with the Enemy Act of 1917, Roosevelt declared that "all banking transactions shall be suspended." Banks were permitted to reopen only after case-by-case inspection and approval by the government, a procedure that dragged on for months. This action heightened the public's sense of crisis and allowed him to ignore traditional restraints on the power of the central government.

In their understanding of the Depression, Roosevelt and his economic advisers had cause and effect reversed. They did not recognize that prices had fallen because of the Depression. They believed that the Depression prevailed because prices had fallen. The obvious remedy, then, was to raise prices, which they decided to do by creating artificial shortages. Hence arose a collection of crackpot policies designed to cure the Depression by cutting back on production. The scheme was so patently self-defeating that it's hard to believe anyone seriously believed it would work.

The goofiest application of the theory had to do with the price of gold. Starting with the bank holiday and proceeding through a massive gold-buying program, Roosevelt abandoned the gold standard, the bedrock restraint on inflation and government growth. He nationalized the monetary gold stock, forbade the private ownership of gold (except for jewelry, scientific or industrial uses, and foreign payments), and nullified all contractual promises—whether public or private, past or future—to pay in gold.

Besides being theft, gold confiscation didn't work. The price of gold was increased from $20.67 to $35.00 per ounce, a 69% increase, but the domestic price level increased only 7% between 1933 and 1934, and over rest of the decade it hardly increased at all. FDR's devaluation provoked retaliation by other countries, further strangling international trade and throwing the world's economies further into depression.

Having hobbled the banking system and destroyed the gold standard, he turned next to agriculture. Working with the politically influential Farm Bureau and the Bernard Baruch gang, Roosevelt pushed through the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1933. It provided for acreage and production controls, restrictive marketing agreements, and regulatory licensing of processors and dealers "to eliminate unfair practices and charges." It authorized new lending, taxed processors of agricultural commodities, and rewarded farmers who cut back production.

The objective was to raise farm commodity prices until they reached a much higher "parity" level. The millions who could hardly feed and clothe their families can be forgiven for questioning the nobility of a program designed to make food and fiber more expensive. Though this was called an "emergency" measure, no President since has seen fit to declare the emergency over.

Industry was virtually nationalized under Roosevelt's National Industrial Recovery Act of 1933. Like most New Deal legislation, this resulted from a compromise of special interests: businessmen seeking higher prices and barriers to competition, labor unionists seeking governmental sponsorship and protection, social workers wanting to control working conditions and forbid child labor, and the proponents of massive spending on public works.

The legislation allowed the President to license businesses or control imports to achieve the vaguely identified objectives of the act. Every industry had to have a code of fair competition. The codes contained provisions setting minimum wages, maximum hours, and "decent" working conditions. The policy rested on the dubious notion that what the country needed most was cartelized business, higher prices, less work, and steep labor costs.

To administer the act, Roosevelt established the National Recovery Administration and named General Hugh Johnson, a crony of Baruch's and a former draft administrator, as head. Johnson adopted the famous Blue Eagle emblem and forced businesses to display it and abide by NRA codes. There were parades, billboards, posters, buttons, and radio ads, all designed to silence those who questioned the policy. Not since the First World War had there been anything like the outpouring of hoopla and coercion. Cutting prices became "chiseling" and the equivalent of treason. The policy was enforced by a vast system of agents and informers.

Eventually the NRA approved 557 basic and 189 supplementary codes, covering about 95% of all industrial employees. Big businessmen dominated the writing and implementing of the documents. They generally aimed to suppress competition. Figuring prominently in this effort were minimum prices, open price schedules, standardization of products and services, and advance notice of intent to change prices. Having gained the government's commitment to stilling competition, the tycoons looked forward to profitable repose.

But the initial enthusiasm evaporated when the NRA did not deliver, and for obvious reasons. Even its corporate boosters began to object to the regimentation it required. By the time the Supreme Court invalidated the whole undertaking in early 1935, most of its former supporters had lost their taste for it.
*
*Striking down the NRA, Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes wrote that "extraordinary conditions do not create or enlarge constitutional power." Congress "cannot delegate legislative power to the President to exercise an unfettered discretion to make whatever laws he thinks may be needed."*









						How FDR Made the Depression Worse | Robert Higgs
					

The Free Market 13, no.




					mises.org


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 17, 2021)

Hollie said:


> Odd that the flaming leftist is screeching about entitlements when it was leftists who enacted those programs.



You miss the point more often then a retard.  My complaint isn't about entitlements, which are in fact the hallmark of a modern society.  My point, which you clearly didn't get, or perhaps are deliberately avoiding, is that you cast all this derision upon the "Welfare State", when in fact, you guys would scream the loudest if your goodies were taken away.  



Hollie said:


> Predictable, however, that screeching leftist is whining about those evil, white, middle class people who worked and contributed to the programs they supported during their working years.



Not at all.. the point is, that we wouldn't have a middle class if we DIDN'T have those programs.   Families would be bankrupted taking care of old and sick loved ones.   People would be driven back in their career progression every time there was a recession, and they ended up having to take lower-paying jobs because they couldn't get unemployment. 

Case in point- look at all the Republicans screaming to cut unemployment insurance because a lot of people in lower paid industries are refusing to go back to their "essential" jobs when they can make ends meet on a weekly unemployment check. 



Hollie said:


> Honestly, cupcake, it's obvious you're self-hating enough to whine about the devil white reaping the rewards of a lifetime of work but you're too selfish to give your money to those poor, oppressed folks the leftists hate almost as much as they hate themselves.



I don't have to give them MY money, we need to make sure the one percent pays their fair share to support these programs and pay the hired help a fair wage. 

Not to worry, as long as the One Percent can get people like you to cling to your guns and your bibles, they can keep taking you for a ride.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 17, 2021)

2aguy said:


> They don't know what happened...they were too busy suffering under the FDR depression to know that he caused it to get worse and to last longer with his policies....
> 
> Left wing historians? When will you stop lying to yourself?



Actually, they were pretty sure they knew exactly what happened. It's why he got elected four times. 

Trump didn't even get elected once.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 17, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Odd that the flaming leftist is screeching about entitlements when it was leftists who enacted those programs.
> ...


You really are struggling with some pretty simple concepts. While you despise the evil white middle class, it is that group which propelled this nation forward out of the world wars. During the Depression of the '30s, the middle class found itself in a train wreck of a stalled economy. They survived a decade of deprivation, hardships and then WW2. In the years that followed they built the America that was to become legend. The rabid laftist narrative turns the success of the middle class into something to be despised while the rabid leftists exploit the benefits of what they didn't build or create. 

It's really a bit creepy as you seem to be little more than a mouthpiece for AOC and the dysfunctional squad. "Tax the rich'', ''Green New Deal'', a socialist paradise of Venezuela or Cuba and all will be right with the world, especially if you can get rid of whitey which will make all your problems disappear .


----------



## Hollie (Jul 17, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > They don't know what happened...they were too busy suffering under the FDR depression to know that he caused it to get worse and to last longer with his policies....
> ...


Leftists live and breathe their conspiracy theories .


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 17, 2021)

Hollie said:


> You really are struggling with some pretty simple concepts. While you despise the evil white middle class, it is that group which propelled this nation forward out of the world wars. During the Depression of the '30s, the middle class found itself in a train wreck of a stalled economy. They survived a decade of deprivation, hardships and then WW2. In the years that followed they built the America that was to become legend. The rabid laftist narrative turns the success of the middle class into something to be despised while the rabid leftists exploit the benefits of what they didn't build or create.


I think your history is a bit confused.  There wasn't a "middle class" before the New Deal.  As much as we talk about the roaring 20's, the vast majority of people lived in abject poverty even before the recession hit.  60% of the population lived below the poverty line.  






						Economic problems in the 1920s - CCEA - GCSE History Revision - CCEA - BBC Bitesize
					

Weaknesses in the American economy became more apparent as the 1920s progressed (CCEA).



					www.bbc.co.uk
				




It was FDR who established a middle class through entitlements, supporting a minimum wage, supporting unions, etc.   

Now, yes, White people benefited more, because they always do in our society.  One of the main drivers of the Civil Rights movement was that black people saw white people moving out of the tenements of the cities and poor hovels of the South and they were still stuck there.   The Civil Rights movement was just as much about economics as it was about social standing. 

Final point, because I do believe in putting all the cards on the table.  The sensible policies of elevating the middle class and the new deal did create the middle class, but so did the fact the US came out of WWII relatively unscathed compared to everyone else.  That gave us a huge advantage economically.  

But so did the fact that FDR and HST spent 20 years building the Middle Class, to the point that when Ike ran in 1952 and 1956, THIS was the Republican platform. 






Holly shit, what a fucking Communist!!  Who the fuck is this guy?  




Hollie said:


> It's really a bit creepy as you seem to be little more than a mouthpiece for AOC and the dysfunctional squad. "Tax the rich'', ''Green New Deal'', a socialist paradise of Venezuela or Cuba and all will be right with the world, especially if you can get rid of whitey which will make all your problems disappear .


Hardly.   If you want to argue with AOC, go argue with her.  

The point is, we only had a middle class because during FDR's term, the top marginal rate went up to 93%.  When JFK promoted tax reform to reduce the top marginal rate to 70%, it was REPUBLICANS who called him fiscally irresponsible.   

yeah, the fact that we've been punishing Cuba and Venezuela for picking forms of government we don't like is proof socialism doesn't work.  Forget they were shitholes before the commies got there, or we've economically sanctioned them ever since.  Socialism Bad.   Except when white people get it. 




Hollie said:


> Leftists live and breathe their conspiracy theories .



No, no, a conspiracy is something done in secret.  Trump lost by 3 million votes in 2016.  The people said "NO".  He lost by 7 million votes in 2020. The people said "NO" even louder.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 17, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > You really are struggling with some pretty simple concepts. While you despise the evil white middle class, it is that group which propelled this nation forward out of the world wars. During the Depression of the '30s, the middle class found itself in a train wreck of a stalled economy. They survived a decade of deprivation, hardships and then WW2. In the years that followed they built the America that was to become legend. The rabid laftist narrative turns the success of the middle class into something to be despised while the rabid leftists exploit the benefits of what they didn't build or create.
> ...


I think your history is a bit contrived.

The ''Roaring 20's'' was called that for a reason. Can you guess what that reason is?





The Economy in the 1920s and What Caused the Great Depression​The 1920s had hidden weaknesses that caused the Great Depression. One reason? The U.S. economy shifted from a traditional to a free-market system.



www.thebalance.com
The 1920s is the decade when America's economy grew 42%. Mass production spread new consumer goods into every household. The modern auto and airline industries were born. The U.S. victory in World War I gave the country its first experience of being a global power. Soldiers returning home from Europe brought with them a new perspective, energy, and skills. Everyone became an investor thanks to easy access to credit. That hidden weakness helped cause the Great Depression.

Economic Growth and Output​The economy grew 42% during the 1920s, and the United States produced almost half the world's output because World War I destroyed most of Europe. New construction almost doubled, from $6.7 billion to $10.1 billion. Aside from the economic recession of 1920-21, when by some estimates unemployment rose to 11.7%, for the most part, unemployment in the 1920s never rose above the natural rate of around 4%.1


Per-capita GDP rose from $6,460 to $8,016 per person, but this prosperity was not distributed evenly. In 1922, the top 1% of the population received 13.4% of total income. By 1929, it earned 14.5%.

Your ''I hate whitey" attitudes are pretty typical of the modern left. You combine child-like naïveté and paranoid aggression in the tirades you dump into threads. Those damaging pairings are a wonder to behold. The child-like naïveté protects the self-hating leftist from from facts while the paranoid aggression protects the delicate leftist sensibilities from any actual accounting of their failings.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 17, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> No, no, a conspiracy is something done in secret.  Trump lost by 3 million votes in 2016.  The people said "NO".  He lost by 7 million votes in 2020. The people said "NO" even louder.


Leftists just love their conspiracy theories. Because you missed it, the 'popular vote' does not exclusively win elections.

Your comment about Trump losing by 7 million votes in 2020 is looking more and more like election fraud as Georgia, Arizona and other states are finding obvious errors.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 18, 2021)

Hollie said:


> I think your history is a bit contrived.
> 
> The ''Roaring 20's'' was called that for a reason. Can you guess what that reason is?



Wishful thinking?   Since you seem to be obsessed about cars being "proof" that the 20's were somehow an ideal time, let's look at that.   The Model T cost $300.00 by the 1920's.  In today's dollars, that would be about $4075.00.  You couldn't buy even the cheapest new car for that amount today.   Yet despite that, 75% of families in the supposedly Roaring 20's couldn't afford them.

Compare that to today, where 91% of households have at least one car. And that's after the GOP wrecked the middle class with the last five recessions. 

Despite all the economic gains after WWI, most Americans still lived in poverty. 



Hollie said:


> Per-capita GDP rose from $6,460 to $8,016 per person, but this prosperity was not distributed evenly. In 1922, the top 1% of the population received 13.4% of total income. By 1929, it earned 14.5%.



And today the top 1% has 49% of the wealth.  What is wrong with this picture? 



Hollie said:


> Your ''I hate whitey" attitudes are pretty typical of the modern left. You combine child-like naïveté and paranoid aggression in the tirades you dump into threads. Those damaging pairings are a wonder to behold. The child-like naïveté protects the self-hating leftist from from facts while the paranoid aggression protects the delicate leftist sensibilities from any actual accounting of their failings.



Not at all....  I do very well.  The problem is, I have to work a lot harder at it than my Dad did, because he belonged to a union when we still had a middle class.  You know, before Republicans decided that working people were making too much money and they had to totally put a stop to that shit. 

Ironically, they figured out the way to destroy the middle class was to get stupid white people to vote against their own economic interests by playing on their sexual, racial and religious fears.

"Hey, I just lost my good job to outsourcing."
"Never mind that!  That person wants to use the lady's room, and he has a DICK!!!!" 

you guys are so gullible.

Riddle me this, Batman.  Why is it that Recessions always seem to happen when Republicans are in charge.  If you take a look at the eleven recessions that have happened since the end of WWII, ten of them happened when Republicans were in charge.   Why do you think that is?  Hint', it's not a bug, it's a design feature. 



Hollie said:


> Leftists just love their conspiracy theories. Because you missed it, the 'popular vote' does not exclusively win elections.


No, but when it doesn't, it's always a fucking disaster.  Trump was a disaster. Dubya was a disaster. Benjamin Harrison was a disaster.  Rutherford B. Hayes was a disaster.




Hollie said:


> Your comment about Trump losing by 7 million votes in 2020 is looking more and more like election fraud as Georgia, Arizona and other states are finding obvious errors.



Um, yeah, how is that audit going in Arizona... They want to start bugging people at home now because they haven't been able to find the widespread fraud they claimed was out there.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 18, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > I think your history is a bit contrived.
> ...


You seem to be obsessed with making nonsensical claims and then going your best Michael Jackson moonwalk in retreat. It was predictable that your claims about the Roaring 20's were nonsense as that period in time included spectacular economic growth. 

As with the leftist narrative, we understand that GDP per capita was not ''equitable'', therefore, proof the evil white persin must be 'racist'. This is the retreat to ignorance and racism defines the left. Their leftist, Venezuela or Cuba style dystopias are the model for 'equity', wher everyone is similarly abused and throttled. 


Predictably, the left has decided that the way to crush the middle class is to scream 'equity'. They will use the power of government to crush white farmers byecluding them from programs reserved for 'people of color'. 









						Court Rejects Biden's Race Reparations for Black Farmers Again
					

Biden’s plan to forgive debt for all non-white farmers was dealt another legal blow after a judge issued a priliminary injunction to stop it.




					www.breitbart.com
				





The left is attempting to press their race hating CRT nonsense in public schools. Fortunately, parents, are rejecting such vile leftist race hating ideology.









						‘Expose These People Publicly’: Parents Against Critical Race Curriculum Listed By Teachers Attempting To ‘Infiltrate’ Them
					

A Republican political action committee is “preparing for legal war” against a group of teachers and parents in Virginia.




					dailycaller.com
				






Riddle me this, Che Guevara wannabe. Why is it that your nonsense comment about Republican presidents and recessions is a broadly sweeping, false claim?









						Fact check: Do Republican presidents oversee recessions and Dems oversee recoveries?
					

Have only GOP leaders since Reagan had recessions? Not quite. Democratic presidents oversee recoveries, but Obama still had to tackle recession.



					www.usatoday.com


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 18, 2021)

Hollie said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...




Democrats do not oversee recoveries....the democrats destroy the economy, the republicans have to fix the economy, and just as the economy is recovering, the democrats are in office again to wreck the recovery.....


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 18, 2021)

Hollie said:


> You seem to be obsessed with making nonsensical claims and then going your best Michael Jackson moonwalk in retreat. It was predictable that your claims about the Roaring 20's were nonsense as that period in time included spectacular economic growth.



Actually, it included nothing of the sort, as 60% of the population lived below the poverty line.  

Compare that to today, where for all our problems, only 14% live below the poverty line.  



Hollie said:


> As with the leftist narrative, we understand that GDP per capita was not ''equitable'', therefore, proof the evil white persin must be 'racist'. This is the retreat to ignorance and racism defines the left. Their leftist, Venezuela or Cuba style dystopias are the model for 'equity', wher everyone is similarly abused and throttled.


Let's try to focus on this country and not your fear of Cuba, okay?  

I mean, if you really want to talk about Cuba, we can talk about our 60 years of exploiting the country before they finally threw us out..  



Hollie said:


> Predictably, the left has decided that the way to crush the middle class is to scream 'equity'. They will use the power of government to crush white farmers byecluding them from programs reserved for 'people of color'.



Uh, you do realize that white farmers are already massively subsidized by the government, right?  Frankly, for someone who hate socialism so much, you can't find a better example of it than American Agricultural policy. 









						U.S. government checks constituted 40% of farmers' income in 2020: USDA
					

Iowa farmer says that without federal money it would have been difficult to make ends meet but that it began to feel as if the government checks were...




					www.marketwatch.com
				







Hollie said:


> The left is attempting to press their race hating CRT nonsense in public schools. Fortunately, parents, are rejecting such vile leftist race hating ideology.



You means some screaming racists are... but they'll out themselves in short order and be pretty embarrassed. 



Hollie said:


> Riddle me this, Che Guevara wannabe. Why is it that your nonsense comment about Republican presidents and recessions is a broadly sweeping, false claim?



Well, it isn't, but I'm glad you passed up on it.   Let's review, shall we.  Every recession we got out of we did so because of either massive spending or a Democrat imposing stronger policies with more equity. 

2020- Trump
2008 - Bush - Obama had to fix it. 
2001 - Bush- The war fixed it. Barely. There's a reason why they call that decade the "Oughts". 
1990-  Bush-1 - Clinton fixed it. 
1982 - Reagan - Massive military spending fixed it. 
1980-  Carter - Really didn't get fixed. 
1975-  Ford - Carter had to fix it, but we had massive inflation
1969 - Nixon- Fixed it through price controls and massive government intervention
1960-  Ike - JFK had to fix it. 
1953, 58 - Ike.  largely alleviated through massive infrastructure spending


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 18, 2021)

2aguy said:


> Democrats do not oversee recoveries....the democrats destroy the economy, the republicans have to fix the economy, and just as the economy is recovering, the democrats are in office again to wreck the recovery.....



Wow, do you come from Bizarro world. 

Recessions start under Republicans, but they are Democrats fault.
Swimming pools are more dangerous than guns
People who shoot their family members belong to gangs.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 18, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Actually, it included nothing of the sort, as 60% of the population lived below the poverty line.
> 
> Compare that to today, where for all our problems, only 14% live below the poverty line.
> 
> ...


Actually, the facts contradict your claims about the economy during the 1920's. 









						American Economy in the 1920s: Consumerism, Stock Market & Economic Shift - Video & Lesson Transcript | Study.com
					

The American economy in the 1920s boomed thanks to advances in manufacturing, advertising, and financing. Learn about the economic shift that saw...




					study.com
				



The Roaring Economy of the 1920s​The 1920s have been called the Roaring '20s and for good reason. Not only was American culture 'roaring' in terms of style and social trends, but the economy was 'roaring' as well. The decade was a time of tremendous prosperity. Following the end of World War I, the industrial might of the United States was unleashed for domestic, peaceful purposes. Within a few short years, an economic shift took place as the economy transitioned from wartime production to peacetime production. New technologies like the automobile, household appliances, and other mass-produced products led to a vibrant consumer culture, stimulating economic growth. Furthermore, under the administration of three consecutive Republican presidents, the government adopted fiscally conservative policies that fueled private business.


Interesting that, as noted above: "_Furthermore, under the administration of three consecutive Republican presidents, the government adopted fiscally conservative policies that fueled private business_.

Gee, whiz. For all the whining about those evil republicans (you know, those evil white republicans), there was a decade of solid US growth and prosperity. 

If you want to talk about your obsession with communist / socialist paradises, Cuba is among those models that leftisrs admire. Castro was a murderous thug who reduced the entire country (except for his cronies) to poverty, imprisoned, tortured, and killed anyone who dared oppose his regime. Sounds like a leftist paradise. "Equity'', as everyone is equitably oppressed by the leftist regime. 

Uh, did you realize that farming subsidies are not procured by race based criteria? That would change under the raced based Biden policy, 'Equity' means that subsidies would be dolled out to blacks while excluding white farmers. That would otherwise be defined as race-based policy which us a violation of law. How strange. That us what the courts have determined. 









						Judge halts Biden’s $4B financial aid program for farmers of color
					

A federal judge has stopped a nearly $4 billion Biden Administration effort intended to provide debt relief to minority farmers, noting that the program doesn’t consider the financial status …




					nypost.com
				





Well, it's not surprising that you falsely represented that "_Every recession we got out of we did so because of either massive spending or a Democrat imposing stronger policies with more equity''._

You offered nothing but a rote list of unverified comments. Odd that it was President Trump who managed to steer the economy into unprecedented growth and income gains for all Americans. The stock market under Trump was particularly a boon for the evil white investors. I understand your day will be ruined by the evil white middle class being bolstered by a strong economy / stock market but you can find solace in the Biden inflation numbers. That will effectively rol, back the gains made by the devil white and Biden's open border policies will kill the wage gains made by Americans. 

Basically, you can feel good about yourself because leftist democrat policies will negatively affect you. 







President Trump often highlights the rising value of US financial markets as a measure of success - in particular the Dow Jones Industrial Average


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 18, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Actually, it included nothing of the sort, as 60% of the population lived below the poverty line.
> 
> Compare that to today, where for all our problems, only 14% live below the poverty line.
> 
> ...




The democrats created the housing crash that hit when Bush was in office....clinton attacked the banks with the Dept. of Justice and forced them to take bad loans

Bush 1 had the Reagan boom.......and a slight recession, and then clinton wrecked the Reagan boom with his tax increases and bad policies..it took him 8 years to finish off the Reagan boom and just before he left office the economy tanked...he almost made it but didn't get out in time to blame it on Bush 2.

You idiots wreck the economy, just when the republicans fix the economy, you guys get back into office, take the credit, wreck the economy, then blame the wrecked economy on the next republican...you really are shitheads.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Jul 18, 2021)

2aguy said:


> The democrats created the housing crash that hit when Bush was in office....clinton attacked the banks with the Dept. of Justice and forced them to take bad loans
> 
> Bush 1 had the Reagan boom.......and a slight recession, and then clinton wrecked the Reagan boom with his tax increases and bad policies..it took him 8 years to finish off the Reagan boom and just before he left office the economy tanked...he almost made it but didn't get out in time to blame it on Bush 2.
> 
> You idiots wreck the economy, just when the republicans fix the economy, you guys get back into office, take the credit, wreck the economy, then blame the wrecked economy on the next republican...you really are shitheads.



  Clinton is often given praise and credit for the economic boom that happened near the end of his last term, but those who do so ignore the fact that that only took place after Republicans, for the first time in forty years, came to control both houses of Congress, and President Clinton, desperate to remain relevant, rolled over and went along with the policies put forth by the Republican-controlled Congress that were diametrically opposed to those which Clinton has previously promoted.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 18, 2021)

Bob Blaylock said:


> Clinton is often given praise and credit for the economic boom that happened near the end of his last term, but those who do so ignore the fact that that only took place after Republicans, for the first time in forty years, came to control both houses of Congress, and President Clinton, desperate to remain relevant, rolled over and went along with the policies put forth by the Republican-controlled Congress that were diametrically opposed to those which Clinton has previously promoted.




And even then, the economy went into a recession right at the end, just before he left office....and you know he had hoped to be out of office a minute before that happened so they could simply blame Bush...


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 18, 2021)

Hollie said:


> Actually, the facts contradict your claims about the economy during the 1920's.



No, they really don't.   Again, 60% of Americans lived below the poverty line.  I'm sure that people who thought " A chicken in every pot" was a good slogan, but it kind of showed how miserable the times were. 




Hollie said:


> Uh, did you realize that farming subsidies are not procured by race based criteria? That would change under the raced based Biden policy, 'Equity' means that subsidies would be dolled out to blacks while excluding white farmers. That would otherwise be defined as race-based policy which us a violation of law. How strange. That us what the courts have determined.



Not seeing a problem here.  We've had 400 years of the system favoring white farmers.  It's kind of like the argument about welfare... you guys are fine with welfare when YOU get it.  You just call it an entitlement. 



Hollie said:


> If you want to talk about your obsession with communist / socialist paradises, Cuba is among those models that leftisrs admire. Castro was a murderous thug who reduced the entire country (except for his cronies) to poverty, imprisoned, tortured, and killed anyone who dared oppose his regime. Sounds like a leftist paradise. "Equity'', as everyone is equitably oppressed by the leftist regime.



Okay, let's look at Cuba.  Let's look at what JFK said about Cuba after the revolution. 

*I believe that there is no country in the world, including the African regions, including any and all the countries under colonial domination, where economic colonization, humiliation and exploitation were worse than in Cuba, in part owing to my country's policies during the Batista regime. I believe that we created, built and manufactured the Castro movement out of whole cloth and without realizing it. I believe that the accumulation of these mistakes has jeopardized all of Latin America. The great aim of the Alliance for Progress is to reverse this unfortunate policy. This is one of the most, if not the most, important problems in America foreign policy. I can assure you that I have understood the Cubans. I approved the proclamation which Fidel Castro made in the Sierra Maestra, when he justifiably called for justice and especially yearned to rid Cuba of corruption. I will go even further: to some extent it is as though Batista was the incarnation of a number of sins on the part of the United States. Now we shall have to pay for those sins. In the matter of the Batista regime, I am in agreement with the first Cuban revolutionaries.*

— U.S. President John F. Kennedy, interview with Jean Daniel, 24 October 1963[108]

Let's look at Cuba before the revolution.  75% of the arable land was owned by foreign interests.  American Mafia families were able to set up casinos, prostitution and other criminal enterprises with impunity. In short, there was a reason why those people revolted.  

And instead of actually heeding what JFK said, realizing our sins, the US policy for the last 60 years has been treating Cuba like a stalker treats his ex-girlfriend. 




Hollie said:


> You offered nothing but a rote list of unverified comments. Odd that it was President Trump who managed to steer the economy into unprecedented growth and income gains for all Americans. The stock market under Trump was particularly a boon for the evil white investors. I understand your day will be ruined by the evil white middle class being bolstered by a strong economy / stock market but you can find solace in the Biden inflation numbers. That will effectively rol, back the gains made by the devil white and Biden's open border policies will kill the wage gains made by Americans.



really, let's look at what Trump steered the economy into. 

600,000 dead. 
65,000,000  jobs lost
200,000 businesses bankrupted
Riots in the streets. 

No, the middle class did not do well under Trump.  Trump is the first president since Hoover to post a net job loss. 

You seem to think that if the Parasites on Wall Street are doing well, that means the rest of us are.  It really doesn't work that way.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 18, 2021)

Bob Blaylock said:


> Clinton is often given praise and credit for the economic boom that happened near the end of his last term, but those who do so ignore the fact that that only took place after Republicans, for the first time in forty years, came to control both houses of Congress, and President Clinton, desperate to remain relevant, rolled over and went along with the policies put forth by the Republican-controlled Congress that were diametrically opposed to those which Clinton has previously promoted.



Really? What did the Republican pose that really changed the trajectory of the economy?  

Nothing.  Sorry, most of the Contract on America didn't do much of anything, most of it in fact never became law.  Newt forced a couple of shutdowns, but eventually he blinked.  

What got the economy back moving again was Clinton's stimulus program - please note, we have never gotten out of a recession without an influx of government spending. Also a big help was his tax reform that finally got the rich to pay their fair share. 



2aguy said:


> And even then, the economy went into a recession right at the end, just before he left office....and you know he had hoped to be out of office a minute before that happened so they could simply blame Bush...



Sorry, Dick Tiny, the recession didn't start until Q2 of 2001, when Bush was in office.  Now, what should have been a mild recession was complicated by 9/11.  But the primary cause of the recession of 2001 was overproduction.  Warehouses were full of manufactured goods that weren't moving.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 18, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> No, they really don't.   Again, 60% of Americans lived below the poverty line.  I'm sure that people who thought " A chicken in every pot" was a good slogan, but it kind of showed how miserable the times were.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Again, the facts contradict your ''... because I say so'', nonsense.









						American History 1920s Summary
					

American History 1920s Summary:



					theamericanhistory.org
				




The decade of the 1920s, or as it was called by its contemporaries, “The New Era,” was marked by prosperity and new opportunity in the aftermath of World War I. The war began in Europe in 1914, and the United States entered the fray in 1917. The USA was one of the victors in the First World War and it enjoyed a period of great prosperity in the 1920’s, though there was a darker side to American life even then.


No. Leftists don't see the problem with racism. After all, leftists (democrats) were the party of slavery and the party of Jim Crow. The problem with leftist notions of racism is that the courts are not convinced that race based ideology is such a good idea.









						A Third Judge Strikes Down Biden’s Racist Farm Aid Program That Excludes Whites | The Daily Wire
					






					www.dailywire.com
				





Of course, race is the wedge used by democrats to infect this country with the plague of identity politics. It has now expanded to encompass sex, sexual orientation, ethnicity, and,, most importantly, skin color. The Democrat party has become a coalition of hate groups and has sought to exploit every way in which Americans can be categorized. The Left can be thought of as the party of self-hate and a bottomless pit of want and need. The Cult of Democrats has nothing to offer anyone that must not first be taken from someone else. Therefore it must create groups that see persons not in the in-group as enemies.

Your silly list of "Trump steered the economy into'', is just more your usual hysterics. You're afflicted with the debilitating disease of TDS.

What you listed are the failings of the democrats. Take responsibility for your failures.

Wall Street was very good to middle class investors (you know, the devil white), under Trump. You still refuse to do the right thing and give your money / belongings to the poor and oppressed.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Jul 18, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> really, let's look at what Trump steered the economy into.
> 
> 600,000 dead.
> 65,000,000 jobs lost
> ...



  Once again, it was you Democraps who cooked up this fake _“pandemic”_, along with the fraudulent claims about how many have allegedly died from it; and it is you Democraps who exploited this as an excuse to sabotage the economy, destroying all those jobs and businesses, and it is you Democraps who openly supported the subhuman criminal pieces of shit who have been rioting and looting.

  It is your side that totally owns this; all of it.

  Of course, it's pretty much a standard Democrapic tactic—to the point of becoming an absurd but entirely true cliché—to intentionally put forth policies that you know will only produce very bad results, and then to try to cast the blame at your opposition for those bad results.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 19, 2021)

Hollie said:


> Again, the facts contradict your ''... because I say so'', nonsense.



The facts are... 60% of Americans lived below the poverty line, even before the recession hit.  The 1920's included two of the worst depressions in our history - 1920 and 1929.  Depressions that were so bad that they stopped calling them depressions and used the less panicky "recession" to describe downturns. 





__





						America in the 1920's
					

An exploration of American in the 1920s, including the growth of mass production, mass consumption and an inequality of wealth.



					historylearning.com
				




America in the 1920s is famous for its consumerism, jazz, flappers and prosperity. However, not everybody benefited from this economic boom. More than 60 per cent of American lived below the poverty line, with people in the South suffering the most. Yet, America’s global economic power was unrivalled.

Herbert Hoover’s 1928 presidential campaign slogan was:



> “A chicken in every pot, and a car in every backyard.”











						Why the Roaring Twenties Left Many Americans Poorer
					

For some, the Great Depression began in the 1920s.




					www.history.com
				




The speakeasy party culture popularized in books, movies and magazines was only accessible to a small portion of wealthy, urban and mostly white Americans. Black Americans and immigrants faced violence from the newly revived Ku Klux Klan, and many workers’ wages either didn’t keep up with productivity or fell off completely. For farmers in particular, the Great Depression basically began after World War I.





Hollie said:


> No. Leftists don't see the problem with racism. After all, leftists (democrats) were the party of slavery and the party of Jim Crow. The problem with leftist notions of racism is that the courts are not convinced that race based ideology is such a good idea.



The courts are stacked with racist troglodytes. 



Hollie said:


> Of course, race is the wedge used by democrats to infect this country with the plague of identity politics. It has now expanded to encompass sex, sexual orientation, ethnicity, and,, most importantly, skin color. The Democrat party has become a coalition of hate groups and has sought to exploit every way in which Americans can be categorized. The Left can be thought of as the party of self-hate and a bottomless pit of want and need. The Cult of Democrats has nothing to offer anyone that must not first be taken from someone else. Therefore it must create groups that see persons not in the in-group as enemies.



Um, I'm sorry, who used these things are race issues? 

Nixon did the Southern Strategy. 
Reagan talked about Young Buck and Welfare Queens
Bush splashed pictures of Willie Horton on every screen
Jesse Helms did the White Hands ad
Bush Jr. screamed about gay marriage coming to get us all. 
Trump screamed about Mexican rapists and murderers.  

If anyone has used race and sexual orientation as wedge issues it's the Republicans.  All Trump did was say the quiet parts out loud.  




Hollie said:


> Your silly list of "Trump steered the economy into'', is just more your usual hysterics. You're afflicted with the debilitating disease of TDS.
> 
> What you listed are the failings of the democrats. Take responsibility for your failures.


Trump was president, those are his failures.  As a wise man said, "The Buck Stops Here."  




Hollie said:


> Wall Street was very good to middle class investors (you know, the devil white), under Trump. You still refuse to do the right thing and give your money / belongings to the poor and oppressed.



I'm not the one oppressing the poor and ripping them off. That would be the parasite investor class.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 19, 2021)

Bob Blaylock said:


> Once again, it was you Democraps who cooked up this fake _“pandemic”_, along with the fraudulent claims about how many have allegedly died from it; and it is you Democraps who exploited this as an excuse to sabotage the economy, destroying all those jobs and businesses, and it is you Democraps who openly supported the subhuman criminal pieces of shit who have been rioting and looting.



Mormon Bob, Trump was president.  He owns all of it.  

Nixon would have been a great president if it weren't for Watergate.
Reagan would have been a great president if it weren't for Iran-Contra

Every president would have been great except for that one thing they failed to deal with.   Trump's happened to be Covid and everything that followed - the recession, the riots and the general nastiness.. that got him thrown out of office. 



Bob Blaylock said:


> Of course, it's pretty much a standard Democrapic tactic—to the point of becoming an absurd but entirely true cliché—to intentionally put forth policies that you know will only produce very bad results, and then to try to cast the blame at your opposition for those bad results.



Yet this bad shit only seems to happen when Republicans are in charge... Why do you think that is?


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 19, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> The facts are... 60% of Americans lived below the poverty line, even before the recession hit.  The 1920's included two of the worst depressions in our history - 1920 and 1929.  Depressions that were so bad that they stopped calling them depressions and used the less panicky "recession" to describe downturns.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Lies...

*Nixon did the Southern Strategy.*
*Reagan talked about Young Buck and Welfare Queens
Bush splashed pictures of Willie Horton on every screen
Jesse Helms did the White Hands ad
Bush Jr. screamed about gay marriage coming to get us all.*
*Trump screamed about Mexican rapists and murderers


Nixon did the Southern Strategy.*

What happened to all those racist Dixiecrats that, according to the progressive narrative, all picked up their tents and moved from the Democratic Party to the Republican Party? Actually, they exist only in the progressive imagination.

This is the world not as it is but as progressives wish it to be. Of all the Dixiecrats who broke away from the Democratic Party in 1948, of all the bigots and segregationists who voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964, I count just two—one in the Senate and one in the House—who switched from Democrat to Republican.

In the Senate, that solitary figure was Strom Thurmond. In the House, Albert Watson. The constellation of racist Dixiecrats includes Senators William Murray, Thomas P. Gore, Spessard Holland, Sam Ervin, Russell Long, Robert Byrd, Richard Russell, Olin Johnston, Lister Hill, John C. Stennis, John Sparkman, John McClellan, James Eastland, Herman Talmadge, Herbert Walters, Harry F. Byrd, George Smathers, Everett Jordan, Allen Ellender, A. Willis Robertson, Al Gore Sr., William Fulbright, Herbert Walters, W. Kerr Scott, and Marion Price Daniels.

The list of Dixiecrat governors includes William H. Murray, Frank Dixon, Fielding Wright, and Benjamin Laney. I don’t have space to include the list of Dixiecrat congressmen and other officials. Suffice to say it is a long list. And from this entire list we count only two defections.

Thus the progressive conventional wisdom that the racist Dixiecrats became Republicans is exposed as a big lie.

The Dixiecrats remained in the Democratic Party for years, in some cases decades. Not once did the Democrats repudiate them or attempt to push them out.


Segregationists like Richard Russell and William Fulbright were lionized in their party throughout their lifetimes, as of course was Robert Byrd, who died in 2010 and was eulogized by leading Democrats and the progressive media.
The Switch That Never Happened: How the South Really Went GOP › American Greatness


the creator of the southern strategy was rejected….

see page 4, bottom of first column...

http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/books/phillips-southern.pdf



http://blackquillandink.com/?p=6082



> On the Southern Strategy lie itself......
> The "Southern Strategy" is a Lie | Pundit House





> Believe it or not, the entire myth was created by an unknown editor at the New York Times who didn’t do his job and read a story he was given to edit.
> 
> On May 17, 1970, the New York Times published an article written by James Boyd. The headline, written by our unknown editor, was “Nixon’s Southern Strategy: It’s All in the Charts.”
> 
> ...




********



> The "Southern Strategy" is a Lie | Pundit House
> 
> Ken Raymond
> Jun 2011
> ...




=


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 19, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> The facts are... 60% of Americans lived below the poverty line, even before the recession hit.  The 1920's included two of the worst depressions in our history - 1920 and 1929.  Depressions that were so bad that they stopped calling them depressions and used the less panicky "recession" to describe downturns.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




*Reagan talked about Young Buck and Welfare Queens

The truth.....

In September 1974, the Chicago Tribune ran a story about Taylor’s welfare fraud, launching her infamy. 

While that story focused on the lack of a crackdown on such cases overall, it quickly caused a national sensation focused on Taylor herself. 


United Press International ran a story shortly after the Tribune’s in more than 11,000 newspapers across the country declaring that “For Linda Taylor, welfare checks are a way of life.” 

The papers wrote their own headlines, and it was in the Democrat and Chronicle in Rochester, New York that she was first dubbed the “welfare queen.”










						The Myth of the Welfare Queen
					

The right turned Linda Taylor into a bogeyman. But her real life was much more complicated.




					newrepublic.com
				



*


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 19, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> The facts are... 60% of Americans lived below the poverty line, even before the recession hit.  The 1920's included two of the worst depressions in our history - 1920 and 1929.  Depressions that were so bad that they stopped calling them depressions and used the less panicky "recession" to describe downturns.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




*Bush splashed pictures of Willie Horton on every screen*

*The truth....*

*The first person to mention the Massachusetts furlough program in the 1988 presidential campaign was Democratic Senator Al Gore. 
-------*

*Who was Willie Horton...something joe doesn't want you to know...*

On October 26, 1974, in Lawrence, Massachusetts, Horton and two accomplices robbed Joseph Fournier, a white 17-year-old gas station attendant, and then fatally stabbed Fournier 19 times after he had cooperated by handing over all of the money in the cash register. His body was stuffed in a trash can so his feet were jammed up against his chin. Fournier died from blood loss.[7] 

*Horton was convicted of murder, sentenced to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole, and incarcerated at the Northeastern Correctional Center in Massachusetts.[citation needed]*

*On June 6, 1986, Horton was released as part of a weekend furlough program, but did not return. On April 3, 1987, in Oxon Hill, Maryland, Horton twice raped a woman after pistol-whipping, knifing, binding, and gagging her fiancé. He then stole the car belonging to the man he had assaulted.*


He was later shot by Corporal Paul J. Lopez of the Prince George's County Police Department and captured by Corporal Yusuf A. Muhammad of the same department after a pursuit. On October 20, Horton was sentenced in Maryland to two consecutive life terms plus 85 years. The sentencing judge, Vincent J. Femia, refused to return Horton to Massachusetts, saying, "I'm not prepared to take the chance that Mr. Horton might again be furloughed or otherwise released. This man should never draw a breath of free air again."[8]

On April 18, 1996, Horton was transferred to the Jessup Correctional Institution (then called the Maryland House of Correction Annex), a maximum security prison in Jessup, Maryland, where he remains.[9]
-------

Legislative and political background[edit]​Democratic Presidential candidate Michael Dukakis was the governor of Massachusetts at the time of Horton's release, and while he did not start the furlough program, he had supported it as a method of criminal rehabilitation. The state inmate furlough program, originally signed into law by Republican Governor Francis Sargent in 1972, excluded convicted first-degree murderers. However, in 1973, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled that this right extended to first-degree murderers, because the law specifically did not exclude them.[10][11] The Massachusetts legislature quickly passed a bill prohibiting furloughs for such inmates. However, in 1976, Dukakis vetoed this bill arguing it would "cut the heart out of efforts at inmate rehabilitation."[12]

*





						Willie Horton - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				



*


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 19, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> The facts are... 60% of Americans lived below the poverty line, even before the recession hit.  The 1920's included two of the worst depressions in our history - 1920 and 1929.  Depressions that were so bad that they stopped calling them depressions and used the less panicky "recession" to describe downturns.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




As to the others.....Trump stated there are rapists and murderers coming across the U.S. border...that is true......as we see with the mexican criminals who actually are crossing the U.S. border...you doofus.......

Gay marriage has now turned into gay fascists persecuting bakers, pizza makers, wedding photographers, and men dressed as women going into girls locker rooms and bathrooms and now taking over women's sports....

You are an idiot.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 20, 2021)

Dick Tiny spooges the thread with easily dismissible crap. 



2aguy said:


> What happened to all those racist Dixiecrats that, according to the progressive narrative, all picked up their tents and moved from the Democratic Party to the Republican Party? Actually, they exist only in the progressive imagination.
> 
> This is the world not as it is but as progressives wish it to be. Of all the Dixiecrats who broke away from the Democratic Party in 1948, of all the bigots and segregationists who voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964, I count just two—one in the Senate and one in the House—who switched from Democrat to Republican.



Wow, talk about missing the point.  The politicians weren't the problem, it was the people who voted them in.  

So, yeah, some Dixiecrat wasn't going to have a lot of credibility saying, "I'm a Republican now".   But the inbred, bible-thumping, Confederate flag flying racists who kept putting him in every year didn't stop being racist.  They just found a new guy to vote for, and he had an R-after his name. 

That's the point.   And Nixon realized this, he's the one who constructed a Southern Strategy of opposing further progress on civil rights and playing on white resentment. 



2aguy said:


> In September 1974, the _Chicago Tribune _ran a story about Taylor’s welfare fraud, launching her infamy.
> 
> While that story focused on the lack of a crackdown on such cases overall, it quickly caused a national sensation focused on Taylor herself.
> 
> ...



Taylor was one person, and she went to jail.   Reagan didn't talk about "Linda Taylor", he talked about "Welfare queens and young bucks", like welfare fraud was rampant, again- playing on white resentment.  



2aguy said:


> The first person to mention the Massachusetts furlough program in the 1988 presidential campaign was Democratic Senator Al Gor



What Al Gore didn't do.  Al Gore didn't splash pictures of Willie Horton on the screen and say, "THIS SCARY BLACK MAN IS COMING TO GET YOU!!!!"    Old Racist George H. did that. 

He also left out that a Republican had started the furlough program and it was the courts that ruled people like Horton could use them.  Of course, Dukakis didn't help himself by being dispassionate about the hypothetical rape and murder of his wife when discussing the Death Penalty. 



2aguy said:


> As to the others.....Trump stated there are rapists and murderers coming across the U.S. border...that is true......as we see with the mexican criminals who actually are crossing the U.S. border...you doofus.......



We have plenty here already, and mostly, undocumented immigrants try to keep out of trouble because they don't want to get deported even if they didn't do anything.  But Racial Fearmongering- it's the Republican way.  That last thing you ever want is stupid white people looking at who keeps screwing them economically. 

So talk about race. Talk about gays. Talk about guns. Talk about Creationism.  Anything to keep stupid white people angry.  



2aguy said:


> Gay marriage has now turned into gay fascists persecuting bakers, pizza makers, wedding photographers, and men dressed as women going into girls locker rooms and bathrooms and now taking over women's sports....



See, exactly my point.  This is what Republicans do the best.  Create fake panics like this, to get stupid white people to vote against their own economic interests.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 20, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Dick Tiny spooges the thread with easily dismissible crap.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




again, dixiecrats stayed with the democrats, you idiot...

Bush did not run the willie horton ad, though he should have, it was an outside group.

nixon did not have a southern strategy as you have been shown over and over again......

You are a liar and a vile human being.

Now, get back on the topic of the thread...


----------



## Coyote (Jul 20, 2021)

*Southern strategy, welfare fraud, Horton...thread is completely off topic now, I think it has run it's course.  Closed*.


----------

