# Mass shooting: At Least 11 Shot At Gilroy Garlic Festival



## skye (Jul 28, 2019)

Police responded to the festival grounds around 5:30PM. Around 11 people were reportedly shot. One of them has died.

Never knew there was a garlic festival, prayers go to the victims.



MASS SHOOTING: At Least 11 Shot At Gilroy Garlic Festival - Breaking911


----------



## skye (Jul 28, 2019)

California has banned guns, right? but...this sort of tragedy still happens over there!

Perhaps a good guy  should have carried a gun  to defend himself and others,and the outcome would have been different.


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory (Jul 28, 2019)

The perps were likely vampires protecting their own interests.


----------



## Defiant1 (Jul 28, 2019)

It's fake news.  Weapons of any kind are prohibited.

Christmas Hill Park rules prohibit bringing the following items on Festival grounds:


Alcohol of any kind
Bottles, glass and cans
Coolers – large or small
Frisbees and water projecting devices
Pocketknives and *weapons of any kind*.


----------



## shockedcanadian (Jul 28, 2019)

skye said:


> Police responded to the festival grounds around 5:30PM. Around 11 people were reportedly shot. One of them has died.
> 
> Never knew there was a garlic festival, prayers go to the victims.
> 
> ...




Just another standard nut.


----------



## MindWars (Jul 28, 2019)

Defiant1 said:


> It's fake news.  Weapons of any kind are prohibited.
> 
> Christmas Hill Park rules prohibit bringing the following items on Festival grounds:
> 
> ...



It's not fake.








Multiple Injuries Reported in Shooting at Garlic Festival


----------



## BasicHumanUnit (Jul 28, 2019)

Liberals just can't seem to control themselves.....
Yesterday in Baltimore, today SanFrancisco.....they own what? 95% of all "gun violence" in their Utopias?

They embrace tons of legislation making it next to impossible for good people to protect themselves and their families.....while giving criminals the edge.   Is it any wonder their "Gun Free" zones are the most dangerous places inthe nation?

Shots fired at Gilroy Garlic Festival in California, multiple 'victims,' police say

If the left Really wants to follow the Constitution and yet make America Safe from so called "Gun Violence", they need to focus on their own.   Their people are the ones doing all the killing as usual.

And yet they completely ignore that and go straight for the jugular of the NRA and peaceful, law abiding gun owners.   That's their bag....defending the criminal, prosecuting the innocent.....as always.

Good men must not allow them to prevail.   The result would be devastating.


----------



## skye (Jul 28, 2019)

Admiral Rockwell Tory said:


> The perps were likely vampires protecting their own interests.




That's gun controlled California for ya'


----------



## MindWars (Jul 28, 2019)

Defiant1 said:


> It's fake news.  Weapons of any kind are prohibited.
> 
> Christmas Hill Park rules prohibit bringing the following items on Festival grounds:
> 
> ...



Oh wait I think I get why you said that LOL........


----------



## skye (Jul 28, 2019)

MindWars said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > It's fake news.  Weapons of any kind are prohibited.
> ...




Of course it's not fake.

thank you!


----------



## Tijn Von Ingersleben (Jul 28, 2019)

Mexican Gangs?


----------



## Wry Catcher (Jul 28, 2019)

Admiral Rockwell Tory said:


> The perps were likely vampires protecting their own interests.



Another stupid comment.


----------



## Wry Catcher (Jul 28, 2019)

Tijn Von Ingersleben said:


> Mexican Gangs?



White supremacists?  The shooter did wear camouflage.


----------



## skye (Jul 28, 2019)

Wry Catcher said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> > California has banned guns, right? but...this sort of tragedy still happens over there!
> ...





Wow....you are  a very sick individual!


----------



## Dick Foster (Jul 28, 2019)

Defiant1 said:


> It's fake news.  Weapons of any kind are prohibited.
> 
> Christmas Hill Park rules prohibit bringing the following items on Festival grounds:
> 
> ...


Hey shitforbrains, ever hear the expression that if you outlaw guns only outlaws will have guns? Go back and try to find were you lost your mind why don't you? And if you find it, try using it.


----------



## Tijn Von Ingersleben (Jul 28, 2019)

Wry Catcher said:


> Tijn Von Ingersleben said:
> 
> 
> > Mexican Gangs?
> ...


Wetbacks loves camouflage. It helps them hide from la migra.


----------



## skye (Jul 28, 2019)

Wry Catcher said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> > Wry Catcher said:
> ...




ok

you are sicker than  I thought!


----------



## Wry Catcher (Jul 28, 2019)

Tijn Von Ingersleben said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> > Tijn Von Ingersleben said:
> ...



Another stupid comment.


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 28, 2019)

skye said:


> Police responded to the festival grounds around 5:30PM. Around 11 people were reportedly shot. One of them has died.
> 
> Never knew there was a garlic festival, prayers go to the victims.
> 
> ...


I live 45 minutes away. Crazy! Thanks for the updates. Hope everybody else pulls through


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 28, 2019)

skye said:


> California has banned guns, right? but...this sort of tragedy still happens over there!
> 
> Perhaps a good guy  should have carried a gun  to defend himself and others,and the outcome would have been different.


California has not banned guns. A lot of hunters here. You got bad intel


----------



## skye (Jul 28, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> > Police responded to the festival grounds around 5:30PM. Around 11 people were reportedly shot. One of them has died.
> ...




I agree with you.....hope everybody else pulls through!


----------



## skye (Jul 28, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> > California has banned guns, right? but...this sort of tragedy still happens over there!
> ...




oh ok so everybody can carry in Cali?


----------



## P@triot (Jul 28, 2019)

Wry Catcher said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> > Wry Catcher said:
> ...


Yeah...nothing says “empathy” like “F.U.”. Dumb ass. The fact is, you’re a typical leftist child throwing a typical leftist tantrum after someone pointed how idiotic left-wing policy ended in more deaths as usual.


----------



## Tijn Von Ingersleben (Jul 28, 2019)

Wry Catcher said:


> Tijn Von Ingersleben said:
> 
> 
> > Wry Catcher said:
> ...


and yours was brilllliant!


----------



## mudwhistle (Jul 28, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> > California has banned guns, right? but...this sort of tragedy still happens over there!
> ...


It's just very difficult to get a gun permit. Cops can arrest the person defending himself just as easily as the perp. 
They don't have some kind of force-field around gun-free zones so you're pretty much on your own in the state of California.


----------



## Death Angel (Jul 28, 2019)

MindWars said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > It's fake news.  Weapons of any kind are prohibited.
> ...


He was being sarcastic -- pointing out the absurdness of gun free zones


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 28, 2019)

skye said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > skye said:
> ...


Sure if you get a permit. I own a handful of guns haven’t taken the time to go get a CC but don’t really need one. A bunch of my friends have them


----------



## Death Angel (Jul 28, 2019)

Dick Foster said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > It's fake news.  Weapons of any kind are prohibited.
> ...


You're looking foolish.


----------



## I c h i g o (Jul 28, 2019)

skye said:


> California has banned guns, right? but...this sort of tragedy still happens over there!



People are always going to get guns no matter what the laws are. Most are sold and bought on the deep web. That way, they can't be tracked back. They use phony addresses to get their packages - usually illegal guns that have their serial numbers removed. There are ways to get a gun regardless.


----------



## hjmick (Jul 28, 2019)

skye said:


> Never knew there was a garlic festival




It's a lot of fun... if you like garlic.


----------



## fncceo (Jul 28, 2019)

Vampires?


----------



## HenryBHough (Jul 28, 2019)

California LOVES setting national trends.

If you have even a single clove of garlic in your home get rid of it NOW or YOU could be next!


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 28, 2019)

mudwhistle said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > skye said:
> ...


Even if everybody carried guns in Cali the festival banned weapons like most large gatherings do... even Trump rally’s.


----------



## Death Angel (Jul 28, 2019)

Wry Catcher said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


So have you.


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 28, 2019)

mudwhistle said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > skye said:
> ...


It’s not that difficult, you just need to go through the process and show you understand gun safety and dont pose a threat. I don’t think it’s unreasonable


----------



## Death Angel (Jul 28, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> mudwhistle said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


So there was no shooting? You know, guns are banned.


----------



## Coyote (Jul 28, 2019)

P@triot said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> > skye said:
> ...


Maybe he is just pissed off that people like you are trying to make this political.


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 28, 2019)

Death Angel said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > mudwhistle said:
> ...


Are you not following this conversation? You sound confused and your statement makes no sense


----------



## P@triot (Jul 28, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Maybe he is just pissed off that people like you are trying to make this political.


It _is_ political. It clearly illustrates the *failure* of the left-wing ideology and the subsequent mindless policies it produces.


----------



## P@triot (Jul 28, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> It’s not that difficult, you just need to go through the process and show you understand gun safety and dont pose a threat. I don’t think it’s unreasonable


I do. It is completely unreasonable by U.S. Constitution standards. If that is the process the left desires, they need to legally and properly amend the U.S. Constitution.


----------



## skye (Jul 28, 2019)

*Mass Shooting Reported at Gilroy Garlic Festival in California*


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 28, 2019)

P@triot said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > It’s not that difficult, you just need to go through the process and show you understand gun safety and dont pose a threat. I don’t think it’s unreasonable
> ...


It’s the process the state of california and it’s people want


----------



## skye (Jul 28, 2019)

Coyote said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > Wry Catcher said:
> ...




Please tell me

how am I trying to make it political, Coyote?

you truly lost me


----------



## Coyote (Jul 28, 2019)

P@triot said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Maybe he is just pissed off that people like you are trying to make this political.
> ...


Let me see.

We have shooting.

No suspect has been identified.

No motive has been identified.

But you, clearly, must possess special knowledge no one else has and can clearly pinpoint it as a failure of left wing policies in left wing California.

What was your excuse for school shooting in red state Florida?  How about the Los Vegas shooting?


----------



## Coyote (Jul 28, 2019)

skye said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...


Your statement about gun policy.


----------



## skye (Jul 28, 2019)

Coyote said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



is that political, Coyote?    hmmmm  I don't know


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 28, 2019)

MindWars said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > It's fake news.  Weapons of any kind are prohibited.
> ...


Impossible the sign says no weapons allowed 
How can that be?


----------



## skye (Jul 28, 2019)

Gunshots were fired at the Gilroy Garlic Festival in California.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 28, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


But you aren't always with your friends and you can't carry with a magazine inserted in the magwell.


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 28, 2019)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > skye said:
> ...


I’m personally not interested in carrying nor do I feel a need to be surrounded by friends who are carrying. But if I wanted to I know there is a process to do so legally


----------



## The Purge (Jul 28, 2019)




----------



## cnm (Jul 28, 2019)

Yawn...


----------



## Leo123 (Jul 28, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> I’m personally not interested in carrying nor do I feel a need to be surrounded by friends who are carrying. But if I wanted to I know there is a process to do so legally



Yes but, luckily for criminals (and unlucky for you as well) there is no "process' they need go through.


----------



## Defiant1 (Jul 28, 2019)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> MindWars said:
> 
> 
> > Defiant1 said:
> ...




That's what I say.


----------



## Leo123 (Jul 28, 2019)

Defiant1 said:


> It's fake news.  Weapons of any kind are prohibited.
> 
> Christmas Hill Park rules prohibit bringing the following items on Festival grounds:
> 
> ...



I see what you did there!!


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 28, 2019)

Leo123 said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > I’m personally not interested in carrying nor do I feel a need to be surrounded by friends who are carrying. But if I wanted to I know there is a process to do so legally
> ...


So what?! I’m not seeing your point. If I want to get a cc I can go get one. It’s not a big deal.

Some criminals will get a gun no matter what. Some mentally unstable dangerous people who shouldn’t have a gun may be prevented with good laws. Not everybody knows a black market gun dealer ya know.


----------



## Picaro (Jul 28, 2019)

Dick Foster said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > It's fake news.  Weapons of any kind are prohibited.
> ...



He was being sarcastic. Leave posting while drunk to the experts.


----------



## Deplorable Yankee (Jul 28, 2019)

skye said:


> Police responded to the festival grounds around 5:30PM. Around 11 people were reportedly shot. One of them has died.
> 
> Never knew there was a garlic festival, prayers go to the victims.
> 
> ...


Rut roh 

Im sure  TWITer is lit up blaming "white supremacists", "racism ", "maga hats" and guns 

oh and Trump for " inspiring  violence and hatred "

NAZI Leftards claim anti abortion signs inspire violence and hatred


----------



## Deplorable Yankee (Jul 28, 2019)

when i used to travel to china and other 3rd world shitholes id swallow raw garlic every morning ..no shit 
ruff on the stomach but rids bodies of any parasites you may of unknowingly consumed 

Dont want no woims


----------



## Dogmaphobe (Jul 28, 2019)

We are in a political discussion group.  Heaven forbid any poster make something political here in a political discussion group. 



…...especially when it is an opinion not shared by those who control the proceedings here in a political discussion group where we discuss politics in such a political way.


----------



## Dogmaphobe (Jul 28, 2019)

Picaro said:


> Leave posting while drunk to the experts.




You rang?


----------



## satrebil (Jul 28, 2019)

Another mass shooting in a gun free zone?

SAY IT AIN'T SO!!


----------



## White_MAGA_Man (Jul 28, 2019)

Reports of many injured and some dead folks. 

ATF, local law enforcement respond to reported shooting in Gilroy


----------



## Leo123 (Jul 28, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> Leo123 said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...



Yes, 'some criminals will get a gun no matter what'.....You, on the other hand, have to jump through government hoops even if you want to buy Ammo in CA.  You don't need to know a black market seller, lots of folks (who are not criminals) sell guns privately.   The only thing keeping law abiding citizens from buying, owning and shooting guns is the State.  There is currently a challenge to the unfair CA ammo laws.


----------



## Old Yeller (Jul 28, 2019)

Used to live walking distance.  Went often.  Maybe 150K attend Fri Sat Sun annually.  Some good live bands and lots of cooking shows too.


----------



## Marion Morrison (Jul 28, 2019)

I read it's gang stuff. Full-auto AKs.

Gangs seem to have no problem getting them out there.

In California with all their crazy gun restrictions.


----------



## satrebil (Jul 28, 2019)

Another gun free zone. I guess the sign wasn't big enough.


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 28, 2019)

Leo123 said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > Leo123 said:
> ...


It’s really not that hard to get a gun, a CC or Ammo. We need to have regulations, right? You dont want guns and ammo sold like slurpies at 7-11 do you?


----------



## Vandalshandle (Jul 28, 2019)

skye said:


> California has banned guns, right? but...this sort of tragedy still happens over there!
> 
> Perhaps a good guy  should have carried a gun  to defend himself and others,and the outcome would have been different.



California has banned guns? Do you get your news from the NRA?


----------



## Marion Morrison (Jul 28, 2019)

skye said:


> California has banned guns, right? but...this sort of tragedy still happens over there!
> 
> Perhaps a good guy  should have carried a gun  to defend himself and others,and the outcome would have been different.





Tijn Von Ingersleben said:


> Mexican Gangs?



I heard it was gangs and 1 full-auto AK. Nortenos vs.-? Probably MS-13 or La Raza.

Gangs don't seem to have any problem getting those out there.


----------



## Vandalshandle (Jul 28, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> mudwhistle said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...



Interestingly enough, they ban guns at NRA conventions. They must be a bunch of commie gun grabbers.


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 28, 2019)

Marion Morrison said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> > California has banned guns, right? but...this sort of tragedy still happens over there!
> ...


They think it was a white dude in camo shorts


----------



## beautress (Jul 28, 2019)

Prayers up for families of those who were killed, and for those who were traumatized and injured in Gilroy today.


----------



## Marion Morrison (Jul 29, 2019)

3 Dead, at Least 11 Shot at Gilroy Garlic Festival: Official


----------



## Marion Morrison (Jul 29, 2019)

It says 2 shooters. White guy in 30s?

One shooter is dead.


----------



## Marion Morrison (Jul 29, 2019)

Dupe thread.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 29, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


So you don't like to take responsibility for your own safety?


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 29, 2019)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...


Of course I do. Where does it say I need to be strapped to take control of my own safety?! That’s a pretty stupid statement


----------



## Old Yeller (Jul 29, 2019)

covfefe said:


> Shooter was reportedly a Trump supporter and was screaming "MAGA!!!" while killing innocent civilians.




List warning #1. Lose the avatar also,  IsaacNewton?


----------



## EvilCat Breath (Jul 29, 2019)

Good thing there were armed officers who shot tge shooter dead before even more damage was done   sounds like antifa


----------



## james bond (Jul 29, 2019)

It's at the Gilroy Garlic Festival.  I used to go yearly when living in SF and SJ.  It's a mass shooting.  People said they thought it was firecrackers, but they could hear the bullets whizzing by and started to run.

I think four dead including the shooter and fifteen injured.


----------



## Leo123 (Jul 29, 2019)

Marion Morrison said:


> It says 2 shooters. White guy in 30s?
> 
> One shooter is dead.



If he were white we probably would know by now. IMO


----------



## james bond (Jul 29, 2019)

Libturds saying it was a MAGA shooting b/c the suspect was white and wearing camos.  Four dead including the shooter and fifteen injured.  Tragedy.  I used to go to this festival yearly when living in SF and SJ.


----------



## Issa (Jul 29, 2019)

Marion Morrison said:


> I read it's gang stuff. Full-auto AKs.
> 
> Gangs seem to have no problem getting them out there.
> 
> In California with all their crazy gun restrictions.


Mass shooting in the US doesn't discriminate....15000 deaths on average each year.


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Jul 29, 2019)

Issa said:


> Marion Morrison said:
> 
> 
> > I read it's gang stuff. Full-auto AKs.
> ...


Not due to mass shootings you liar. And less then 12000 a year until last year. Seems the left is up in arms and murdering people cause they can not handle losing the election in 2016. I mean if you can lie so can I right?


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 29, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


Your reaction is very revealing. What the fuck is strapped? You're in the same situation and the gunman sees you and a family member. What do you do?


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 29, 2019)

Old Yeller said:


> covfefe said:
> 
> 
> > Shooter was reportedly a Trump supporter and was screaming "MAGA!!!" while killing innocent civilians.
> ...


I hope the next Trump supporter that goes on a shooting rampage yells I'm with her I'm with her I'm with her insert sarcasm


----------



## Gracie (Jul 29, 2019)

I love driving thru Gilroy. OMG..the smell of garlic in that whole town. And onions. Ever salivate smelling cooking onions and garlic? That is the odor of the freeway that runs thru it. 
Too sad about the shooting.


----------



## Mindful (Jul 29, 2019)

Marion Morrison said:


> It says 2 shooters. White guy in 30s?
> 
> One shooter is dead.



Odds on them laying this on Trump?


----------



## Marion Morrison (Jul 29, 2019)

Mindful said:


> Marion Morrison said:
> 
> 
> > It says 2 shooters. White guy in 30s?
> ...



Not good.


----------



## Marion Morrison (Jul 29, 2019)

Leo123 said:


> Marion Morrison said:
> 
> 
> > It says 2 shooters. White guy in 30s?
> ...



They said searching for a white guy on the news. (Could be Latin, though)

It seems like they should be able to track the guy. (If they know how to track)

4 Dead, Including Suspect, 15 Hurt in Garlic Fest Shooting


----------



## Mindful (Jul 29, 2019)

Marion Morrison said:


> Leo123 said:
> 
> 
> > Marion Morrison said:
> ...



Let's hope it's a white guy. Just _has _to be a white guy.

(Sarcasm heavily inserted)


----------



## Marion Morrison (Jul 29, 2019)

Mindful said:


> Marion Morrison said:
> 
> 
> > Leo123 said:
> ...



Watch it be someone that should be in a Mental Institution. Taking those SSRIs.


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 29, 2019)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...


I do whatever I can to keep everybody safe, what kind of question is that?! Let me ask you something’s. Do you always have a gun on you? Do you take it to your kids school? To concerts, movie theaters, baseball games?

If not then why? Is that an example of you not taking responsibility for your own safety?


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 29, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


If you feel the need too ponder what kind of question I asked you,then you are not prepared to protect anyone. Yes I always carry. Regradless what a sign may say


----------



## Deplorable Yankee (Jul 29, 2019)

video here of when shots first rang out
California Brief (@CaliforniaBrief) | Twitter
updates also

i know where not supposed to plug on USMB  but 
In an age of full of shit corporate lefttarded media Free press and independents deserve free plugs 

Free speech and free flow of info forever .....ya fuckin slaves 
*California Brief*‏ @CaliforniaBrief 26 Sep 2018
#LocalMatters. That’s why this feed is committed to reporting on stories exclusively from and about California and Californians with total platform agnosticity (newspapers, TV, radio, blogs — as long as it’s factual, we’re open to all sources). Support local journalism.


----------



## Marion Morrison (Jul 29, 2019)

Dammit! To get a cheap AR before they ban, or no?

I have a theory that so-called therapists are programming them to do these things.

Bah! I didn't want a gun like that b4 the 1st ban. Still don't. 

Ofc if someone wants one they should be free to get one, it's just not my thing.

You know the gun-grabbers are gonna roll with this, and then some!


----------



## shockedcanadian (Jul 29, 2019)

Apparently guy was asked by people screaming "why are you doing this" and he responded "because I'm really angry".

6 Year old boy killed so that some POS could get his anger out in the form of mass murder.  This is the world we live in.


----------



## Aletheia4u (Jul 29, 2019)

White_MAGA_Man said:


> Reports of many injured and some dead folks.
> 
> ATF, local law enforcement respond to reported shooting in Gilroy


I have went to that garlic festival before. It is a small little farming community. That it smells like garlic every where. I cannot see why would of shooter targeted that place. But it might be gang related. San Jose Ca is not that far from there. San Jose has a big Hispanic gang problem, but it was  a lone shooter. It is a multicultural event. And the shooting was preplanned, because he has cut out an opening in the fence. Maybe the shooter was doing a hit for a drug cartel. .But he wouldn't have gunned them down in a public place. That they would of have shot their victims at their homes or somewhere else. But the shooter could be a White person that just hated Mexicans. Because that city is populated with migrant workers. Sounds like the shooter was on a suicide mission.


----------



## shockedcanadian (Jul 29, 2019)

Aletheia4u said:


> White_MAGA_Man said:
> 
> 
> > Reports of many injured and some dead folks.
> ...



This is almost certainly not gang related, this was random, collective murder.

Just some unstable, emotional sick psycho who decided that shooting people would help his anger and depression.  I don't know the persons back story, but to kill innocent people that had nothing to do with his suffering or hurt, is about as cowardly as it gets.  What the hell did a 6 year old have to do with his problems?  Regardless of his reasoning,it's not sound, this person isn't stable.

Again, the world we live in.  Desensitized to violence and a complete lack of respect for life.  As I get older it's clear, from music, to video games, movies and human interactions between one another on a day to day basis, the future is not bright for civilization.  Those qualities of empathy are lost, and it's not just USA that's dealing with the repercussions of such a society.

The sad reality is, many of us deal with stresses, anxiety and even depression at times.  Especially if we've been wronged and recourse isn't possible.  In America, you have so many resources and ways to deal with your suffering, especially in California.  These actions are inexcusable.  If he was angry and needed help, he could have found it.


----------



## Aletheia4u (Jul 29, 2019)

shockedcanadian said:


> Aletheia4u said:
> 
> 
> > White_MAGA_Man said:
> ...


It was just announced that the shooter was a White male.  Of course he was mentally ill. What probably had made him to do what he has done. It is this atmosphere of hate that is going around. The left is encouraging minorities to attack Whites. He probably has been beaten by a group of Hispanics recently. And so he probably just released his anger on the people. But then it could of have been an ANTIFA's plot. It was one of their agenda to shoot up public events. They wants to start a race war. And this is the best way to do it. Gilroy has a lot of European farm owners, surrounded by a lot of migrant workers and Hispanics citizens.. which the media is pushing this story that White people hates people of color.


----------



## shockedcanadian (Jul 29, 2019)

Aletheia4u said:


> shockedcanadian said:
> 
> 
> > Aletheia4u said:
> ...




Who knows at this point?  I do know, the gunman was a piece of trash.

If you have a problem with someone, you address them, you don't randomly kill people who have nothing to do with your problems.  This is a symptom of an illogical, emotionally driven, uncaring world.  I can't imagine in a million years targeting innocent people who didn't do anything to me.  Whatever his motivations, he achieved nothing but damning his soul to hell.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 29, 2019)

Any minute 2AGuy will be showing up telling us how we don't need any more gun laws and swimming pools are more dangerous.


----------



## Olde Europe (Jul 29, 2019)

JoeB131 said:


> Any minute 2AGuy will be showing up telling us how we don't need any more gun laws and swimming pools are more dangerous.



Yeah, and, have you heard about car / traffic deaths?

We've already been informed that the shooter - white - was obviously insane.  Had the shooter been black, the efforts at an explanation would have ended right there, and the verdict on blackness would have been confirmed yet again.


----------



## August West (Jul 29, 2019)

shockedcanadian said:


> Apparently guy was asked by people screaming "why are you doing this" and he responded "because I'm really angry".
> 
> 6 Year old boy killed so that some POS could get his anger out in the form of mass murder.  This is the world we live in.


Correction: This is the country we live in.


----------



## Jitss617 (Jul 29, 2019)

Waiting to  hear a democrat pretend they are so heart broken! After a weekend of thousands of babies getting dismembered in abortions! 
And scold the GUN not the person.


----------



## August West (Jul 29, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> Waiting to  hear a democrat pretend they are so heart broken! After a weekend of thousands of babies getting dismembered in abortions!
> And scold the GUN not the person.


If you know where babies are being dismembered get off your dumb ass and do something about it. This is your defense of a mass murderer?


----------



## Jitss617 (Jul 29, 2019)

August West said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > Waiting to  hear a democrat pretend they are so heart broken! After a weekend of thousands of babies getting dismembered in abortions!
> ...


I do I just voted to put in two  supreme court judges that are against abortion .. hehehe.. we are winning biatch .. 
awww let me hear how sad you are about this shooting but say nothing about the 90 blacks shot this weekend in towns run by democrats.. 

Let’s hear your outrage snowflake


----------



## August West (Jul 29, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> August West said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...


Blacks shooting each other in bad neighborhoods are not a threat to me. The terrorists that shoot up public places are. How dumb are you anyway?


----------



## Crixus (Jul 29, 2019)

Marion Morrison said:


> I read it's gang stuff. Full-auto AKs.
> 
> Gangs seem to have no problem getting them out there.
> 
> In California with all their crazy gun restrictions.




Ya, I bet they come up from Mexico.


----------



## Jitss617 (Jul 29, 2019)

August West said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > August West said:
> ...


Blacks neighborhoods aren’t public places?? Lol wtf haha


----------



## mudwhistle (Jul 29, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


I lived in San Diego for 8 years. You had to have somebody who had a permit vouch for you.....and if you shoot someone....even in defense...you and your friend could be hauled into court and possibly imprisoned for assault.


----------



## BasicHumanUnit (Jul 29, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> California has not banned guns. A lot of hunters here. You got bad intel



Commiefornia......
Everyone knows that the only reason they haven't is that "pesky annoyance" called the Constitution.
But they keep trying anyway and nearly have for all intents and purposes.


----------



## 22lcidw (Jul 29, 2019)

August West said:


> shockedcanadian said:
> 
> 
> > Apparently guy was asked by people screaming "why are you doing this" and he responded "because I'm really angry".
> ...


I was wondering what took so long from the last one in Virginia. Fifty years ago we went from a nation which had physical foundation to one of human foundation. We also killed God. Or the faith in a deity was slowly reduced. All of our vices were expanded a hundred fold. Faith is one of the stalwarts of not doing anything lie we see today as part of our personalities. True Religious belief or faith brings guilt with it. Even having an education in it does the same. We were the Land of Milk and Honey, the Garden of Eden or Eden. Of course we still had many problems and issues. Then we became Babylon, the Whore of Babylon, Sodom and Gomorrah. And the problems that were fixed expanded into many other problems a thousand times worse. Social justice rules the roost as being qualified overrules being the best.This is not a sermon. This was basically taken from a book that tells us how men live. Whether of faith or secular. You can use other metaphors and it will be the same only worded different. This is so easy to see and yet so many are blind. You used to be able to go to a sports stadium with very little security and all the food you can bring in. Today you walk through a  complex metal detector probed by people with wands. Security is everywhere. This garlic festival had the same security set up as stadiums. But the person/people involved cut through a fence. This is what you wanted and this is what you got. Its a tragedy, but we ph uk with each other. I just remember people faces who have ever ph uked with me. Its from other time eras, but it is fun. And there are people on these boards and many others who feel the same way for many reasons.


----------



## P@triot (Jul 29, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


Doesn’t matter. If the people of Alabama wanted to lynch African-Americans, would that be ok? If the constitution doesn’t permit it - then it doesn’t matter what the people of California want.


----------



## P@triot (Jul 29, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> So what?! I’m not seeing your point. If I want to get a cc I can go get one. It’s not a big deal.


The left: “Taking $200 class, having a background check, needing a CCW permit holder to vouch for you, and having to pass tests for a permit is *not a big deal*”.

Also the left: “What...you want a voter to produce ID?!? No African-American in the world has ID nor do they know how to obtain one. This is racist and a monumental violation of constitutional rights”.


----------



## jknowgood (Jul 29, 2019)

August West said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > August West said:
> ...


Yep, and strict gun laws aren't helping you either. Oh and gun free zones.


----------



## BasicHumanUnit (Jul 29, 2019)

P@triot said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > It’s the process the state of california and it’s people want
> ...



The California politburo has over ruled the "Will of The People" in California so many times it's hard to keep track.
Just look up the initiatives California voters have voter for, only to have the State decide otherwise.


----------



## jknowgood (Jul 29, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> August West said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...


He wouldn't dare go there. You know racist wouldn't be caught dead there.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 29, 2019)

Marion Morrison said:


> Dammit! To get a cheap AR before they ban, or no?
> 
> I have a theory that so-called therapists are programming them to do these things.
> 
> ...


I felt the same way about the bump stock but then again I can use a rubber band with the same effect if not better lol


----------



## MAGAman (Jul 29, 2019)

JoeB131 said:


> Any minute 2AGuy will be showing up telling us how we don't need any more gun laws and swimming pools are more dangerous.


Newsflash.

Mass murder is already illegal.


----------



## NotYourBody (Jul 29, 2019)

Gilroy is a big farming community with a majority HIspanic population. The two biggest employers are two giant farming corporations. 

The kind that employ illegals to work their crops and harvest the garlic the town was celebrating.

The white shooter said he was angry.

We'll have to wait and see where the facts lead.

If guns made the country safe, we'd be the safest country in the world. Hell, in the universe.


----------



## OldLady (Jul 29, 2019)

22lcidw said:


> August West said:
> 
> 
> > shockedcanadian said:
> ...


It's not because of God is Dead.  I am taking the liberty of sharing a comment of Tommy Tainant's yesterday on another thread:
_The UK is many times safer than the crazy US, even when we are pissed. But we are no better than you. Its cos we dont have guns.
Thats it._


----------



## Weatherman2020 (Jul 29, 2019)

White_MAGA_Man said:


> Reports of many injured and some dead folks.
> 
> ATF, local law enforcement respond to reported shooting in Gilroy


Sacramento will have the shooters out by Friday.


----------



## Weatherman2020 (Jul 29, 2019)

OldLady said:


> 22lcidw said:
> 
> 
> > August West said:
> ...


Narrative Fail. 

London now more dangerous than New York City, crime stats suggest


----------



## NotYourBody (Jul 29, 2019)

Weatherman2020 said:


> White_MAGA_Man said:
> 
> 
> > Reports of many injured and some dead folks.
> ...


The cops killed the shooter within one minute. During that one minute 11 were injured and 3 were murdered.

I guess California cops are braver than Florida cops. They might even have been Hispanic cops. Oh my.


----------



## NoNukes (Jul 29, 2019)

White_MAGA_Man said:


> Reports of many injured and some dead folks.
> 
> ATF, local law enforcement respond to reported shooting in Gilroy


264 mass shootings in the USA this year.


----------



## Vastator (Jul 29, 2019)

August West said:


> shockedcanadian said:
> 
> 
> > Apparently guy was asked by people screaming "why are you doing this" and he responded "because I'm really angry".
> ...


There is risk inherent to freedom. The more security one has; the less freedom one has. There’s no way around it. You just have to decide which is more important to you. Real, traditional Americans who align more closely with the founders vision for this nation, choose freedom every time...


----------



## White_MAGA_Man (Jul 29, 2019)

Update!

Shooter is Iranian/Italian.











Gilroy Garlic Festival Shooting: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know | Heavy.com

Second shooter still on the loose.


----------



## EvilCat Breath (Jul 29, 2019)

In other words a democrat.


----------



## Defiant1 (Jul 29, 2019)

MAGAman said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Any minute 2AGuy will be showing up telling us how we don't need any more gun laws and swimming pools are more dangerous.
> ...




I don't think they put that on the sign...


----------



## Defiant1 (Jul 29, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> Gilroy is a big farming community with a majority HIspanic population. The two biggest employers are two giant farming corporations.
> 
> The kind that employ illegals to work their crops and harvest the garlic the town was celebrating.
> 
> ...




It was a "gun free" zone.


----------



## Alan Stallion (Jul 29, 2019)

skye said:


> Never knew there was a garlic festival



Yeah, a pretty cool annual event in my part of the world. You can have garlic-flavored anything, even a free small sample of garlic ice cream (it's not as bad as it sounds; it's actually pretty good).

I've only been to the event once though, since it's usually 90-100+ degrees this time of year.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 29, 2019)

CA toughest gun laws in the country

I've always said gun laws do not stop murderers


----------



## rightwinger (Jul 29, 2019)

skye said:


> Police responded to the festival grounds around 5:30PM. Around 11 people were reportedly shot. One of them has died.
> 
> Never knew there was a garlic festival, prayers go to the victims.
> 
> ...


A small price to pay for our Second Amendment Freedoms

My thoughts and prayers go out to the victims


----------



## iceberg (Jul 29, 2019)

JoeB131 said:


> Any minute 2AGuy will be showing up telling us how we don't need any more gun laws and swimming pools are more dangerous.


pretty sure what the shooter did was illegal already. 

now - what laws would you propose to stop this? so far i've yet to encounter anyone wanting MORE gun control come up with a solution that didn't involve just getting rid of all guns period.


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 29, 2019)

rightwinger said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> > Police responded to the festival grounds around 5:30PM. Around 11 people were reportedly shot. One of them has died.
> ...




It has nothing to do with a "price paid for our 2nd A rights"

This is a kind of event that can take anywhere, even places that don't have a 2nd Amendment.   Places like Paris France in the fall of 2015.   Or in the Tremendous Republic of Mexico.


----------



## miketx (Jul 29, 2019)

Looks like another muslim went nuts. We need more gun control! No muslims can own guns unless they go back where they came from.


----------



## whitehall (Jul 29, 2019)

A garlic festival. Who would shoot up a freaking garlic festival? Only in California. The perp was shot dead by the brave Police Officers that the left seems to hate and revile.


----------



## rightwinger (Jul 29, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > skye said:
> ...



The families of the victims have to realize that guns in our society keep us safe and that your loved ones death only serves to protect our beloved second amendment


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 29, 2019)

rightwinger said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



We would have guns in our society, regardless of what the laws say.


----------



## harmonica (Jul 29, 2019)

skye said:


> California has banned guns, right? but...this sort of tragedy still happens over there!
> 
> Perhaps a good guy  should have carried a gun  to defend himself and others,and the outcome would have been different.


CA has a much lower murder rate than very pro-gun Missouri
LA has a much lower murder rate than very pro-gun St Louis, Mo
.....you people are shallow/warped thinkers--no--you can't stop everything, but you can LOWER the murder rate
PLUS, the laws are not national
cops carry and they get killed/etc
I've been over this a million times with 2AGuy


----------



## EvilCat Breath (Jul 29, 2019)

whitehall said:


> A garlic festival. Who would shoot up a freaking garlic festival? Only in California. The perp was shot dead by the brave Police Officers that the left seems to hate and revile.


It was a really angry Iranian.


----------



## bodecea (Jul 29, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> Waiting to  hear a democrat pretend they are so heart broken! After a weekend of thousands of babies getting dismembered in abortions!
> And scold the GUN not the person.


T's & P's to you and your agenda.


----------



## NotYourBody (Jul 29, 2019)

Tipsycatlover said:


> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> > A garlic festival. Who would shoot up a freaking garlic festival? Only in California. The perp was shot dead by the brave Police Officers that the left seems to hate and revile.
> ...


So a male who is half white European and half Iranian?

Wow. You couldn't put two angrier social groups in one body.


----------



## bodecea (Jul 29, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> > White_MAGA_Man said:
> ...


Definitely braver than all those open carry guys who ran like little girls when there was that shooter in Dallas years ago.


----------



## AquaAthena (Jul 29, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> mudwhistle said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


And that may help but nothing prevents an angry nutjob from killing.

Snips:  Gilroy Garlic Festival gunman cut through back fence to avoid security, police say

"Smithee said the festival had security checkpoints with metal detectors."

"Taylor Pellegrini, 25, said that her bag was checked at the entrance but that one of her friend’s was not"

*Gilroy Garlic Festival gunman cut through back fence to avoid security, police say*
.


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 29, 2019)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...


Ok captain commando do what you gotta do... don’t worry about me I’ve been just fine


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 29, 2019)

BasicHumanUnit said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > California has not banned guns. A lot of hunters here. You got bad intel
> ...


No they haven’t


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 29, 2019)

P@triot said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...


Do you believe anybody should be able to walk into a school carrying a gun? Cruise into a high school basketball game holding an AR?


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 29, 2019)

P@triot said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > So what?! I’m not seeing your point. If I want to get a cc I can go get one. It’s not a big deal.
> ...


I got no problem with the CCW process and I have no problem with voter ID. How about you stick to my arguments and not bring in the strawman


----------



## covfefe (Jul 29, 2019)

Old Yeller said:


> covfefe said:
> 
> 
> > Shooter was reportedly a Trump supporter and was screaming "MAGA!!!" while killing innocent civilians.
> ...



Kiss my ass.


----------



## covfefe (Jul 29, 2019)

Mindful said:


> Marion Morrison said:
> 
> 
> > It says 2 shooters. White guy in 30s?
> ...



It's already confirmed that the shooter was a pro-Trump terrorist.

And he killed a 5 year old kid.


----------



## Jitss617 (Jul 29, 2019)

bodecea said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > Waiting to  hear a democrat pretend they are so heart broken! After a weekend of thousands of babies getting dismembered in abortions!
> ...


Who?? English please


----------



## bodecea (Jul 29, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...


Now there's some irony for us.


----------



## Wry Catcher (Jul 29, 2019)

beautress said:


> Prayers up for families of those who were killed, and for those who were traumatized and injured in Gilroy today.



Prayers won't bring back the six year old boy murdered by another inhuman monster with a gun.


----------



## OldLady (Jul 29, 2019)

Vastator said:


> August West said:
> 
> 
> > shockedcanadian said:
> ...


Our founders Never. Ever. In A Million Years. would have found our level of gun homicide and ever increasing mass shootings of innocent civilians an acceptable trade for "freedom."
That's bullshit.


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 29, 2019)

Marion Morrison said:


> I read it's gang stuff. Full-auto AKs.
> 
> Gangs seem to have no problem getting them out there.
> 
> In California with all their crazy gun restrictions.


Nope..one crazy guy, as usual.


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 29, 2019)

Tipsycatlover said:


> Good thing there were armed officers who shot tge shooter dead before even more damage was done   sounds like antifa


Nope..one crazy guy, as usual.


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 29, 2019)

RetiredGySgt said:


> Issa said:
> 
> 
> > Marion Morrison said:
> ...


Nope..one crazy guy..as usual.


----------



## Vastator (Jul 29, 2019)

OldLady said:


> Vastator said:
> 
> 
> > August West said:
> ...


That’s pure speculation on your part. No one finds it acceptable by the way. That’s why it isn’t accepted. It’s criminalized.


----------



## NotYourBody (Jul 29, 2019)

Aletheia4u said:


> shockedcanadian said:
> 
> 
> > Aletheia4u said:
> ...



So it's the minorities fault the White/Iranian man had to shoot them?


----------



## Wry Catcher (Jul 29, 2019)

RetiredGySgt said:


> Issa said:
> 
> 
> > Marion Morrison said:
> ...



You're a callous jerk, the six year old murdered by a gun lost his right to life, liberty and happiness.  Common  sense gun regulations may not prevent a monster from getting a gun, but no regulations assure a monster will get a gun and kill innocent people.

It's time to amend the Second Amendment, and allow the people in every state to establish common sense regulations - continuing to do the same thing, and even advocate more guns in the hands of more people, is insane.


----------



## bodecea (Jul 29, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> > Good thing there were armed officers who shot tge shooter dead before even more damage was done   sounds like antifa
> ...


Determined by skin tone, I'm sure.


----------



## OldLady (Jul 29, 2019)

covfefe said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > Marion Morrison said:
> ...





covfefe said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > Marion Morrison said:
> ...


You got a link on that?  (pro-Trump terrorist part)


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 29, 2019)

miketx said:


> Looks like another muslim went nuts. We need more gun control! No muslims can own guns unless they go back where they came from.


Unbelievably stupid..even for you.


----------



## RealDave (Jul 29, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> Waiting to  hear a democrat pretend they are so heart broken! After a weekend of thousands of babies getting dismembered in abortions!
> And scold the GUN not the person.



Babies are not aborted.


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 29, 2019)

Tipsycatlover said:


> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> > A garlic festival. Who would shoot up a freaking garlic festival? Only in California. The perp was shot dead by the brave Police Officers that the left seems to hate and revile.
> ...


kinda left out the Italian part of his heritage, eh? Knee-jerk hack. not that it matter..he was American..same as any citizen. Except crazy.


----------



## RealDave (Jul 29, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> August West said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...



So gang violence & mass killings are OK because abortion is legal.

I get it.


----------



## NotYourBody (Jul 29, 2019)

iceberg said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Any minute 2AGuy will be showing up telling us how we don't need any more gun laws and swimming pools are more dangerous.
> ...


I'm for getting rid of all guns.

But since we can't get rid of all guns, I guess we should keep trying the GOP policy of Thoughts & Prayers. It's working so well.


----------



## bodecea (Jul 29, 2019)

skye said:


> California has banned guns, right? but...this sort of tragedy still happens over there!
> 
> Perhaps a good guy  should have carried a gun  to defend himself and others,and the outcome would have been different.


You can thank Gov. Reagan and the NRA for the strict gun laws in California.


----------



## OldLady (Jul 29, 2019)

Vastator said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > Vastator said:
> ...


No more pure speculation on my part than it was on yours to think the opposite.  Our founders' vision never included this.  Never.  Ever.


----------



## blastoff (Jul 29, 2019)

Issa said:


> Marion Morrison said:
> 
> 
> > I read it's gang stuff. Full-auto AKs.
> ...


Impossible.  

Perhaps you’re so stupid as to be including all the inner city shooting gallery deaths?  That mistake would be the only possible way to get anywhere near 15,000.


----------



## Wry Catcher (Jul 29, 2019)

Vastator said:


> August West said:
> 
> 
> > shockedcanadian said:
> ...



What greater act limited liberty, life and happiness to a six year old boy then a monster with a gun?  The idea that no solutions exist is the last and worst defense of 2aguy and others who put their right to guns unrestricted / uncontrolled.

They and the NRA are culpable for the deaths of innocent people by firearms purchsed by a monster.


----------



## EvilCat Breath (Jul 29, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> > whitehall said:
> ...


Sadly Italy has been overrun with people from the middle east who are seeking the generous welfare of Europe.  That doesn't make the invaders Italian, French, Spanish or any other ethnicity.  This shooter is as American as the San Bernardino shooters or John Walker Lindh.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 29, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


between you and me I choose not to be a victim and wait to be protected you, on the other hand, have cast your die and it came up craps


----------



## EvilCat Breath (Jul 29, 2019)

Wry Catcher said:


> Vastator said:
> 
> 
> > August West said:
> ...


Had it not been a man with a gun that stopped the shooter after one minute this would have been a democrat wet dream


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 29, 2019)

Vastator said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > Vastator said:
> ...


Mass shootings and the killing of innocents is the price we pay for our 2nd amendment rights. Not calling for the repeal of the 2nd and I believe in private gun ownership.
We live in a culture of violence...and it is accepted by the vast majority. Whine if you will..and then turn on another action flick with 70 deaths by gun. Maybe kick back with a 1st person shooter and kill everything in cyberspace. While your children watch and learn.
Our culture is what it is--and I want a gun or two...to protect myself from everyone else's guns.

To paraphrase:
From time to time the Tree of Liberty must be watered....with the blood of innocents.


----------



## bodecea (Jul 29, 2019)

shockedcanadian said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> > Police responded to the festival grounds around 5:30PM. Around 11 people were reportedly shot. One of them has died.
> ...


Looks like INCEL again.


----------



## bodecea (Jul 29, 2019)

Dick Foster said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > It's fake news.  Weapons of any kind are prohibited.
> ...


Mulford Act - Wikipedia


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 29, 2019)

Tipsycatlover said:


> EvilEyeFleegle said:
> 
> 
> > Tipsycatlover said:
> ...


Luckily, in this country, American is not an 'ethnicity'..no matter how hard some try to make it so.


----------



## bodecea (Jul 29, 2019)

skye said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > skye said:
> ...


Mulford Act - Wikipedia


----------



## Dekster (Jul 29, 2019)

skye said:


> Police responded to the festival grounds around 5:30PM. Around 11 people were reportedly shot. One of them has died.
> 
> Never knew there was a garlic festival, prayers go to the victims.
> 
> ...



I've heard about the festival but don't know much about it other than most of the garlic you buy in the store comes from that area.


----------



## Wry Catcher (Jul 29, 2019)

Tipsycatlover said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> > Vastator said:
> ...



You're disgusting.  A liar and incapable of rational discourse.


----------



## bodecea (Jul 29, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> mudwhistle said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


And NRA conventions.


----------



## bodecea (Jul 29, 2019)

skye said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > skye said:
> ...


Of COURSE you don't know.


----------



## bodecea (Jul 29, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> > whitehall said:
> ...


Looks like ANOTHER INCEL terrorist act.


----------



## EvilCat Breath (Jul 29, 2019)

Wry Catcher said:


> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> > Wry Catcher said:
> ...


That is a brilliant and expected democrat response.  What substance!!!!


----------



## rightwinger (Jul 29, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...


Very true

That is why we just shrug at these killings


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 29, 2019)

covfefe said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > Marion Morrison said:
> ...





covfefe said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > Marion Morrison said:
> ...


I heard it was reported he was saying I'm with her, I'm with her, I'm with her, in the same fashion an Islamic jihadist would say, Allahu Akbar


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 29, 2019)

bodecea said:


> shockedcanadian said:
> 
> 
> > skye said:
> ...




How do you figure?  The stories indicate nothing about the sexuality of the alleged shooter at all.

They mentioned he was "very angry", I attributed that to the fact that he was an Iranian, an ethnic group known for their anger and radicalism.

They also mentioned he was from California, so its most likely he was as Queer as a $3 bill.


----------



## Olde Europe (Jul 29, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> But since we can't get rid of all guns, I guess we should keep trying the GOP policy of Thoughts & Prayers. It's working so well.



I swear, the next time any of the gun-toting goons of the deplorable "No, we can't" faction has anything of any worth to say on the matter of smallish men's propensity to right their pathetic smallishness with the help of mass murderous gun violence will be the first.


----------



## Tijn Von Ingersleben (Jul 29, 2019)

Marion Morrison said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> > California has banned guns, right? but...this sort of tragedy still happens over there!
> ...


The reason I asked was because the last time I was in Gilroy, California it was full of migrants....jeeze that was 15 years ago and I know THAT has only become more concentrated. 
Officially it is about 50% Hispanic but we all know that is horse shit. If the official number is 50% you know it is closer to %70.


----------



## miketx (Jul 29, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> miketx said:
> 
> 
> > Looks like another muslim went nuts. We need more gun control! No muslims can own guns unless they go back where they came from.
> ...


Truth hurts you cockroaches.


----------



## RealDave (Jul 29, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> > White_MAGA_Man said:
> ...


 Well, when you use the right weapon for mass killing, bad things happen.

You Hispanic comment was bigoted.  Are you a bigoted fuck?


----------



## Wry Catcher (Jul 29, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> > EvilEyeFleegle said:
> ...



Spot on ^^^

Racism and other forms of bigotry came out of the closet when We the People elected a man of African descent President of the United States; Trump's election and comments that the bigots on steroids are "good people too", even when they carried proudly the Nazi Flag has further divided our nation.

No longer can we be considered the melting pot, we have been divided into tribes by demagogues and charlatans on the FAR RIGHT.

  Yes Virginia, fascism came to America and it's up to patriots to stand up and say enough, on the internet and at the polls.

Blastoff found my post here ^^^ funny.  I wonder why he could not offer a rebuttal to my thoughtful comments.  Is it denial, a defense mechanism, or that he can't post anything substantive or thoughtful to explain his single word response?


----------



## RealDave (Jul 29, 2019)

miketx said:


> Looks like another muslim went nuts. We need more gun control! No muslims can own guns unless they go back where they came from.


Maybe we should disarm all you assfuck Trumpettes.  If you are so stupid to vote for Trump, you are also too stupid to be allowed to own a gun.


----------



## miketx (Jul 29, 2019)

RealDave said:


> miketx said:
> 
> 
> > Looks like another muslim went nuts. We need more gun control! No muslims can own guns unless they go back where they came from.
> ...


Come get them cockroach.


----------



## Jitss617 (Jul 29, 2019)

bodecea said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...


I don’t bite.. talk like a man


----------



## iceberg (Jul 29, 2019)

Vastator said:


> August West said:
> 
> 
> > shockedcanadian said:
> ...





NotYourBody said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...


so you have zero suggestions also. got it.


----------



## miketx (Jul 29, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...


S/he's a pseudo man.


----------



## EvilCat Breath (Jul 29, 2019)

How dare racist bigots object to being killed by an Iranian?  Haven't the Nazis been listening to Rashida Taliban, Mullah Omar, and Alexandra Occasional cortex?  

It was a garlic festival.  Full of white people who have it coming.


----------



## iceberg (Jul 29, 2019)

Wry Catcher said:


> Vastator said:
> 
> 
> > August West said:
> ...


your blind blame and phaux rage isn't going to help this now is it?

people can offer up suggestions on how to fix this or keep bitching. looks like you're for bitching.


----------



## blastoff (Jul 29, 2019)

whitehall said:


> A garlic festival. Who would shoot up a freaking garlic festival? Only in California. The perp was shot dead by the brave Police Officers that the left seems to hate and revile.


No ‘seems to’ about it.  

Next we’ll be hearing the lefty pukes claiming the cops are suffering depression over killing the guy because he wasn’t black.


----------



## miketx (Jul 29, 2019)

iceberg said:


> Vastator said:
> 
> 
> > August West said:
> ...


It's simple really. All that has to be done is stop letting violent criminals out of prison and stop slapping them on the wrist. Problem solved. But the cockroach libs let criminals out of jail in the hopes they kill so they can call for more gun control.


----------



## iceberg (Jul 29, 2019)

Wry Catcher said:


> EvilEyeFleegle said:
> 
> 
> > Tipsycatlover said:
> ...


you may be a complex idiot, but you're still an idiot.

those who call everyone RACIST for not liking obama in my mind are huge contributors to the divide we now "enjoy". in the real world (aka, no extreme liberals) it is quite possible to disagree with someone of another race/culture w/o race OR culture being a part of it. this insane practice of calling someone RACIST at every opportunity as if it's some moral compass get out of an argument free card started this divide.


----------



## miketx (Jul 29, 2019)

Tipsycatlover said:


> How dare racist bigots object to being killed by an Iranian?  Haven't the Nazis been listening to Rashida Taliban, Mullah Omar, and Alexandra Occasional cortex?
> 
> It was a garlic festival.  Full of white people who have it coming.


No vampires there huh? See? If they had put full garlic control in place no telling how many vampires would be sucking up.


----------



## Jitss617 (Jul 29, 2019)

RealDave said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > Waiting to  hear a democrat pretend they are so heart broken! After a weekend of thousands of babies getting dismembered in abortions!
> ...


Lol science isn’t your thing is it haha


----------



## miketx (Jul 29, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...


He's just another liar.


----------



## Jitss617 (Jul 29, 2019)

RealDave said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > August West said:
> ...


If you are ok with snipping the necks of defenseless babies, how in the world are you worried about shootings? Lol


----------



## Vastator (Jul 29, 2019)

OldLady said:


> Vastator said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...


You really think gun murder didn’t exist back then?


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 29, 2019)

JoeB131 said:


> Any minute 2AGuy will be showing up telling us how we don't need any more gun laws and swimming pools are more dangerous.


Those gun laws worked great in Californa


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 29, 2019)

miketx said:


> EvilEyeFleegle said:
> 
> 
> > miketx said:
> ...


Not that you would know the truth if it bit you on your fat ass. On the one hand you'll rant about the 2nd..and then you want an exception for Americans who practice Islam..as I said..stupid. A religious exception to the 2nd? I think not. As for your new favorite word..cockroaches--not really much of an insult..if you think about it...hardy survivors who can live on anything and survive a nuclear war.

When you are stiff on the kitchen floor after your coronary..the Roachs will dance on your eyeballs.


----------



## miketx (Jul 29, 2019)

OldLady said:


> Vastator said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...


I know! How about you cockroaches stop letting violent criminals out of prison and stop slapping others on the wrist? Huh? How about that? And then stop trying to take guns away from people who didn't commit the crimes you wallow in. Ghoul.


----------



## blastoff (Jul 29, 2019)

Wry Catcher said:


> EvilEyeFleegle said:
> 
> 
> > Tipsycatlover said:
> ...


Take a moment to read my signature.  And then follow it, please.


----------



## miketx (Jul 29, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> miketx said:
> 
> 
> > EvilEyeFleegle said:
> ...


Come get some cockroach.


----------



## pismoe (Jul 29, 2019)

he might IDENTIFY as being 'iranian' and doesn't like the way that 'iran' is being treated using Sanctions  and threats .  --------   just a thought .


----------



## AquaAthena (Jul 29, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > shockedcanadian said:
> ...


CBS News has learned the suspect has been identified as Santino William Legan, 19. I was at his father’s house in Gilroy for hours early this morning as police and federal agents searched it for evidence. https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2019/07/29/gilroy-garlic-festival-mass-shooting/ …


----------



## miketx (Jul 29, 2019)

JoeB131 said:


> Any minute 2AGuy will be showing up telling us how we don't need any more gun laws and swimming pools are more dangerous.


You and lying filth like you are asked repeatedly how more gun laws will stop this, and like the no-good lying scum you are, you never provide an answer. Why is that my six-legged parasite?


----------



## Dick Foster (Jul 29, 2019)

james bond said:


> It's at the Gilroy Garlic Festival.  I used to go yearly when living in SF and SJ.  It's a mass shooting.  People said they thought it was firecrackers, but they could hear the bullets whizzing by and started to run.
> 
> I think four dead including the shooter and fifteen injured.



In all the years I lived and worked in Silicon Valley, I never felt the urge to go and be herded around like cattle and over pay for a bunch of junk. When I went anywhere, I always tried to go in the opposite direction of the herds.


----------



## MAGAman (Jul 29, 2019)

Wry Catcher said:


> Prayers won't bring back the six year old boy murdered by another inhuman monster with a gun.


Neither will taking guns away from law abiding citizens.


----------



## miketx (Jul 29, 2019)

Wry Catcher said:


> beautress said:
> 
> 
> > Prayers up for families of those who were killed, and for those who were traumatized and injured in Gilroy today.
> ...


Perhaps if you stopped importing inhuman monsters.


----------



## RealDave (Jul 29, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...


 Babies are not being killed.

These are fetuses.

If you care about aborted fetuses, why do you support stealing children at the border & sending children to overcrowded concentration camps.  Or why do you want to take childrem's food stamps, underfund their schools?  

Why did you support a President accused of child rape?

Really, I do not support abortion, I support the right for the woman to choose


----------



## RealDave (Jul 29, 2019)

miketx said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> > beautress said:
> ...


  Calling Melania a monster?


----------



## mudwhistle (Jul 29, 2019)

covfefe said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > Marion Morrison said:
> ...


Pro Trump Terrorists don't exist. Anti Trump terrorists, yes. Unless the fucker thinks Hitlery won instead of Trump. 

BTW, Just because this kid is white does not mean he's pro Trump. As a matter of fact most 19 year old Californians are Democrats.


----------



## RealDave (Jul 29, 2019)

MAGAman said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> > Prayers won't bring back the six year old boy murdered by another inhuman monster with a gun.
> ...


 We could ban assault type weapons.

You certainly have no use for one.


----------



## miketx (Jul 29, 2019)

RealDave said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...


I lost count of the number of sick twisted lies in this pile of crap post.


----------



## miketx (Jul 29, 2019)

RealDave said:


> miketx said:
> 
> 
> > Wry Catcher said:
> ...


I didn't know she was a muslim murderer.


----------



## Jitss617 (Jul 29, 2019)

RealDave said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...


No they are bodies of humans who are defenseless.. 

And it’s none of my business what  irresponsible parents do with their children .. I donate to charities that help with children.. I vote to encourage more  Responsibility  In a first class culture country... it’s why we have immigration laws.. learn the ways of great Americans we have history books so you can read lol


----------



## RealDave (Jul 29, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...


ba·by
/ˈbābē/
 
 Learn to pronounce 

_noun_
noun: *baby*; plural noun: *babies*
1.
a very young child, especially one newly or recently born.


----------



## pismoe (Jul 29, 2019)

just some further info , an article .  ---   Gilroy Garlic Festival shooter identified as Santino William Legan, reports say   ---


----------



## Papageorgio (Jul 29, 2019)

Wry Catcher said:


> beautress said:
> 
> 
> > Prayers up for families of those who were killed, and for those who were traumatized and injured in Gilroy today.
> ...



Neither will your post.


Wry Catcher said:


> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> > Issa said:
> ...



Doesn't California have some of he strictest gun laws? Guns I don't believe is the problem, it is our society of entitlement, our parenting, our acceptance of violence in entertainment.


----------



## rightwinger (Jul 29, 2019)

Thankfully, the boy was able to get ahold of an assault rifle to maximize his killing ability

We would not want to inconvenience mass killers and keep them from their weapon of choice


----------



## NotYourBody (Jul 29, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> To paraphrase:
> From time to time the Tree of Liberty must be watered....with the blood of innocents.



Volunteer one of your family innocents for the watering, if that's what you claim is required.


----------



## Jitss617 (Jul 29, 2019)

RealDave said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...


Yes  at 10 weeks they have a heart beat... science is a beautiful thing


----------



## satrebil (Jul 29, 2019)

RealDave said:


> MAGAman said:
> 
> 
> > Wry Catcher said:
> ...



Assault is an action, not an object. A screwdriver can be an "assault weapon" you fucking brainlet.


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 29, 2019)

rightwinger said:


> Thankfully, the boy was able to get ahold of an assault rifle to maximize his killing ability
> 
> We would not want to inconvenience mass killers and keep them from their weapon of choice




Assault rifles are Illegal in California, but it didn't stop him.


----------



## RealDave (Jul 29, 2019)

miketx said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Any minute 2AGuy will be showing up telling us how we don't need any more gun laws and swimming pools are more dangerous.
> ...



This has been answered multiple times.  

Banning assault type rifles would at the least reduce the carnage.

The truth is most of you deplorables are chicken shits.

If you did not have access to such a powerful weapon, would you even consider one of these killings?

We should alsi ban tactical gear.


----------



## Jitss617 (Jul 29, 2019)

RealDave said:


> miketx said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...


A rifle can assault someone!??? What do you have video evidence??


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 29, 2019)

RealDave said:


> miketx said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...




Assault type rifles ARE outlawed in California.

But those who are inclined to commit this kind of crime tend to be unimpressed by such laws.


----------



## rightwinger (Jul 29, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Thankfully, the boy was able to get ahold of an assault rifle to maximize his killing ability
> ...



Thank the NRA


----------



## satrebil (Jul 29, 2019)

RealDave said:


> If you did not have access to such a powerful weapon, would you even consider one of these killings?
> 
> We should alsi ban tactical gear.



Do you have any idea how much more powerful a typical deer hunting rifle is than an AR-15?

Of course you don't, because you don't have the foggiest fucking clue what you're talking about.


----------



## RealDave (Jul 29, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > miketx said:
> ...



a Baseball bat is a bat typically used in Baseball.

Am assault rifle of a rifle typically used in military assaults.

An Asaault type rifle is a rifle that resembles an assault rifle.

A Maga hat is a hat worn by dumbasses.


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 29, 2019)

RealDave said:


> miketx said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...



Some people need this kind of weaponry for self defense, Dave.

The WH had these kinds of weapons for many years before Trump took the oath to serve his country.

Down in Miami, Al Pacino was similarly well armed.

Some people have to worry about Criminal Gangs and Terror Cells coming after them.


----------



## Vastator (Jul 29, 2019)

RealDave said:


> MAGAman said:
> 
> 
> > Wry Catcher said:
> ...


Who are you to decide what anyone has a use, or need for? I’ll save you the trouble of thinking, so you don’t hurt yourself... “No one.”


----------



## miketx (Jul 29, 2019)

RealDave said:


> miketx said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...


How does that stop murderers? and how does banning clothing stop murderers? How does banning assault rifles do anything when there are all kinds of other rifles that the criminals can use? Your explanation is as useless and ridiculous as you are. Most mass shootings are with handguns.


----------



## Vandalshandle (Jul 29, 2019)

Vastator said:


> August West said:
> 
> 
> > shockedcanadian said:
> ...



Thomas Jefferson would have preferred an AK-47.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 29, 2019)

rightwinger said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> > Police responded to the festival grounds around 5:30PM. Around 11 people were reportedly shot. One of them has died.
> ...


So what other freedoms are you willing to give up to stop criminals from committing crimes?


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 29, 2019)

RealDave said:


> A Maga hat is a hat worn by dumbasses.




A MAGA hat just shows that the wearer is a supporter of President Trump and an opponent of Extreme Liberalism.

Any number of buttons, hats and other gear have been worn by political advocates  for more than a century.


----------



## miketx (Jul 29, 2019)

RealDave said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...


Just admit you have no answer for anything and that you do not want to punish crime.


----------



## satrebil (Jul 29, 2019)

RealDave said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...



Tell me, tard - which of the following is an "assault rifle"?


----------



## RealDave (Jul 29, 2019)

satrebil said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > If you did not have access to such a powerful weapon, would you even consider one of these killings?
> ...



Jesus fuck.

I can't load up my Remington  270 cal Model 760 with a 150 round magazine & shoot as a semiautomatic .

The POWER comes in the number of bullets fired ion a short period of time

As for what I know, I know I probably own more guns that you do.


----------



## miketx (Jul 29, 2019)

Vandalshandle said:


> Vastator said:
> 
> 
> > August West said:
> ...


Did you speak to him?


----------



## RealDave (Jul 29, 2019)

satrebil said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...


  So, we can't talk abouyt assault type weapons without more of this bullshit.


----------



## mudwhistle (Jul 29, 2019)

rightwinger said:


> Thankfully, the boy was able to get ahold of an assault rifle to maximize his killing ability
> 
> We would not want to inconvenience mass killers and keep them from their weapon of choice


Which imaginary weapon did he use?
Cuz there is no assault rifles.


----------



## RealDave (Jul 29, 2019)

miketx said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...



So because I think these guns need to be banned I am against law enforcement?

Really?


----------



## Vandalshandle (Jul 29, 2019)

I don't know what all the fuss is about. The shooters in Gilroy and New York were well organized militias.


----------



## miketx (Jul 29, 2019)

RealDave said:


> satrebil said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...


Fake news.


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 29, 2019)

RealDave said:


> satrebil said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...





Determining exactly what you libs are talking about is the first step to dialogue.


----------



## RealDave (Jul 29, 2019)

mudwhistle said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Thankfully, the boy was able to get ahold of an assault rifle to maximize his killing ability
> ...


  We had an assault rifle ban.  According to dumbfuck you, it never happened.


----------



## miketx (Jul 29, 2019)

RealDave said:


> miketx said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...


Tell us how banning them will have any effect on anything when there are countless other guns that can be used and the banned guns can be obtained illegally?


----------



## miketx (Jul 29, 2019)

RealDave said:


> satrebil said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...


Why can't you respond to the question with an answer instead of deflecting like always?


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 29, 2019)

miketx said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > miketx said:
> ...



Then you have to ban all those other guns too

That is the goal after all


----------



## Vandalshandle (Jul 29, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> miketx said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...



Don't look now. Your paranoia is gaining on you.


----------



## pismoe (Jul 29, 2019)

miketx said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > miketx said:
> ...


-----------------------------    and the common 12 gauge pump shotgun is pretty devastating with 'double aught buck shot or any 12 gauge ammo .  -------   Just gotta hope that the President and 'repub rinos ' don't get all Emotional and wobbly .  I think that 3 were murdered in this shooting but over 320 million Americas went home to bed last night and are traveling to work or having breakfast as I now type his message eh ??


----------



## satrebil (Jul 29, 2019)

RealDave said:


> satrebil said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...



No, tard. The POWER comes from the size and velocity of the projectile.


----------



## covfefe (Jul 29, 2019)

Shooter confirmed to be right wing nutjob Trump supporter who quoted white supremacist nonsense in his instagram account.


----------



## Vastator (Jul 29, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> miketx said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...


That’s why they must never be given an inch.


----------



## satrebil (Jul 29, 2019)

RealDave said:


> satrebil said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...



Answer the question - which one is the assault rifle?


----------



## BasicHumanUnit (Jul 29, 2019)

Choice A):  You can keep yours guns, and occasionally, a leftist imbecile will kill another leftist imbecile

Choice B): Give up your guns to save a small handful of  Anti-Constitutional, fascist Leftists.

I can't speak for you, but I know my choice.


----------



## Vandalshandle (Jul 29, 2019)

covfefe said:


> Shooter confirmed to be right wing nutjob Trump supporter who quoted white supremacist nonsense in his instagram account.



I am Shocked! SHOCKED, I say!


----------



## The Original Tree (Jul 29, 2019)

*I have three guesses:

1.) ANTIFA
2.) Islamic Terrorism
3.) Gang Related (MS-13 or Domestic)

All three are directly attributable to The Leftists Dems in this country who have gone off the hook.

Let me remind everyone that this fair was a GUN FREE ZONE!*


----------



## BasicHumanUnit (Jul 29, 2019)

Consider this......

Speaking from Statistics......when a Lefty says guns are dangerous, and civilians shouldn't have guns....they are categorically talking about other Leftists.

They are openly admitting their own are the problem.


----------



## Vandalshandle (Jul 29, 2019)

BasicHumanUnit said:


> Consider this......
> 
> Speaking from Statistics......when a Lefty says guns are dangerous, and civilians shouldn't have guns....they are categorically talking about other Leftists.
> 
> They are openly admitting their own are the problem.



...and yet, I have never heard anyone but RW nuts say the words, "civilians should not have any guns", and it is always something that the RW nut seems to remember some leftist as saying. Nobody ever seems to know exactly who that leftist is.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 29, 2019)

Vandalshandle said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > miketx said:
> ...



Really?

Why is there a call to ban " assault weapons"?  Because they are used to kill people

So ban the AR 15 and when another gun is used to kill a few people at a garlic festival what do you do?

You say we have to ban that gun too

etc etc etc


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 29, 2019)

mudwhistle said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > skye said:
> ...


I’ve never heard of this rule that you need a permit holder to vouch for you. Can you provide more details about that?


----------



## BasicHumanUnit (Jul 29, 2019)

Mass shootings outside of national conflict are irrelevant in the context of the 2nd Amendment.

The 2nd Amendment is about NATIONAL PROTECTION.....not individual protection.

So all arguments that we need more "gun control" after mass shooting is nothing more than misdirected, knee-jerking idiocy......or Stalinism


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 29, 2019)

covfefe said:


> Shooter confirmed to be right wing nutjob Trump supporter who quoted white supremacist nonsense in his instagram account.


No it was confirmed shooter was shouting I'm with her, I'm with her, I'm with her, like an Islamic Jihadist would shout  Allahu Akbar, and he was supposedly wearing one of those pussy hats


----------



## mudwhistle (Jul 29, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> mudwhistle said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


I tried to get one when I was working at a liquor store back in the 80s in San Diego. Somebody has to vouch for you.


----------



## August West (Jul 29, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...


22 weeks is the earliest that a fetus could live outside the womb. Science is a beautiful thing indeed. When you phonies start protesting our never ending wars and our guns for all policy I may take you seriously but I`ll still support a woman`s right to choose.


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 29, 2019)

AquaAthena said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > mudwhistle said:
> ...


Yes I agree. I’m seeing these posts trying to make the case that California’s gun laws somehow played a factor in this, which just doesn’t make sense.


----------



## BasicHumanUnit (Jul 29, 2019)

Vandalshandle said:


> BasicHumanUnit said:
> 
> 
> > Consider this......
> ...



Scott Israel, former Broward Sheriff who oversaw the Parkland shootings and assisted them



			
				Broward Sheriff Scott Israel said:
			
		

> Civilians shouldn't own guns, that's what the Police are for



A MILLION other examples


----------



## August West (Jul 29, 2019)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> covfefe said:
> 
> 
> > Shooter confirmed to be right wing nutjob Trump supporter who quoted white supremacist nonsense in his instagram account.
> ...


He was a gun pussy so why shouldn`t he wear a pussy hat whatever the hell that is?


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 29, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> AquaAthena said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...



The Draconian Gun Laws of California certainly didn't prevent this.    And that's the point


----------



## RealDave (Jul 29, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> Vandalshandle said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...



A less powerful weapon would men fewer casualties.


----------



## mudwhistle (Jul 29, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> AquaAthena said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


I think brainwashing or hatred in our schools might have something to do with it.
Why is it always some young kid?


----------



## RealDave (Jul 29, 2019)

BasicHumanUnit said:


> Consider this......
> 
> Speaking from Statistics......when a Lefty says guns are dangerous, and civilians shouldn't have guns....they are categorically talking about other Leftists.
> 
> They are openly admitting their own are the problem.


 Actusally, liberals aren't saying that so fuck off.


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 29, 2019)

RealDave said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > Vandalshandle said:
> ...




Theoretically, sure.

Except for the fact that if the perp couldn't buy a more powerful weapon legally, he'd buy it illegally.

Libs fail to consider the fact that there is a lively black market in the field of firearms.


----------



## The Original Tree (Jul 29, 2019)

*So the Shooter was of Iranian Dissent, and he did not like President Trump.  From his brother's Instagram

“Rising tuition and housing costs adversely affect students nationwide,” the story quoted Rosino Legan. “Now, President Trump revealed in his budget plan that they were going to eliminate subsidized student loans. Myself and millions of other students heavily rely on these loans.”*


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 29, 2019)

RealDave said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > Vandalshandle said:
> ...



An AR 15 is one of the lowest powered rifles on the market.

Every rifle I own is more powerful than an AR 15


----------



## OldLady (Jul 29, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> Vastator said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...


All I can say to that is,


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 29, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...




Yes.

But the AR15 has such a fearsome reputation among Liberals, so if you just show the AR15 to a leftist he will lose control of his bowels and be rendered incapacity without firing a round.


----------



## RealDave (Jul 29, 2019)

satrebil said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > satrebil said:
> ...



What are the models?

The top is likely the Ruger Mini that you assfucks use as an example of a semi automatic.  Don't know what the other one is - maybe the same gun accessorized to look like a scary weapon.

We don't need these guns.  We need to limit magazine size.  

So why do you people want these guns?  Because you can shoot straight?  Because they look scary & you think it makes you a tough guy?  Because it is so much fun to get all beered up & shoot bottles?


----------



## RealDave (Jul 29, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...


  Show me your AR-15 & I'll laugh at you for being so stupid to actually own one.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 29, 2019)

OldLady said:


> EvilEyeFleegle said:
> 
> 
> > Vastator said:
> ...


How many other of your guaranteed rights are you willing to give up to prevent criminals from committing crimes?


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 29, 2019)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...


Well I’m calling your bullshit. You don’t always have a gun on you. There are times whether it be in church or a swimming pool or at a movie theater where I’m sure you don’t have a gun at your side and during those times I can use your same argument against you that you are trying to use against me. Fact is that it’s an idiotic agreement that it is necessary to have a gun at all times to be responsible and protected. I could take the argument further to highlight the stupidity and say that whenever you are not wearing full body armor you are being unsafe and irresponsible as you never know when a bullet may come flying.

You’re argument is weak and I think I just pointed out the absurdity of it so best to stop using it from now on captain


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 29, 2019)

The Original Tree said:


> *So the Shooter was of Iranian Dissent, and he did not like President Trump.  From his brother's Instagram
> 
> “Rising tuition and housing costs adversely affect students nationwide,” the story quoted Rosino Legan. “Now, President Trump revealed in his budget plan that they were going to eliminate subsidized student loans. Myself and millions of other students heavily rely on these loans.”*


The suspect name is 
Santino William Legan


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 29, 2019)

mudwhistle said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > mudwhistle said:
> ...


It’s not the 80s and I don’t believe that is the case anymore


----------



## The Original Tree (Jul 29, 2019)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> > *So the Shooter was of Iranian Dissent, and he did not like President Trump.  From his brother's Instagram
> ...


*Yes, he was of Iranian and Italian dissent, and hated President Trump, and actually just hated everything and everyone.
Fine Product of the Fucked up California School System.
Probably couldn't figure out what bathroom to use so he became enraged and went Postal.*


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 29, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > AquaAthena said:
> ...


If a law did actually prevent a crime how would that be proven?


----------



## bodecea (Jul 29, 2019)

miketx said:


> Looks like another muslim went nuts. We need more gun control! No muslims can own guns unless they go back where they came from.


It was INCEL....again.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 29, 2019)

OldLady said:


> EvilEyeFleegle said:
> 
> 
> > Vastator said:
> ...


You can take that pic and shove it up your ass that's my first amendment right


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 29, 2019)

mudwhistle said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > AquaAthena said:
> ...


Well kids are highly emotional and hormonal... what kind of brainwashing are you talking about?


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 29, 2019)

OldLady said:


> EvilEyeFleegle said:
> 
> 
> > Vastator said:
> ...


Fair enough....nice pattern. I've been told that a mark of maturity is perceiving the world as it is, rather than as we wish it to be.


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 29, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...




If someone committed such a crime in Texas and declared that they would have done it in California where they lived,but didn't because of the gun laws.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 29, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


I carry conceal a Ruger ec9 IWB I don't go to the pool I go to the gym wearing a spandex waist belt 
The only place I wouldn't carry is a government building


----------



## Picaro (Jul 29, 2019)

Concealed carry will work; open carry is just two fucktards waiting for a collision. It's stupid to advertise you're carrying, just an ego trip for morons.


----------



## bodecea (Jul 29, 2019)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> covfefe said:
> 
> 
> > Mindful said:
> ...


Of course you "heard it was reported".....


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 29, 2019)

Picaro said:


> Concealed carry will work; open carry is just two fucktards waiting for a collision. It's stupid to advertise you're carrying, just an ego trip for morons.




That really depends on the circles you are traveling with.  In some communities, Open Carry is needed to dissuade criminals from approaching you in the first place.


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 29, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> EvilEyeFleegle said:
> 
> 
> > To paraphrase:
> ...


Didn't read the rest of the post..or just..didn't understand?

It is what it is...I am not 'claiming' ill-educated one..I'm commenting.


----------



## Jitss617 (Jul 29, 2019)

RealDave said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...


So no evidence a ride assulted anyone hahah ok


----------



## pismoe (Jul 29, 2019)

is this what you are always looking for VShandel .  ---   diane feinstein on taking all guns - Bing video  ---


----------



## bodecea (Jul 29, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > shockedcanadian said:
> ...


Oh...where do you get your information that Iranians are an "ethnic group known for their anger and radicalism"?   Iranian isn't even an ethnic group....it's a nationality.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 29, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > EvilEyeFleegle said:
> ...


hows this pattern?


----------



## bodecea (Jul 29, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...


Even more Irony!      Keep it coming, Jr.


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 29, 2019)

bodecea said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...




Yes, Iranians are an angry ethnicity, they hate America as you can see here.  BTW, Obama's top advisor was an Iranian broad.


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 29, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...


Haha... ok, great point. Since there haven’t been any declarations of that kind then I guess you’ve proven your point. You win!


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 29, 2019)

bodecea said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > covfefe said:
> ...


Interesting you never once called COVFEFE response into question 
Interesting not.


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 29, 2019)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...


Haha, you work out in spandex with a gun on your hip?! Now that’s a great picture!! How about when you shower? You got a little waterproof holster?


----------



## Jitss617 (Jul 29, 2019)

RealDave said:


> satrebil said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...


Which on assaulted you? Lol


----------



## Jitss617 (Jul 29, 2019)

RealDave said:


> miketx said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...


Why are you against tools?? They saved 94 thousand lives last year... are you crazy??


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 29, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


No, it's a belt made of spandex with a compartment for a pistol.


----------



## Weatherman2020 (Jul 29, 2019)

RealDave said:


> miketx said:
> 
> 
> > Looks like another muslim went nuts. We need more gun control! No muslims can own guns unless they go back where they came from.
> ...


Almost all murders are committed by Democrats. And ‘colored’ people.


----------



## Jitss617 (Jul 29, 2019)

August West said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...


No you don’t you are killing woman and men lol 
IT HAS A HEAR BEAT AND NERVES AT 10 weeks.. it can feel pain when you are cutting it apart 

You will lose in the end.. I’m
Shocked we let it happen this long


----------



## NotYourBody (Jul 29, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> NotYourBody said:
> 
> 
> > EvilEyeFleegle said:
> ...


You are correct, I just skimmed it. I apologize. 

I will come back to read this when I have more time. Again, sorry.


----------



## Weatherman2020 (Jul 29, 2019)

rightwinger said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...


Never in history has a gun walked up to anyone and shoot someone, shitforbrains.


----------



## OldLady (Jul 29, 2019)

mudwhistle said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > AquaAthena said:
> ...


Hormones, maybe?  But then there was the Las Vegas shooter.  60's wasn't he?  Thinking back, it's definitely not always kids.  Unless to you, anything under 70 is a kid.


----------



## Jitss617 (Jul 29, 2019)

RealDave said:


> satrebil said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...


You don’t,, what’s your address? Lol do you have a welcome sign on your door?


----------



## Weatherman2020 (Jul 29, 2019)

It’s what happens when children are brainwashed to believe there is no God and they’re no more important than a dandelion in the grass.


----------



## Issa (Jul 29, 2019)

So it tuned out that the terrorist went to Nevada to buy an AK 47 that he  ouldnt het in California.


----------



## OldLady (Jul 29, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


Are they as easy to spray fire into a crowd of garlic festival goers?  AR 15 is a copy of a weapon developed for WAR.  It is designed to kill as quickly and easily as possible.


----------



## Weatherman2020 (Jul 29, 2019)

Shooter was an Iranian who hated white people. 

Santino William Legan: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know | Heavy.com


----------



## NotYourBody (Jul 29, 2019)

covfefe said:


> Shooter confirmed to be right wing nutjob Trump supporter who quoted white supremacist nonsense in his instagram account.


 
Gee. What a surprise.


----------



## Weatherman2020 (Jul 29, 2019)

Wry Catcher said:


> Tijn Von Ingersleben said:
> 
> 
> > Mexican Gangs?
> ...


Shooter was an Iranian who hated whites. 

I’ll wait here for your apology to the group. 

Santino William Legan: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know | Heavy.com


----------



## Weatherman2020 (Jul 29, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> covfefe said:
> 
> 
> > Shooter confirmed to be right wing nutjob Trump supporter who quoted white supremacist nonsense in his instagram account.
> ...


Except he was an Iranian who hated whites. 

Santino William Legan: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know | Heavy.com


----------



## NotYourBody (Jul 29, 2019)

Issa said:


> So it tuned out that the terrorist went to Nevada to buy an AK 47 that he  ouldnt het in California.


That's also what happens in Chicago. They drive to Gary, IN to buy their guns.


----------



## miketx (Jul 29, 2019)

OldLady said:


> EvilEyeFleegle said:
> 
> 
> > Vastator said:
> ...


parrot traitors like you are hilarious.


----------



## g5000 (Jul 29, 2019)

skye said:


> California has banned guns, right? but...this sort of tragedy still happens over there!
> 
> Perhaps a good guy  should have carried a gun  to defend himself and others,and the outcome would have been different.


Good guys with guns (cops) took down the shooter within seconds.


----------



## Jitss617 (Jul 29, 2019)

bodecea said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...


Umm ok lol


----------



## miketx (Jul 29, 2019)

g5000 said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> > California has banned guns, right? but...this sort of tragedy still happens over there!
> ...


cockroach says if you have a gun but aren't a cop then you must be a criminal. Classic logic from gayputin.


----------



## Defiant1 (Jul 29, 2019)

OldLady said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...




You don't know what you are talking about.
The AR doesn't fire any faster than any other semi-automatic.
The AR is less powerful than most other semi-automatics.


----------



## g5000 (Jul 29, 2019)

miketx said:


> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> > skye said:
> ...


Nice strawman you have there, faggot.


----------



## Weatherman2020 (Jul 29, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> covfefe said:
> 
> 
> > Shooter confirmed to be right wing nutjob Trump supporter who quoted white supremacist nonsense in his instagram account.
> ...




 

I’ll wait here for your apology.


----------



## miketx (Jul 29, 2019)

g5000 said:


> miketx said:
> 
> 
> > g5000 said:
> ...


That's what you said lair.


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 29, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> Issa said:
> 
> 
> > So it tuned out that the terrorist went to Nevada to buy an AK 47 that he  ouldnt het in California.
> ...




Sometimes.   Other times, they just buy them in Chicago from black market gun dealers operating in the back room of cocktail lounges.

But in either event, the Illinois law is ignored


----------



## Issa (Jul 29, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> Issa said:
> 
> 
> > So it tuned out that the terrorist went to Nevada to buy an AK 47 that he  ouldnt het in California.
> ...


Very sad...deaths and more deaths and all we hear is thoughts and prayers.


----------



## miketx (Jul 29, 2019)

Issa said:


> NotYourBody said:
> 
> 
> > Issa said:
> ...


Why don't you lobby for letting more criminals out of prison?


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 29, 2019)

covfefe said:


> Shooter confirmed to be right wing nutjob Trump supporter who quoted white supremacist nonsense in his instagram account.


Link or lie.


----------



## depotoo (Jul 29, 2019)

Issa said:


> NotYourBody said:
> 
> 
> > Issa said:
> ...


Actually all we hear is ban more guns from law abiding citizens that maybe could have stopped this sooner than it was.


----------



## OldLady (Jul 29, 2019)

Weatherman2020 said:


> Shooter was an Iranian who hated white people.
> 
> Santino William Legan: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know | Heavy.com


I just read that article and it did not say that, or imply it.  As a matter of fact, that is a total lie.  He was third generation Iranian.  His immigrant grandfather was an educated professional and served his community in local politics.  His parents are also professionals and respected in the community.

Santino would get along great with President Trump, I think:

_ He wrote: “Read Might Is Right by Ragnar Redbeard. Why overcrowd towns and pave more open space to make room for hordes of mestizos and Silicon Valley white twats?”...
The book is described as being akin to Social Darwinism and includes misogynistic and racist principles “claiming that the woman and the family as a whole is the property of the man and proclaiming the innate superiority of the Anglo-Saxon race.
_
Do not take Weatherman's word for it, folks.  He's out and out lying.


----------



## covfefe (Jul 29, 2019)

Weatherman2020 said:


> NotYourBody said:
> 
> 
> > covfefe said:
> ...



"Might is Right" is right wing terrorist propaganda.

I was right, you are wrong.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 29, 2019)

Weatherman2020 said:


> Shooter was an Iranian who hated white people.
> 
> Santino William Legan: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know | Heavy.com


So he was a pussy hat wearing leftist


----------



## covfefe (Jul 29, 2019)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> > Shooter was an Iranian who hated white people.
> ...



Far right Trump humping terrorist.

Moron Labia!


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 29, 2019)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> EvilEyeFleegle said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...


Meh. When you put half the number of rounds in an area silver dollar sized..while someone is shooting back...you can color me impressed.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 29, 2019)

covfefe said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> > NotYourBody said:
> ...


 twat when you use all his words it spells leftist.


----------



## depotoo (Jul 29, 2019)




----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 29, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > EvilEyeFleegle said:
> ...


300 yards not a problem 500 is what you get here.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 29, 2019)

OldLady said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...



All my rifles but 1 are semiautomatic.  I'm more of a hand gun person myself.  I don't have as much use for rifles as some do so I only have a few but all of them are in a much larger caliber than an Ar 15.

But why don;t you answer my earlier question to you

What other of your guaranteed rights are you willing to give up to stop criminals from committing crimes?


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 29, 2019)

OldLady said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> > Shooter was an Iranian who hated white people.
> ...


Oh my...I'm soooo surprised that Weatherman would tell an untruth..or shade the argument to favor his take..or leave out important info that completely changes the context of an argument..shocked i tell ya!


----------



## OldLady (Jul 29, 2019)

Defiant1 said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


Of course it allows for more rapid shooting.  It is easy to handle.  It is a mass shooters dream, which is why it is the preferred rifle.  But did he use an AR?  Did I read here that he bought an AK47 out of state?  What did he use?


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 29, 2019)

covfefe said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Weatherman2020 said:
> ...


he hated whites, therefore, he's a pussy hat wearing leftist.


----------



## miketx (Jul 29, 2019)

OldLady said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...


An SKS.


----------



## OldLady (Jul 29, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > Weatherman2020 said:
> ...


Well, it takes some chutzpah when you also put the link in the same post that says the complete opposite.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 29, 2019)

OldLady said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...


The Ar 15 just happens to be one of the most popular rifle frames in the country

There are over 8 million of them in the hands of civilians and 99.9999% of those civilians will never shoot anyone

And no it does not shoot faster than any other semiautomatic rifle


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 29, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > Weatherman2020 said:
> ...


He self identified as an Italian Iranian


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 29, 2019)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> EvilEyeFleegle said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...


Well..I hope that's from your POS Ar-15. Cause my ole .308 can do a bit better, I think. I suppose you can pull the trigger faster on an AR..or you might have more rounds....but i maintain that one shot on target beats 'spray and pray' hands down. Then again..never really thought about spraying a crowd of innocents..at any range.


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 29, 2019)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> EvilEyeFleegle said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...


Is that a pic from freakin' Lawrence of Arabia! Brand new account? Hmmmm.


----------



## Flash (Jul 29, 2019)

Another failure of Liberal gun policies.

The firearm he used was illegal in Commie California.  Didn't do jackshit to stop someone using it in a crime, did it?

He bought the firearm from a licensed gun dealer in Nevada on July 9th.  He passed a background check to get the gun.  Another failure.  Background checks don't ever work to prevent crime.  Just another stupid Libtard fantasy.  .

Commie California's strict gun laws against concealed carry prevented the people at the gathering from protecting themselves from somebody that would do them harm.

*Failed, failed, failed!*


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 29, 2019)

OldLady said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...


It was an AK bought in Vegas


----------



## Dragonlady (Jul 29, 2019)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> covfefe said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



He doesn't hate whites.  He's a white supremacist.  Just another angry white boy with an AK47.


----------



## Vandalshandle (Jul 29, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> Vandalshandle said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...



We have an agent hiding under your bed. As soon as you fall asleep...………….


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 29, 2019)

OldLady said:


> EvilEyeFleegle said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...


You seem to have ignored a few things he self-identified as an Italian Iranian, and hated whites and it sounds like he was a tree hugger. Iran's dear leader is a holocaust denier. anarchist history revisionist all sound like leftiest to me.
Here the portion you left out
Legan also posted about a fringe white supremacist book written in 1890. Noted indivualist anarchist, revisionist historian and Holocaust denier James J. Martin called, the book, “


----------



## Vandalshandle (Jul 29, 2019)

BasicHumanUnit said:


> Vandalshandle said:
> 
> 
> > BasicHumanUnit said:
> ...



A million? How about 5?


----------



## Flash (Jul 29, 2019)

Looks like Santino was an angry ANTIFA type.   Trump is right, ANTIFA is a terrorist organization.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 29, 2019)

Dragonlady said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > covfefe said:
> ...


Why would he say silicon valley white twats?


----------



## mudwhistle (Jul 29, 2019)

OldLady said:


> mudwhistle said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


The guy was a federal agent. Didn't you know that? Shooter in bloody Vegas gun massacre was longtime federal agent


----------



## Vandalshandle (Jul 29, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > Defiant1 said:
> ...



100% of the mass killers used to be perfectly innocent.


----------



## danielpalos (Jul 29, 2019)

BasicHumanUnit said:


> Liberals just can't seem to control themselves.....
> Yesterday in Baltimore, today SanFrancisco.....they own what? 95% of all "gun violence" in their Utopias?
> 
> They embrace tons of legislation making it next to impossible for good people to protect themselves and their families.....while giving criminals the edge.   Is it any wonder their "Gun Free" zones are the most dangerous places inthe nation?
> ...


We have a Second Amendment, why do we have security problems in our free States?


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 29, 2019)

Dragonlady said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > covfefe said:
> ...


A little early to make assumptions re. ideology. In any event, except for the poo flinging here and elsewhere...ideology seldom motivates these people..mental illness and extreme alienation play larger roles, IMO.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 29, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > EvilEyeFleegle said:
> ...


It was his Instagram page maybe if you viewed it you would have read this
Legan also shared a third photo of his maternal grandfather, Ali Ashgar Vahabzdaeh,


----------



## Flash (Jul 29, 2019)

From the police conference it looks like the firearm was a SKS.  A rifle with a ten round fixed magazine.  However, you can remove the fixed magazine and use detachable 30 round "duckbill" magazines.  

SKSs are usually reliable weapons but reports from the eyewitness are that the police were able to neutralize him when his gun failed. 

Those cheap after market magazines that can fail are sold by companies like TAPCO.  Lesson: don't ever TAPCO fuck your SKS.


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 29, 2019)

BTW, Kudos to the Gilroy LEA..facing a gun that could cut right through their vests..they killed the suspect within a minute or two of his opening fire with a head shot. A cool and deliberate action under fire that should be recognized for what it was. Heroic.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 29, 2019)

Flash said:


> From the police conference it looks like the firearm was a SKS.  A rifle with a ten round fixed magazine.  However, you can remove the fixed magazine and use detachable 30 round "duckbill" magazines.
> 
> SKSs are usually reliable weapons but reports from the eyewitness are that the police were able to neutralize him when his gun failed.
> 
> Those cheap after market magazines that can fail are sold by companies like TAPCO.  Lesson: don't ever TAPCO fuck your SKS.


Tapco SKS magazines ARE 20 ROUNDS


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 29, 2019)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> EvilEyeFleegle said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...


I find none of this all that defining..people are just taking whatever snippets they can find and using them to justify their lil agendas. Total froth...and insignificant to me.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 29, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > EvilEyeFleegle said:
> ...


You asked about the pic on his Instagram page it was of his grandfather


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 29, 2019)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Dragonlady said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...


You critique dragonlady for leaving out parts and then you do the exact same thing... what’s up with that?!

The full line was... “why overcrowd towns and pave more open space to make room for hordes of *mestizos* and Silicon Valley white twats.” 

That means mixed race hispanic incase you didn’t know


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 29, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Dragonlady said:
> ...


No I asked her if he didn't hate whites why did he say silicon valley white twats?
Wouldn't he also be mixed race?


----------



## Weatherman2020 (Jul 29, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > Weatherman2020 said:
> ...




 

I’ll wait here for your apology.


----------



## Weatherman2020 (Jul 29, 2019)

Dragonlady said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > covfefe said:
> ...


An Iran who hates whites is a white supremacy freak!?

You Leftards are a constant BS lie.


----------



## Dragonlady (Jul 29, 2019)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Dragonlady said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



Have you ever met a bunch of tech nerds?  They give new meaning to the words "entitled jerks".  They don't think they're smarter than everybody else, they KNOW it.


----------



## OldLady (Jul 29, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > Defiant1 said:
> ...





Blues Man said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


You are looking at this all wrong.  As I read it, and many others do as well, the Second Amendment is for keeping the citizenry ready to call up in case of attack.  They did not have a standing army and the Founding Fathers did not want one.  Even before the Revolutionary War, the local militias were called up to train on a regular basis.  All adult males except the very oldest were required to participate and they needed to bring their own weapon.

We now have the largest standing army in the world.  The Second Amendment no longer applies.   Since it keeps standing in the way of getting rid of the majority of guns in this country, I say ditch it.


----------



## Flash (Jul 29, 2019)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Flash said:
> 
> 
> > From the police conference it looks like the firearm was a SKS.  A rifle with a ten round fixed magazine.  However, you can remove the fixed magazine and use detachable 30 round "duckbill" magazines.
> ...




I don't know what they are selling nowadays but a few years ago you could get both 20 and 30 rounders.  The 20 rounders are more reliable.  Back when I had a SKS I could never get the 30 round mags to feed properly.  They would be OK until it got down to the last 3 or 4 rounds and then it would misfeed because the spring wasn't strong enough.  That is probably what happen to him. 

The better alternative is get a Chinese military 20 rd fixed magazine to replace the standard 10 round.  Of course you would have to refill it using stripper clips.

Better yet get a Type D SKS that uses AK magazines.


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 29, 2019)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...


You were trying to say that he was a white hating leftist. Hating Mestizos doesn’t really fall into that category does it. I know why you left it out but it was just ironic that you did it right after critiquing somebody else for not being complete


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 29, 2019)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> EvilEyeFleegle said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...


Ahh...OK..got to say though..he sure looks white. Thanks for the clarification.


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 29, 2019)

Weatherman2020 said:


> EvilEyeFleegle said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...


And he hated Mestizos apparently. Why did you leave that out?


----------



## OldLady (Jul 29, 2019)

Weatherman2020 said:


> EvilEyeFleegle said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...


What he's insulting are what you folks call California libtards.


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 29, 2019)

Weatherman2020 said:


> EvilEyeFleegle said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...


Mestizos are white/ Who knew?


----------



## August West (Jul 29, 2019)

pismoe said:


> is this what you are always looking for VShandel .  ---   diane feinstein on taking all guns - Bing video  ---


The topic was assault weapons, not all guns and that`s why the video starts in the middle of the conversation. You boys are easily played. Every time you watch that video do you send a check to Nation`s Real Assholes? They know how to get the attention of fools that are easily separated from their money.


----------



## OldLady (Jul 29, 2019)

Flash said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Flash said:
> ...


Thanks for improving the chances of the next mass shooter.  Hope he reads your posts.


----------



## Marion Morrison (Jul 29, 2019)

RealDave said:


> satrebil said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...



They're both an SKS, dumbass.


----------



## Dick Foster (Jul 29, 2019)

OldLady said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...



If anything its needed even more today. Its purpose is so the government fears the people instead of the people fearing their government. Note the first or second thing any despot does is disarm the populace either before or immediately following eliminating their right to free speech. Hitler did it as did Stalin and all the others right down throughout recorded history.


----------



## ph3iron (Jul 29, 2019)

skye said:


> Police responded to the festival grounds around 5:30PM. Around 11 people were reportedly shot. One of them has died.
> 
> Never knew there was a garlic festival, prayers go to the victims.
> 
> ...


Can't trust these Muslims.
Whoops, he was a white boy?


----------



## ph3iron (Jul 29, 2019)

Marion Morrison said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > satrebil said:
> ...


Ah our john, Love your draft dodgers don't you?


----------



## Flash (Jul 29, 2019)

OldLady said:


> Flash said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...




Anybody that brings a  SKS to a mass shooting is pretty much a dumbass to start with.  There are many better weapons to use.  Kinda of like that idiot in LV that used bump stocks for rapid fire.  His guns jammed.

However, you have an excellent point.  That Trump Derangement Syndrome is a serious mental illness. All of you Moon Bats that post on here suffer from it so no telling what crazy shit you will do, especially when Trump will win in 2020.  Maybe it isn't a good idea to give gun advice.


----------



## ph3iron (Jul 29, 2019)

skye said:


> California has banned guns, right? but...this sort of tragedy still happens over there!
> 
> Perhaps a good guy  should have carried a gun  to defend himself and others,and the outcome would have been different.


That's all we need hundreds of rubes blasting away.
The cops killed him in 1 min?


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 29, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> > EvilEyeFleegle said:
> ...


Mestizos are mixed race hispanics. Mulattos are mixed race blacks


----------



## ph3iron (Jul 29, 2019)

Flash said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > Flash said:
> ...


You do know the derangement syndrome is an old term stolen by the con cult?
Guess not, stupid insults, foul mouth, dead giveaway for zero college


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Jul 29, 2019)

skye said:


> California has banned guns, right? but...this sort of tragedy still happens over there!
> 
> Perhaps a good guy  should have carried a gun  to defend himself and others,and the outcome would have been different.



well if they have banned guns then expect the rest of all the other states to follow. california was the first state to ban indoor smoking and then all the other states followed,expect the same thing again,how anybody can stll say all these years later this is a free country or a government of the people is beyond me.


----------



## Flash (Jul 29, 2019)

ph3iron said:


> Flash said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...




TDS is a serious mental illness that all the stupid Moon Bats have been afflicted with.  We need to find a cure before the idiots go more crazy than they already are.

I am normally against any kind of gun control but I would be willing to consider not allowing any Moon Bats with the TDS affliction from possession a firearm.  Just too dangerous for society given their mental instability.


----------



## 22lcidw (Jul 29, 2019)

OldLady said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...


The constitution was written as our nation as a Republic. With its flaws we were given written documents that promoted freedom. And there were azzes who suberted it even back then. They wrote checks and balances to give us time to think before doing things like we have done. The federal Senate, the federal Income Tax and the Federal Reserve are three checks and balances that were added to the document and removed from the Republic by amendment and/or law. We then became a Democracy. Do you ever listen to the media and politicians? How many spout Republic? We have been a democracy that has grown in strength and shot up like a rocket in the last fifty years for over a century. The Republic is in tatters with the EC the only thing left that is to the front of us all left to keep us from totalitarian government. Although that is happening anyway. Ask the people who are not allowed to spout their 1st amendment rights today how they feel about the 2nd amendment.


----------



## Marion Morrison (Jul 29, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> covfefe said:
> 
> 
> > Shooter confirmed to be right wing nutjob Trump supporter who quoted white supremacist nonsense in his instagram account.
> ...





Flash said:


> ph3iron said:
> 
> 
> > Flash said:
> ...



It's a real thing and many are experiencing a break from reality.

I have to wonder if it will come out this guy was on psyche drugs.


----------



## ph3iron (Jul 29, 2019)

Marion Morrison said:


> NotYourBody said:
> 
> 
> > covfefe said:
> ...


Amusing how Muslims are terrorists and white supremes are ill


----------



## Marion Morrison (Jul 29, 2019)

Being the kid identified as Iranian, allah snackbar isn't too far off.


----------



## Marion Morrison (Jul 29, 2019)

ph3iron said:


> Marion Morrison said:
> 
> 
> > NotYourBody said:
> ...



He came from Muslims, dumbass.

"Legan also shared a third photo of his maternal grandfather, Ali Ashgar Vahabzdaeh, with a note about him anglicizing his name to Ali Baylor from his original Iranian name." 
Santino William Legan: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know | Heavy.com


----------



## ph3iron (Jul 29, 2019)

Marion Morrison said:


> ph3iron said:
> 
> 
> > Marion Morrison said:
> ...


I thought he was a white boy.
Nice insult.
Can't you post w/o one?
wV debate rules?


----------



## Flash (Jul 29, 2019)

OldLady said:


> [Q
> 
> Are they as easy to spray fire into a crowd of garlic festival goers?  AR 15 is a copy of a weapon developed for WAR.  It is designed to kill as quickly and easily as possible.



You are confused.

I have 29 AR-15s.

They are not designed to kill quickly and easily.

They are designed to provide recreational activities, protection for my family and are  "necessary for the security of a free state".

How many do you have and what do you use them for?


----------



## Marion Morrison (Jul 29, 2019)

ph3iron said:


> Marion Morrison said:
> 
> 
> > ph3iron said:
> ...



When it comes to you, probably not. Can you ever back any of your assertions up with facts? No?

STFU then, dumbass.


----------



## Flash (Jul 29, 2019)

Since the shooter was Iranian-Italian, any idea if he was Muslim or Catholic?


----------



## NotYourBody (Jul 29, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> A little early to make assumptions re. ideology. In any event, except for the poo flinging here and elsewhere...ideology seldom motivates these people..mental illness and extreme alienation play larger roles, IMO.


That's why it's really a bad idea to dog whistle these people.

I expect one to go in and shoot up Baltimore next. You know, to rid the city of the vermin. You can probably take out a lot of illegal and wrong colored vermins with an assault weapon.


----------



## NotYourBody (Jul 29, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> NotYourBody said:
> 
> 
> > Issa said:
> ...


Don't you suppose those black market gun dealers also bought their guns in Indiana?


----------



## danielpalos (Jul 29, 2019)

Flash said:


> Since the shooter was Iranian-Italian, any idea if he was Muslim or Catholic?


he should have watched the Italian pole vaulter to get in a better mood.


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 29, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > NotYourBody said:
> ...



They could have received the guns from anywhere, not just Gary Indiana.   They may have received them from black radical groups, the Mafia, crooked police officers, guys sneaking into factories or army bases.

Maybe I'll ask one of those guys the next time I see them, although I doubt if I'd get a straight answer.  They don't want me moving in on their racket by going to the same place


----------



## Flash (Jul 29, 2019)

danielpalos said:


> Flash said:
> 
> 
> > Since the shooter was Iranian-Italian, any idea if he was Muslim or Catholic?
> ...




I usually don't agree with you because you are a TDS afflicted Moon Bat.  However, in this case I think you have it right.


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 29, 2019)

Flash said:


> Since the shooter was Iranian-Italian, any idea if he was Muslim or Catholic?



Rome, Italy has the largest islamonazi mosque in the Western World.


----------



## danielpalos (Jul 29, 2019)

Flash said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > Flash said:
> ...


Think Positive!


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 29, 2019)

LA RAM FAN said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> > California has banned guns, right? but...this sort of tragedy still happens over there!
> ...


How are we not a government of the people? Don’t the people elect the lawmakers?


----------



## Flash (Jul 29, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> LA RAM FAN said:
> 
> 
> > skye said:
> ...




Good thing we have a Bill of Rights to protect us from government oppression.  However, somebody forgot to tell the assholes in California.


----------



## NotYourBody (Jul 29, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> NotYourBody said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...



But they don't make guns in Chicago. 

Maybe they are bringing them in from this place

GAT Guns

In any case they came in there from somewhere. You'd have to have far stricter gun laws to have any effect. Something like Australia I suppose.

Honestly I don't think there is an icicles chance in hell of getting any kind of gun reform passed in this country. Not willingly. MAGAs are way too afraid to be without a gun. I don't think they are able to protect themselves without guns. Anxiety can do that to a person.

The only chance might be an executive action from the next Democrat president. The Supreme Court seems okay with these executive actions.


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 29, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> Honestly I don't think there is an icicles chance in hell of getting any kind of gun reform passed in this country. Not willingly. MAGAs are way too afraid to be without a gun. I don't think they are able to protect themselves without guns. Anxiety can do that to a person.
> 
> The only chance might be an executive action from the next Democrat president. The Supreme Court seems okay with these executive actions.




I don't think an executive order to confiscate the people's firearms would be very popular.  Further, no Democrat President has a plan to disarm Criminal Gangs and Terror Cells in this country, such an executive order would leave the people defenseless- the carnage would be horrific.

I'm old, a seasoned citizen.   Its becoming harder and harder for me to defend myself against the young toughs, without a weapon.

What's the Democrat Plan on this?   For Old people to just stay at home and die quickly?


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 29, 2019)

Flash said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > LA RAM FAN said:
> ...


How so? Because they have gun laws?


----------



## bodecea (Jul 29, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> August West said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...


Don't have an abortion then....you've never had one, have you?


----------



## bodecea (Jul 29, 2019)

Weatherman2020 said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...


Just like a religion has never come up and killed anyone...and yet.........


----------



## bodecea (Jul 29, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > satrebil said:
> ...


Oh look....a personal threat....


----------



## bodecea (Jul 29, 2019)

Weatherman2020 said:


> Shooter was an Iranian who hated white people.
> 
> Santino William Legan: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know | Heavy.com


Was reading neo- Nazi crap....an INCEL....gonna get real quiet on the CRC front now.


----------



## Hugo Furst (Jul 29, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > NotYourBody said:
> ...





NotYourBody said:


> Maybe they are bringing them in from this place
> 
> GAT Guns



Unlikely.

They require background checks




NotYourBody said:


> The only chance might be an executive action from the next Democrat president.



also unlikely.

Even Bernie would know better than to try that


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 29, 2019)

bodecea said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> > Shooter was an Iranian who hated white people.
> ...




What makes you think that Legan was an "INCEL"?

He could have been a gay she-male, and that's probably more likely since he was in California where that is now considered to be normative.


----------



## bodecea (Jul 29, 2019)

OldLady said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> > Shooter was an Iranian who hated white people.
> ...


Of course he is...for those who pay attention, that's a given.


----------



## bodecea (Jul 29, 2019)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > EvilEyeFleegle said:
> ...


So. We're back to Italians and Iranians not being white.......again?


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 29, 2019)

bodecea said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...






Iranians are definitely considered to be "non white" .   Although I wouldn't tell a goomba that you didn't think Italians are white, unless you are looking for a fight.


----------



## covfefe (Jul 29, 2019)

Marion Morrison said:


> ph3iron said:
> 
> 
> > Marion Morrison said:
> ...



Is your google broken or are you too stupid to know how to use it?


----------



## covfefe (Jul 29, 2019)

Flash said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > [Q
> ...



29 AR15s huh?

Will you be signing autographs?


----------



## Vandalshandle (Jul 29, 2019)

So, as is always the case, the random shooter was another angry RW nut, with rants reflecting that on Instagram.


----------



## Papageorgio (Jul 29, 2019)

LA RAM FAN said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> > California has banned guns, right? but...this sort of tragedy still happens over there!
> ...



Minnesota banned smoking in most but not all buildings in 1975.


----------



## Flash (Jul 29, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> Flash said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...




That would be oppressive gun laws against the Bill of Rights.

Too bad the Supremes are too chickenshit to apply the same strict scrutiny to the Constitutional right to keep and bear arms the same as they apply to other Constitutional rights.  Kinds of makes the BORs a joke, doesn't it?

What good does it have a Constitutional right that says that "the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" when commie states like California can infringe the shit out of the right?


----------



## Flash (Jul 29, 2019)

covfefe said:


> Flash said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...




Those are just rookie numbers.


----------



## Vandalshandle (Jul 29, 2019)

I wonder how many illegal immigrants out of the 12 to 30 million that Trumpsters estimate are out there, have been involved in mass random shootings? I suspect that it is the same number of terrorists that came from the countries from which Trump banned immigration.


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 29, 2019)

Flash said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > Flash said:
> ...


Well let me ask... do you think that a person should have the right to walk into a store, buy a machine gun as easy as buying a coke, then go watch a high school football game with it sitting on his lap? Is that something that you’d find acceptable in the society you live in?


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 29, 2019)

bodecea said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...


No Iranian being Moslem, Moslem being haters of women 
There are so many ways you could go with this idiot the book he took the quote from "According to the book Modern Satanism: Anatomy of a Subculture, Might Is Right by Ragnar Redbeard" 
Satanism Moslem Anarchist women are subjects of men
None of that fits any right-wing person you know. be honest for once.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 29, 2019)

Vandalshandle said:


> I wonder how many illegal immigrants out of the 12 to 30 million that Trumpsters estimate are out there, have been involved in mass random shootings? I suspect that it is the same number of terrorists that came from the countries from which Trump banned immigration.


plenty of gang members out mass killing


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 29, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> Flash said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


What is your qualitative experience on the use of deadly force? What gives you the ability to have an opinion on what an individual needs to prevail in a fight for their life?


----------



## Manonthestreet (Jul 29, 2019)

bodecea said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> > Shooter was an Iranian who hated white people.
> ...


Satanist also.....


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 29, 2019)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...


Well how could it? Right wing stands for all that is good virtuous and true while Left wing stands for all that is evil malicious and false... right?


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 29, 2019)

bodecea said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> > Shooter was an Iranian who hated white people.
> ...


From PBS
*Iranian Identity, the 'Aryan Race,' and Jake Gyllenhaal*
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/tehranbureau/2010/08/post-2.
This was the context in which Iranian intellectuals heard, or rather read in Orientalist literature, that Iranians were members of that same superior race as Europeans. Aryanism was for them manna from heaven. It suddenly -- and, it should be added, unexpectedly -- provided them an attractive means to consolidate their fanciful theories. It is fascinating how deeply compatible Aryanism was with the emerging nationalist discourse: the opposition between Iranian and Arab fit squarely into the Aryan vs. Semite paradigm. It also came from Europe. How could the celebrated, emulated Europeans be wrong? Iranians' pride, seriously wounded by the encounter with Europe, could be assuaged with the conviction that they shared in the Europeans' racial superiority. No surprise that they adhered so tightly to the myth of the Aryan race.

FYI Hitler had Moslems in his ranks.


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 29, 2019)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > Flash said:
> ...


Are you asking if I’ve ever been in a situation where I’ve had to fight for my life? The answer is no. My experience simply comes from living my life. And I’m not telling anybody what they need or don’t need to prevail in a fight. My hope would be that we learn skills to avoid and diffuse fights so that they don’t happen.

How come you didn’t answer my question? Not very nice manners to answers questions with questions.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 29, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...


All I can say is that no one on the right stands for what he stood for.


----------



## Dan Stubbs (Jul 29, 2019)

skye said:


> Police responded to the festival grounds around 5:30PM. Around 11 people were reportedly shot. One of them has died.
> 
> Never knew there was a garlic festival, prayers go to the victims.
> Three shot not 11.  get it right.
> ...


----------



## Flash (Jul 29, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> Flash said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...




Absolutely!  

The right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.  What part of that don't you understand?

The crime should never be the possession of the firearm but the crime done with the fire arm.

If that person bought the machine gun why shouldn't he be allowed to take it to the football game if he doesn't commit a crime with it?  After all the Bill of Rights says very clearly that the right to keep and bear shall not be infringed.  When I was younger we use to take guns to school frequently.

I sure as hell don't want to allow asshole Libtards taking away my Constitutional right under the stupid idea of "reasonable gun control" because we all know the shitheads are never reasonable.

If you are confused about what the asshole Liberals call "reasonable" I can give you several example of how bat shit crazy they are.  In fact I think I have before in other threads but like all uneducated low information Moon Bats you failed to grasp the meaning of oppressive.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 29, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


Well, I am asking you what your training is. because you didn't ask me the question 
I could care less what a person carries if that is what they are capable of using


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 29, 2019)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...


So what? He was obviously very troubled. Why the rush to point fingers and put him on the Left or Right team? What do you think that proves?


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 29, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


Guess you haven't noticed but the left quickly jumps on the blame train


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 29, 2019)

Flash said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > Flash said:
> ...


Yeah it used to be like that back in the Wild West, but people wanting a safer and more civilized society decided to make rules. I’m sorry you are falling on the wrong side of history. That must be frustrating


----------



## rightwinger (Jul 29, 2019)

satrebil said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...


Both are effective in slaughtering first graders


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 29, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> Flash said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...



Fair enough, you want "safety".


What's your plan to provide safety to the tens of millions of Senior Citizens who aren't skilled in the martial arts and hand to hand combat when they are dealing with young thugs on the street who might well have firearms?


It seems to me that all the libs want the old timers to do is to Die Quickly.


----------



## rightwinger (Jul 29, 2019)

The Original Tree said:


> *I have three guesses:
> 
> 1.) ANTIFA
> 2.) Islamic Terrorism
> ...


The kid wears a MAGA hat


----------



## RealDave (Jul 29, 2019)

Flash said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > Flash said:
> ...


  The USSC has said the Second Amendment does not mean no regulation.


----------



## RealDave (Jul 29, 2019)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...


   Another mass killing by a white supremacist.  You must be disappointed.  You were hoping for a Hispanic or better yet an illegal Hispanic


----------



## Flash (Jul 29, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> Flash said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...




I carry a weapon many times. I have 50 firearms.  I use them for legal purposes  It is not the wild west.  I will use it to defend myself or my family if I have to.

Just because you are a little chcikenshit afraid to provide protection don't mean we all are.

Your idea of making things safer will only disarm the people that don't use guns for crimes.  It will do nothing to stop the criminals.

We saw that with the shooting in California yesterday, didn't we?  The kid broke all kinds of laws.  The laws didn't protect the people that were shot but it sure as hell kept them from being able to defend themselves against somebody that would disobey the law and do them harm.

Gun control laws are useless to stop crime with a firearm.  Just look at the massive shootings in places like Chicago that has the strictest gun control laws in the country.  Much more dangerous than places like Montana with high legal gun ownership and few gun control laws.  Gun don't commit crimes.  Assholes commit crimes.


----------



## RealDave (Jul 29, 2019)

Flash said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > Flash said:
> ...



Sorry, but Trump voters are more likely uneducated white people.

For example, you think the Second Amendment means get can own any weapon & carry it where ever you want.


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 29, 2019)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...


I see wingnuts on both sides doing it nonstop. Just look at this thread. The shooter was a MS-13 Mexican gangster before the report came out that it was a white dude. And then the California liberal slanders came out yada yada yada. People need to grow up


----------



## rightwinger (Jul 29, 2019)

RealDave said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


Trump says some of the white supremacists are good people


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 29, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > Flash said:
> ...


Are old timers getting shot in the street? I must have missed that memo.


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 29, 2019)

Flash said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > Flash said:
> ...


The festival didn’t allow guns and the shooter was shot in the head by polices minute or two  after he started shooting. California laws had nothing to do with it. 

And I own 11 guns so I don’t know what all this disarm accusations are all about.


----------



## RealDave (Jul 29, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > miketx said:
> ...



So assault type rifles in the hands on non-law enforcement personnel saved 94,0000 lives?  I doubt that.


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 29, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...




Its just not old timers getting shot, but also knifed, cut, burnt, punched, etc.  Oldtimers are often not able to defend themselves.  Rosa Parks was 81 when she got beat and robbed.

I'm sure she wishes she had a "little friend"


----------



## g5000 (Jul 29, 2019)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 29, 2019)

RealDave said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...




Firearms in general save 2 million lives a year in America, minimum.  Criminals aren't interested in a fair fight and will most often split when looking down a barrel of  a firearm


----------



## RealDave (Jul 29, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > satrebil said:
> ...



You planning on attacking me?


----------



## g5000 (Jul 29, 2019)

bodecea said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...



I think it would be awesome poetic justice if we labeled this white supremacist piece of shit as not being white.

Message to all the other white supremacists: If you kill people, we will decide to make you go down in history as a darkie Muslim.


----------



## RealDave (Jul 29, 2019)

Weatherman2020 said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...


  No nuclear weapon walked into the United States & exploded so why not let Iran have them.


----------



## g5000 (Jul 29, 2019)

bodecea said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...


On  more serious note, you have to wonder why it is so important to the pseudocons that the shooter not be identified as a white supremacist.

Things that make you go hmmmmm...

"That puts that wonderful boy a little too close to home!"


----------



## g5000 (Jul 29, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > skye said:
> ...


Actually, in OECD nations other than ours, this kind of thing happens far, far, far less.  Precisely because of their gun laws.


----------



## justinacolmena (Jul 29, 2019)

Gilroy Garlic Festival gunman referred to 'Might is Right' manifesto before shooting

There was reference to a manifesto entitled _Might is Right_. Manifestos are interesting to me. There is always a certain way of thinking that offends some opposing party so much that they want to ban it, and silence any discussion of the issues that are raised in it. (Of course at the same time, they freely distribute other questionable literature such as the Communist Manifesto.)

When I was a schoolchild, many of my classmates spoke in hushed tones of the ideology of _Might is Right_.

The arguments raised are very subtle, and it is difficult at first thought to form a good logical objection to them in the framework in which they were put forth.

At the same time the framework is subtly altered to a "present" and "actual" time / place / situation with the goal of establishing a political supremacy for a master race, and that is a world that I had to step out of for my own safety and well-being.


----------



## IM2 (Jul 29, 2019)

Where is snouter and the rest of the gay incels when this happens?

Police ID Gilroy Garlic Festival shooter as Santino William Legan; victims include 2 children






The man believed to have opened fire at the Gilroy Garlic Festival on Sunday, killing 3 and wounding 12, was identified by police as Santino William Legan, 19, of Gilroy.

Three officers who were patrolling the park fatally shot Legan on Sunday after the 19-year-old started firing at crowds gathered at the popular food festival in Santa Clara County. A 6-year-old boy, identified by family members as Steven Romero of San Jose, a 13-year-old girl and a man in his 20s were killed, said Gilroy Police Chief Scot Smithee.

The officers began shooting at the gunman in less than a minute, he said, "despite the fact that they were outgunned, with their handguns, against a rifle."

Police ID Gilroy Garlic Festival shooting suspect as Santino William Legan; victims include 2 children

"We had thousands of people there in a very small area," Smithee said, his eyes tearing up. "It could have gotten so much worse, so fast. I'm really proud that they got there as quickly as they did. There absolutely would have been more bloodshed."


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 29, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...


Rosa parks?! Ok buddy


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 29, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...




Did you miss that story about Ms. Parks?

Beat and robbed as an old timer, and no , she wasn't armed.

I always liked the story of Rosa Parks, as she fought against an unjust law,she served as an inspiration for Lt. Oliver North, who also disobeyed the unjust Boland Amendment


----------



## Sunni Man (Jul 29, 2019)

And??   ....


----------



## westwall (Jul 29, 2019)

rightwinger said:


> satrebil said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...








Progressive government power, like what you want, has murdered over 100,000,000 people in the last 100 years.

YOUR political ideology is the most violent, vile, and murderous philosophy ever created.  Our Founding Fathers wrote the 2nd Amendment so that we would be able to keep murderous swine,  like you, from committing your crimes.


----------



## harmonica (Jul 29, 2019)

yes---and?


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 29, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...


If Rosa parks was alive today tod you think she would still get beaten to death walking down the street, If she wanted to carry a gun for fear of her life do you think she would not be able to?


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 29, 2019)

RealDave said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


White supremacist /Antifa what different does it make?leftist have no problem defending Antifa you will not find right wingers defending White supremacist


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 29, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...




Depends on where she was living at.

In a lot of Liberal Hell Holes like Chicago, I doubt she would be armed


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 29, 2019)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...




Your right there, both groups seem to be on the payroll of CNN


----------



## miketx (Jul 29, 2019)

RealDave said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...


Any facts are like a cross to a vampire to you.


----------



## Rambunctious (Jul 29, 2019)

Yep.....and?......


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 29, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...


you caught me in mid post 
leftist have no problem defending Antifa you will not find right wingers defending White supremacist


----------



## deannalw (Jul 29, 2019)

Well...  and?


----------



## RealDave (Jul 29, 2019)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...


  Where the fuck have you been?

Antifa is a right wing excuse you use to counter your buddies the White Supremacists.  And yes you do support them.  If not, show me where any of you have posted against them because wed have plenty posting on USMB.


----------



## miketx (Jul 29, 2019)

RealDave said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...


Stop lying. They are all leftist garbage. As vile as you are, you could be their leader.


----------



## RealDave (Jul 29, 2019)

westwall said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > satrebil said:
> ...



So lets arm crazy people & allow them to roan the streets.


----------



## miketx (Jul 29, 2019)

RealDave said:


> miketx said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...


That's a good thing because you have never presented any. Only what you want to believe from the corrupt media.

Tell us all exactly how more or any gun control will stop criminals.
Tell us how disarming the law-abiding will stop criminals.
Tell us exactly what acts of racism Trump has done. 
Be specific.


----------



## miketx (Jul 29, 2019)

RealDave said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...


Great idea, but you are too late. That's what democrats have been doing for years and look what it's gotten us.


----------



## RealDave (Jul 29, 2019)

I am reminded of the evil fucker Wyatt Earp who took away the guns to tame Dodge City.


----------



## miketx (Jul 29, 2019)

RealDave said:


> I am reminded of the evil fucker Wyatt Earp who took away the guns to tame Dodge City.


You're hero?


----------



## XponentialChaos (Jul 29, 2019)

Thoughts and prayers.

See you guys in two weeks for the next mass shooting.


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 29, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...


I guess it’s a good thing nobody is forcing you to live there then


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 29, 2019)

g5000 said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...


Nope..because of their culture. Their laws are a reflection of their culture. Just as our laws..or the lack thereof..are a reflection of our culture--as is the propensity for violent solutions. As we men learn very early...a punch is often the best response..and anger is a great default emotion. 

It is no mistake that violence is more abhorred in countries such as England...and sex not as big a deal. 'Bloody' is pejorative there..but not here, eh? 

Anyway..my point is simple..the laws will never change..until and unless the culture does. I'm not seeing that happening for a very long time. 

The one thing that unites us as a people and a culture is our love of violence as a solution. Individuals may decry it...politicians may whine..and party faithful rush to their pre-prepared positions--it does not really matter..because it's all just a show...Kabuki theater meant to soothe our sensibilities, while nothing changes. Period.


----------



## JoeMoma (Jul 29, 2019)

I love the sound of crickets.


----------



## bodecea (Jul 29, 2019)

westwall said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > satrebil said:
> ...


Get a grip, Spanky......  This just another garden variety right-wing INCEL shooting...ssdd.


----------



## westwall (Jul 29, 2019)

RealDave said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...







Antifart is leftwing.   Always have been since they were founded by Stalin.


----------



## westwall (Jul 29, 2019)

bodecea said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...







I have a great grip.  It's a shame you don't.   Cupcake.


----------



## ABikerSailor (Jul 29, 2019)

Anyone surprised that this idiot was a white supremacist?

What we know about California festival shooter Santino William Legan

*Legan posted two photos on Instagram not long before the attack.

One photo depicted Smokey the Bear in front of a "fire danger" sign, with a caption that said to read the 19th century book "Might is Right," a work that claims race determines behavior and is popular among white nationalists and far-right extremist groups.

Legan's since-deleted Instagram account says he is Italian and Iranian. Minutes before the shooting, he had posted a photo from the festival saying, "Ayyy garlic festival time" and "come get wasted on overpriced (stuff)."*


----------



## westwall (Jul 29, 2019)

RealDave said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...







No, we identify the crazy people,  give them their due process,  then place them where they can't hurt people.


----------



## westwall (Jul 29, 2019)

bodecea said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...








Incel is neither left nor right, though you're not honest enough to admit that.   Incel seems to be a result of the emasculation of boys by progressive polices though.


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 29, 2019)

westwall said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > satrebil said:
> ...


Our Founders were the Progressives of their times, for the most part. The Tories were the conservatives. As for why the 2nd was written...most folks agree it was a valid attempt to empower the people..and save the Govt. the expense of funding a standing army. As most of us know..the 2nd really is a militia amendment. I agree with the right to bear arms...as I agree with the right of Govt. to regulate said possession for the public weal. As it so happen, the Supreme Court agrees.

It's all moot, for the most part..but do go on about what a group of White men 250 years ago intended for our times.

Progressive--Regressive---all the same tired shyte used to manipulate the masses. FYI..masses..that's you I'm talking about. Along with all the knee-jerk hacks on both sides...who are used with such success to maintain the stranglehold that our masters have on our lives.


----------



## westwall (Jul 29, 2019)

ABikerSailor said:


> Anyone surprised that this idiot was a white supremacist?
> 
> What we know about California festival shooter Santino William Legan
> 
> ...







Overpriced stuff sounds like a socialist cry baby to me.


----------



## westwall (Jul 29, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...








No, they were the liberals.  LIBERTY from government.   Do some research before you make a fool of yourself again.  

Progressive polices are STATIST.  The opposite of liberal.


----------



## ABikerSailor (Jul 29, 2019)

westwall said:


> ABikerSailor said:
> 
> 
> > Anyone surprised that this idiot was a white supremacist?
> ...



It would help if you had read all of what I posted.  He told people to read the book "Might makes Right", which is a white supremacist book.


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 29, 2019)

westwall said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...


They were founded to fight against Nazi Germany, right?


----------



## Weatherman2020 (Jul 29, 2019)

g5000 said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...





g5000 said:


> On more serious note, you have to wonder why it is so important to the pseudocons that the shooter not be identified as a white supremacist.



You leftists have zero self awareness.


----------



## Leo123 (Jul 29, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...



Every human is capable of unspeakable evilness.  To deny this about oneself is to give oneself permission to create mayhem.


----------



## TheGreatGatsby (Jul 29, 2019)

Thoughts and prayers for victims and family.


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 29, 2019)

westwall said:


> EvilEyeFleegle said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...


***yawn*** You are so glib with your terms..and so butt ignorant with your lack of insight and your knowledge of history. Freedom from govt. you say? Yet their very first acts were to form a govt.--never-mind that most of them would have been happy staying with England until eternity--had England been smart enough to give them seats in Parliament and an American Peerage. One of the oddities of the American Revolution is that unlike so many others..it was a revolt of the Merchants and Landowners--the nascent middle class of the times. The masses were used, abused, and fooled. As soon the the war was over..the ruling elite created things like the Electoral College and the granting of Representative govt. based on slave populations to dilute the power of the masses and concentrate power just where they wanted it.

I note with amusement your inability to actually address what I had to say..and find some nit-picky bs about terms.

Your calling me a fool is a compliment..for if we agreed..I'd have to seriously check my conclusions.


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 29, 2019)

Leo123 said:


> EvilEyeFleegle said:
> 
> 
> > g5000 said:
> ...


It is true..however..it is also true that some are more likely than others to fall into the abyss. The ultimate permission to create hell on earth is victim-hood..for a person who perceives of themselves as a victim uses that as a permission giver. I sure that right until that bullet ended this shooter's life..he felt the victim.


----------



## Olde Europe (Jul 29, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> > Actually, in OECD nations other than ours, this kind of thing happens far, far, far less.  Precisely because of their gun laws.
> ...




Points all very well made.   Still, and I expect to stand corrected, I find your argument is a complete failure.  The main reason for it is, you talk about the U.S. as if folks were all of just one "culture".

When, in fact, recent developments - most notably a dwindling number of gun owners owning an ever increasing number of guns - demonstrate that there are at least two cultures, and that the anti-gun / gun-regulation portion of the population is gaining strength.  The recent struggles of the NRA to fund their operations is yet another bit that should give you pause.

All told, the good old U.S. of A. may catch up to the civilized world, in which Rambo isn't seen as a role model and a conflict solution strategy, and faster than you think.  That misperception is not without reason, since the gun-toting nitwits still carry the biggest megaphones, and the NRA still has a voter mobilization organization to be reckoned with.  Still, the 2nd Amendment is safe, for the time being.  All the while support for reasonable gun regulation is growing.  Who, remember, thought that gay marriage would be a thing 20 years ago?  Next to no one.  And suddenly it happened.  Also, 15 years ago even hinting at gun regulation during a campaign would be seen as lethal.  Today, not so much.

So, what I am trying to say, culture is fluid, more fluid than ever, and the young, after Parkland, are alert and motivated.  Have courage!  The old geezers bitterly clinging to their guns, and boasting about the numbers and sizes of their ersatz penises on these deplorable threads, will soon enough discover the caravan passed by and is disappearing over the horizon toward a future with much reduced gun violence.


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 29, 2019)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...


Why would anybody from the right defend white supremasists? There’s good people on that side right? ;-)


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 29, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> Leo123 said:
> 
> 
> > EvilEyeFleegle said:
> ...


Yep that’s depression for ya. Hopelessness, anger, frustration, victim hood, not giving a shit... of course there are other mental conditions that cause all kinds of emotions. Can’t be sure what’s going on in somebody else’s head.


----------



## Olde Europe (Jul 29, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> The ultimate permission to create hell on earth is victim-hood..for a person who perceives of themselves as a victim uses that as a permission giver.



Yes, yes, yes.  Truer words...  A permission giver, and excuse for, a justification of the most vicious violence - after all, who would begrudge a victim's self-defense?  It's also the most prevalent political tool, waving the victim card, on one's own or, even better vicariously, on behalf of just about anyone even scratched by the forces of "evil".  There is also no better way to dehumanize those who did *this vicious thing* to the victim, and to declare open season on Them.  A victim and his / her (!) bloody shirt are powerful "things".


----------



## 22lcidw (Jul 29, 2019)

ABikerSailor said:


> Anyone surprised that this idiot was a white supremacist?
> 
> What we know about California festival shooter Santino William Legan
> 
> ...


If he was a white supremacist....it was about time! It is so tiresome reading about Prog nutjobs without really reading about them.


----------



## P@triot (Jul 29, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


I’ll answer your question as soon as you answer mine - which was asked first. If the people of Alabama wanted to lynch African-Americans and got the votes to do it, would that be ok with you?


----------



## P@triot (Jul 29, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


I didn’t bring in a “strawman”. I never said “Slade”.  I said “the left” (look above - I’ve even bolded it in blue for you).

I was 100% accurate


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 29, 2019)

P@triot said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...


Apologies, I didn’t mean to ignore your question. No I would not support lynching African Americans in Alabama.


----------



## P@triot (Jul 29, 2019)

Wry Catcher said:


> beautress said:
> 
> 
> > Prayers up for families of those who were killed, and for those who were traumatized and injured in Gilroy today.
> ...


Nope. But had that 6-year old boy not lived in an unconstitutional shit-hole like California, the people with him would have had a gun on them and *prevented* the shooting.

But hey, like all leftists, you prefer ideology over reality. And that’s why people die.


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 29, 2019)

P@triot said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...


Well I’m on the so called “left”, so I’m gonna push back when the generalizations get used in conversations. What’s the point?


----------



## P@triot (Jul 29, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> Apologies, I didn’t mean to ignore your question. No I would not support lynching African Americans in Alabama.


So we can agree that “the people of X want Y” is not a reasonable argument by any measure. So let’s avoid that in the future.

Now, to answer _your_ question, *yes* - I absolutely approve of the constitutional right to walk into a school with a firearm.

What’s funny is that it’s 100% legal to carry firearms in public parks (and I do). So the children are already around the firearms. It’s just that the left doesn’t realize it.


----------



## P@triot (Jul 29, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> Well I’m on the so called “left”, so I’m gonna push back when the generalizations get used in conversations. What’s the point?


The point is that the comment was 100% accurate. The left overwhelmingly believes that voter ID is an obstacle that cannot be overcome.

You are *not* the litmus test for the left. Just because you feel a certain way doesn’t mean the rest on the left feels the same way.


----------



## P@triot (Jul 29, 2019)

rightwinger said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > We would have guns in our society, regardless of what the laws say.
> ...


Unarmed people become victims. Armed people don’t. So simple, only a Dumbocrat could be confused.


----------



## Olde Europe (Jul 29, 2019)

P@triot said:


> Nope. But had that 6-year old boy not lived in an unconstitutional shit-hole like California, the people with him would have had a gun on them and *prevented* the shooting.
> 
> But hey, like all leftists, you prefer ideology over reality. And that’s why people die.



Yeah, nobody knows what's really going on, and upon hearing shots everybody brandishes a gun, and the "good guys with a gun" but without much by way of training are killing each other off, not to mention scores of kids and other bystanders because they couldn't hit a garage door from 20 feet away while hearing shots fired in anger.

You are a first rate know-nothing idiot - the NRA propaganda microwaved your brain into a peanut-sized lump of grease.


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 29, 2019)

P@triot said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > Apologies, I didn’t mean to ignore your question. No I would not support lynching African Americans in Alabama.
> ...


Ok, I appreciate the honesty and direct answers. This is why you are on the right and I am on the left


----------



## Correll (Jul 29, 2019)

Olde Europe said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > Nope. But had that 6-year old boy not lived in an unconstitutional shit-hole like California, the people with him would have had a gun on them and *prevented* the shooting.
> ...





Got any examples of that actually happening?


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 29, 2019)

Olde Europe said:


> EvilEyeFleegle said:
> 
> 
> > g5000 said:
> ...


From your mouth to God's ears!
However..while I do realize that boiling down complex ideas and still maintaining nuance is difficult---we are still a  one culture baseline. Yeah..there are many facets of said culture..but for the vast majority, IMO, the Archetypes are the same. The touchstones of violence run deep in our shared experiences. Will the youth save us? Maybe..or at least ameliorate the problem. One can only hope. cultures take centuries to change..while there is some evidence that mass media and social media may accelerate the process..it's just too soon to tell.

Always fun to read you..thanks.


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 29, 2019)

P@triot said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > Well I’m on the so called “left”, so I’m gonna push back when the generalizations get used in conversations. What’s the point?
> ...


I just don't understand the fight against the “Left”... what’s the point of that? Talk to people and engage with them about their thoughts and ideas. Otherwise I see it as a strawman


----------



## P@triot (Jul 29, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> Luckily, in this country, American is not an 'ethnicity'..no matter how hard some try to make it so.


So person from Italy is Italian, and a person from England is English, but a person from America is *not* American in your mind? Holy shit....


----------



## P@triot (Jul 29, 2019)

Olde Europe said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > Nope. But had that 6-year old boy not lived in an unconstitutional shit-hole like California, the people with him would have had a gun on them and *prevented* the shooting.
> ...


Oh snowflake....there are thousands and thousands and thousands of instances over the last century of law abiding citizens preventing crimes with their own firearm.

You’re a typical leftist...all raw emotion and devoid of all facts. So you just scream the fairytale emotional scenarios that run through your limited intellect.


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 29, 2019)

P@triot said:


> EvilEyeFleegle said:
> 
> 
> > Luckily, in this country, American is not an 'ethnicity'..no matter how hard some try to make it so.
> ...



Hmm...you misinterpret, I think.  A person--a citizen from America is an American..but American is NOT an ethnicity. It is a nationality. Is a black person from Italy Italian?
An person of Indian descent whose family has lived in England for generations..is he English? In Europe..many people in those countries would answer your question with a resounding NO! In America the answer is always YES!

There are, of course, a few in this country who would like it if it were otherwise...but it is not.


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 29, 2019)

P@triot said:


> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...


There are also thousands of incidents of people being shot with their own guns..so it evens out just a bit.
As for armed citizens stopping a mass shooter..it has happened..about 3-5% of the time. Worth having everyone carry? I dunno...I carry..especially when at events..would i engage a shooter...one of those decisions that I'd have to make in the moment...one never really knows what they're going to do is such cases..overblown, testosterone fueled rhetoric fails people..when they're in the mix.

Fact Check: More Armed Citizens Equals Less Mass Shootings?

Let's Talk About The Mass Shootings That Were Stopped By "A Good Guy With A Gun"


----------



## Leo123 (Jul 29, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> It is true..however..it is also true that some are more likely than others to fall into the abyss. The ultimate permission to create hell on earth is victim-hood..for a person who perceives of themselves as a victim uses that as a permission giver. I sure that right until that bullet ended this shooter's life..he felt the victim.



Yes, when one gives themselves permission to create unfounded mayhem they simply have no moral code.


----------



## P@triot (Jul 29, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> Hmm...you misinterpret, I think.  A person--a citizen from America is an American..but American is NOT an ethnicity. It is a nationality.


Ohhh...I see what you’re saying. My bad.


----------



## Jitss617 (Jul 29, 2019)

bodecea said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > August West said:
> ...


We won’t do t worry no one will haha


----------



## Jitss617 (Jul 29, 2019)

bodecea said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...


You def can’t read ha


----------



## Jitss617 (Jul 29, 2019)

rightwinger said:


> satrebil said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...


Is that how you think? Wow sick


----------



## P@triot (Jul 29, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> There are also thousands of incidents of people being shot with their own guns..so it evens out just a bit.


You are absolutely correct. But that doesn’t “even” it out. A person who shoots themselves is an accident (and often times the result of supreme stupidity / irresponsibility). It’s not one-billionth as tragic as people being slaughtered simply because left-wing representatives unconstitutionally prevented their constituents from defending themselves.


----------



## Jitss617 (Jul 29, 2019)

RealDave said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...


Guns saved over 94 thousand lives last year.. it’s a fact .. suck it up


----------



## Jitss617 (Jul 29, 2019)

RealDave said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...


I would never!


----------



## westwall (Jul 29, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > EvilEyeFleegle said:
> ...







Yes, a government of, by, and FOR the people.  Not some dictatorship.  The only person demonstrating a severe lack of historical knowledge is you, dude.


----------



## Dick Foster (Jul 29, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


It's a futile effort that's for sure because they simply don't have any thoughts or ideas.


----------



## DOTR (Jul 29, 2019)

shockedcanadian said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> > Police responded to the festival grounds around 5:30PM. Around 11 people were reportedly shot. One of them has died.
> ...



The liberal always sets policy by the exceptions.


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 29, 2019)

P@triot said:


> EvilEyeFleegle said:
> 
> 
> > There are also thousands of incidents of people being shot with their own guns..so it evens out just a bit.
> ...


Assuming that that was the reason. I would place the blame on the shooter..where it belongs. The first to act in a violent situation always has the advantage. Even if every person is armed...the shooter will still kill several..this guy..was shot in minutes..still  he hit 11.

Blaming the left is absurd...I live in a Constitutional carry state....we can carry concealed without a permit. Does everyone carry/ No.Do the majority carry..no.  Most of us have a gun around...in the car...in the house....maybe in the backpack. But in a mass shooting scenario....I doubt that the outcome would be anything but tragic. 
At best, an armed citizenry would limit the damage..and lead to a quick resolution. But the danger of friendly fire..is there. My point? The political polemic has little to do with the real-life horror of a mass shooting..and that armed or no--people are going to die.

All deaths are tragic..to someone.


----------



## Old Yeller (Jul 29, 2019)

covfefe said:


> Old Yeller said:
> 
> 
> > covfefe said:
> ...




Always room on the list.  Bad attitude TDS #13.


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 29, 2019)

westwall said:


> EvilEyeFleegle said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...


Uh huh...not that you have the gonads to actually point my alleged lack of knowledge...LOL! I do appreciate the irony of your quoting Abe Lincoln--although it is a bit of a stretch to consider him a 'founding father'. My amusement comes from the fact that many of your ilk often refer to Lincoln as the first American dictator. Suspension of Civil rights like habeas corpus and such.
You are seriously out of your league..when it come to history...I've read your posts for years..so can state this with some degree of certainty.

But hey..surprise me...post a cogent rebuttal of my posts..point out all my factual errors....astound us with your ability. Or at least get your copy and paste on!


----------



## westwall (Jul 29, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > EvilEyeFleegle said:
> ...







Where do you think i quoted abe lincoln?  This oughta be good....


----------



## Marion Morrison (Jul 29, 2019)

covfefe said:


> Marion Morrison said:
> 
> 
> > ph3iron said:
> ...



I'm smart enough not to use Google these days. See, unlike you, I've been around for a long time and know how the internet stuff works.

Google used to suck, Babelfish, and Altavista.com and Yahoo were better..
Then around 2006-2007 Google got good.

Now they've reverted back to sucking again, but not before buying up huge swaths of necessary internet servers, so all traffic has to go through them and they can filter it.

That's bullshit. GoDaddy is bullshit too. Until you've chained 9 anonymous proxies together and been on the web for 18 hours straight, Cracking porn sites and slap raiding all their content, you can fuck off on telling me how the internet works, ok?


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 29, 2019)

westwall said:


> EvilEyeFleegle said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...




***sigh***   I would have thought that such a vaunted intellect would have read the Gettysburg address..i know I was required to memorize it and declaim it in front of the whole class:


*Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal. *

*Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battlefield of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this. *

*But in a larger sense, we cannot dedicate - we cannot consecrate - we cannot hallow - this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember, what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us - that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion - that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain - that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom - and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth. 

The History Place - Great Speeches Collection: Abraham Lincoln - The Gettysburg Address

*
Now you might claim that your paraphrasing was not exact..and thus it was not a quote..but it was...albeit unknowingly.


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 29, 2019)

Marion Morrison said:


> covfefe said:
> 
> 
> > Marion Morrison said:
> ...


DuckDuckGo is the best these days. No trackers and no selling of your info.


----------



## jasonnfree (Jul 29, 2019)

And yet, some of the most dangerous states have very loose gun laws and are run by republicans.

America's Most Dangerous States - SafeHome.org


----------



## Marion Morrison (Jul 29, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> Marion Morrison said:
> 
> 
> > covfefe said:
> ...



Next is bing.


----------



## westwall (Jul 29, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > EvilEyeFleegle said:
> ...







Try again, junior...

*"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."*


----------



## Marion Morrison (Jul 29, 2019)

jasonnfree said:


> And yet, some of the most dangerous states have very loose gun laws and are run by republicans.
> 
> America's Most Dangerous States - SafeHome.org



Wow! That's a lot of total bullshit! 

Interesting propaganda, that.

You're safer in the blackest hood in FL than in Detroit Michigan.

We regard life more here.


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 29, 2019)

westwall said:


> EvilEyeFleegle said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...


Are you stupid? I gave you the exact quote--that you stole from Abe..and you quote the Preamble of the Constitution as a rebuttal? OMG...dropped on your head as an infant? The only commonality between the Preamble and your quote is the word 'people'!

Thank you for the best laugh I've  had in weeks!

I think we have established your knowledge and abilities in History....you see..you cannot substitute rhetoric for knowledge..no matter how you squirm...I own you!


----------



## Marion Morrison (Jul 29, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > EvilEyeFleegle said:
> ...



I disagree. westwall is a wise man.


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 29, 2019)

Marion Morrison said:


> EvilEyeFleegle said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...


Well..he's definitely not at his best here..as you can see.


----------



## westwall (Jul 29, 2019)

jasonnfree said:


> And yet, some of the most dangerous states have very loose gun laws and are run by republicans.
> 
> America's Most Dangerous States - SafeHome.org






A completely bogus "study".  Look at the variables they toss in to skew the stats.  They take the raw data and bury it under crap like "law enforcement to civility ratios" which is a non existent metric in real world criminology.


----------



## miketx (Jul 29, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > Olde Europe said:
> ...


Fake news, liar.


----------



## westwall (Jul 29, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> Marion Morrison said:
> 
> 
> > EvilEyeFleegle said:
> ...







Oh?  How so?  Everything i base my political ideology on is rooted in the COTUS, and by inference Cicero, Locke, and Montesquieu.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 29, 2019)

An extreme gun control state, a gun free zone event....where they even had armed guards and metal detectors at all the gates....

The attacker cut his way through a fence to avoid the metal detectors....

He killed until someone used a gun to stop him, this time a police officer..

Another mass public shooting at another gun-free zone: the Gilroy Garlic Festival attack - Crime Prevention Research Center

Three people were killed and 15 injured. 

*The attacker cut through a back fence to avoid security checkpoints with metal detectors. This area was a gun-free zone.*

But as a general point, even if this wasn’t an area where people were already banned from having guns, do you wonder why there isn’t someone to stop some of the mass public shootings in places such as California? In 2018, the County with a little over 1.5 million adults had issued just 113 concealed handgun permits — that is just 0.007% of adults. To put it differently, that is only 1 permit issued for every 14,300 people. General citizens in Santa Clara County are banned from being able to carry concealed handguns. There is no nearby county that has even one percent of the population with permits, and for California as a whole, only 0.39% of adults have a permit. Last year, outside the restrictive states of California and New York, about 8.63% of the adult population has a permit.

What very few permits are granted in the county are going to be granted in in San Jose and the wealthiest areas of the county, not in Gilroy.

Here is a list of cases we found where concealed handgun permit holders have stopped what otherwise would have been a mass public shooting.

Again, police are important, but they have a very difficult job in stopping these types of attacks. Attackers will either wait until there are no officers nearby or if there is an officer nearby, they will kill him first. There were police near, but even a minute or two is a very long time.


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 29, 2019)

miketx said:


> EvilEyeFleegle said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...


Why hullo Mike...very cogent rebuttal you posted...I'm crushed..just...crushed! Oh wait...nope..not crushed at all...because you proved nothing..all you did was let out another written fart...PooF!

Stinkin' up the joint..what did you eat..some InfoWars stew..or some Gateway Pundit fondue?


----------



## otto105 (Jul 29, 2019)

skye said:


> Police responded to the festival grounds around 5:30PM. Around 11 people were reportedly shot. One of them has died.
> 
> Never knew there was a garlic festival, prayers go to the victims.
> 
> ...




Did the gun get out okay and did republic pols offer thoughts and prayers for it?

That's the only thing the matters post event....


----------



## Marion Morrison (Jul 29, 2019)

miketx said:


> EvilEyeFleegle said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...



"Fact Check" That crap is for the intellectually lazy. I can debunk that bullshit all day, every day. Thank God for a real American education. I can get my proof from microfiche. I do know how to support my assertions properly.
"Fact Check" is not the way. Leftists run the "Fact Checkers".


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 29, 2019)

westwall said:


> EvilEyeFleegle said:
> 
> 
> > Marion Morrison said:
> ...


Uh huh....running from the steaming pile of your quote, are you?  OK..far enough..if you can't just admit the gaff and move on..I'll not mention it again.


----------



## miketx (Jul 29, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> miketx said:
> 
> 
> > EvilEyeFleegle said:
> ...


Typical diarrhea from you liars.


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 29, 2019)

Dick Foster said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...


I will say... even though I agree with Patriot very little of the time, he is a smart cookie. Hard headed and sharp in tone yes, but he can bring a good debate... when he doesn’t use the straw man of course ;-)


----------



## westwall (Jul 29, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > EvilEyeFleegle said:
> ...







Actually, junior.  It is you who can't admit that you are the one in the wrong.  Lincoln borrowed from the founders.  I borrowed from the founders.  There is no harm in admitting you were wrong.  The fact that you can't shows you to be either intellectually dishonest, or unethical in the extreme.


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 29, 2019)

Marion Morrison said:


> miketx said:
> 
> 
> > EvilEyeFleegle said:
> ...


***chuckles*** OK Marion..as I've also had a real American Education..I know that any such compendium can be picked apart. i also know that there is enough truth there to be useful---and that those that decry 'fake news'---are just bit intellectually lazy themselves.


----------



## Marion Morrison (Jul 29, 2019)

miketx said:


> EvilEyeFleegle said:
> 
> 
> > miketx said:
> ...








Need some of this for their lips.


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 29, 2019)

westwall said:


> EvilEyeFleegle said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...


There you go..trying to substitute rhetoric for knowledge. I think we are done..let the readers decide,..me..I've already made up my mind.
BTW...your last post...I direct it to you word for word. Lincoln borrowed nothing..the Gettysburg Address is one of the top 5 speeches ever..and you didn't even know you were quoting it...and the Constitution defense you are using..is lame.

Do enjoy the rest of your evening...nice night here..in oh so red Idaho.

Find yourself something to save face..and move on.


----------



## westwall (Jul 29, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > EvilEyeFleegle said:
> ...








Yeppers, flee little one, flee.  That seems to be the best you can do.


----------



## otto105 (Jul 29, 2019)

Guys, I'm really concerned....did the gun get out okay and has somebody made sure it can shot again?????


----------



## Old Yeller (Jul 29, 2019)

Same day in Brooklyn 11 were shot by one.   Why no press on that?  Does not fit the White Supremecy angle you want to publish?


----------



## otto105 (Jul 29, 2019)

Old Yeller said:


> Same day in Brooklyn 11 were shot by one.   Why no press on that?  Does not fit the White Supremecy angle you want to publish?




Come on just ONE gun did that? 11 people in ONE day! That has to be that best showing for a gun this year!


I'm thinking that it has to be more than one gun...


----------



## blackhawk (Jul 29, 2019)

It seems he bought the gun legally in Nevada and in Nevada background checks are required for all gun sales unelss you have CCW permit.


----------



## Marion Morrison (Jul 29, 2019)

blackhawk said:


> It seems he bought the gun legally in Nevada and in Nevada background checks are required for all gun sales unelss you have CCW permit.



He could just as easily get a full auto AK in CA if he had the money.

Apparently it's a blessing he got an SKS and TAPCO mags and one jammed, allowing the LEOS to put him down.
Same thing with the baseball leftist whacko shooter.


----------



## Marion Morrison (Jul 29, 2019)

Back in the day I had an asian online friend in CA that could get full-auto AKs all day long for $750.

ATF got him. Our relationship was more online-centric. He was a cool dude, but he got hemmed up in that ATF stuff. The Asian underground had mucho access to that. They never did no mass shootings, though. True story. As much access as Asian underground gangs have had to full-auto weapons for like 30 years, they never did no crazy mass shootings.


----------



## Pilot1 (Jul 29, 2019)

Their goal is not to stop murder, and violence where criminals use guns.  If so, they'd focus on the thousands of inner city Black on Black murders.  Their goal is to disarm the law abiding purely for control purposes.


----------



## Leo123 (Jul 29, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > EvilEyeFleegle said:
> ...



Perhaps if the Democrat party would stop demonizing guns (inanimate objects) more people would be comfortable owning, learning to shoot and would carry.   We constantly hear how we should wait for law enforcement but, even where cops can get to the perp right away (as with the Garlic Festival) still people had to die and be injured.  My contention is that if guns were acceptable for people to open-carry, this little punk would have been put down quickly and efficiently.


----------



## cnm (Jul 29, 2019)

Well well. Another mass shooting with a military style semi automatic. I wonder what the common element is, in these mass shootings with military style semi automatics. It's a mystery all right.


----------



## Marion Morrison (Jul 29, 2019)

cnm said:


> Well well. Another mass shooting with a military style semi automatic. I wonder what the common element is, in these mass shootings with military style semi automatics. It's a mystery all right.View attachment 271903



It's not Asians with full-auto AKs fer sure. They've had that for 30 years +

No bullshit. Zero Asian full-auto mass shootings to this day.


----------



## Vandalshandle (Jul 30, 2019)

My thoughts and prayers go out to the 18 to 21 year old white supremacists in California who, because of a new CA law, must drive to Nevada to buy their semi-automatic rifles.


----------



## XponentialChaos (Jul 30, 2019)

otto105 said:


> Guys, I'm really concerned....did the gun get out okay and has somebody made sure it can shot again?????



Don't you worry - the gun is going to be just fine.  

No matter how many people needlessly die, we mustn't let anything happen to these guns.


----------



## emilynghiem (Jul 30, 2019)

rightwinger said:


> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> > *I have three guesses:
> ...



rightwinger The Original Tree

More like, the shooter cites inciteful literature
(associated with Satanic Bible rejection of Christianity and societal institutions)
that both Left and Right will paint to associate with the opposing side.

So the Christian Right will say this means the shooter was demonic
and an extreme secularist against Christianity.

And the Liberal Left will say this means the shooter was some
racist/supremacist associated with the far right antigovernment crowd.


----------



## Picaro (Jul 30, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> Picaro said:
> 
> 
> > Concealed carry will work; open carry is just two fucktards waiting for a collision. It's stupid to advertise you're carrying, just an ego trip for morons.
> ...



Nah, it just tells criminals 'Hey, there's an extra weapon! Shoot that idiot first!!" It's not like you get to whip it out and wave it around every time somebody walks within 3 feet of you in a store or somewhere in public. It's just bad tactics, period. Concealed carry is far more effective; most criminals are either stupid or crazy, so 'deterrence' isn't much of an issue in most cases, while uncertainty is.


----------



## Leo123 (Jul 30, 2019)

Vandalshandle said:


> My thoughts and prayers go out to the 18 to 21 year old white supremacists in California who, because of a new CA law, must drive to Nevada to buy their semi-automatic rifles.



So much for gun control laws eh?  Apparently the park's gun-free zone did absolutely 0 to stop this human excrement.   If the park-goers were armed and guns were ubiquitous and open-carry, this little fuck would have been taken down sooner than a few minutes.   Don't get me wrong, the cops did a great job but, they are only capable of doing so much in a crowd.   If everyone was allowed to carry arms this guy would have been snuffed sooner IMO.  In fact, the little piss-pants coward probably would have been too afraid to do what he did.


----------



## Flash (Jul 30, 2019)

Now those Libtard Loony Tunes in Commie California are advocating exporting their filthy anti Constitutional anti right to keep and bear arms oppressive laws to other states.

Then they wonder why we ridicule them so much.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 30, 2019)

RealDave said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...


No  person who claims to be right-wing defends White Supremacists but you leftist do go out of your way defending Antifa


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 30, 2019)

ABikerSailor said:


> Anyone surprised that this idiot was a white supremacist?
> 
> What we know about California festival shooter Santino William Legan
> 
> ...


A white supremacist who self-identified as an Italian-Iranian who referenced a book on Modern Satanism who was antisemitic who believed in Social Darwinism. So if you and your fellow leftist are trying to attach this Californa indoctrinated fruitcake to the right I would rethink it if I were you.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 30, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...


No one was defending white supremacist 
The president was talking about people who were defending their confederate heritage. Hell I know at least one leftist on another board who is proud of his Confederate heritage and has defended against any monuments removal


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 30, 2019)

Olde Europe said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > Nope. But had that 6-year old boy not lived in an unconstitutional shit-hole like California, the people with him would have had a gun on them and *prevented* the shooting.
> ...


Grasping for straws is the game did you say? You may very well hear shots but you would never pull your pistol unless you had a line of sight danger.


----------



## iceberg (Jul 30, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...


You know he means on both sides of the issue itself. 

But that doesn't help you build your image of him.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 30, 2019)

Vandalshandle said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > Vandalshandle said:
> ...


But you don't deny anything I said

What will be the reaction after the Ar15 is banned and some other person kills a dozen people with a different firearm?


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 30, 2019)

Vandalshandle said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...


100% of all rapists used to be innocent so what's your point?

That everyone is just a criminal in waiting?

SHould we convict you of crimes you haven't committed since after all it's just a matter of time before you do commit a crime?


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 30, 2019)

OldLady said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...



The US military is barred from acting on US soil.

And the second was not conceived for the possibility of an attack by a foreign power.  It was conceived so the citizenry could not be subjugated by a corrupt , tyrannical government.

So what other rights are you willing to give up to stop criminals from committing crimes>\?

How about your 4th or 5t amendment rights?  I mean if you're innocent you shouldn't care if the police search your home whenever they want or if they arrest and innterrogste you for hours on end right?


----------



## RealDave (Jul 30, 2019)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...


 Yea, that is a stupid statement.  You know darn well guns would be pulled.


----------



## RealDave (Jul 30, 2019)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...


That's why he had to be brow beat to issue a statement against those torch bearers.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 30, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


Why do you people always appeal to the ridiculous?

I'm surprised you didn't use a nuclear missile in your example


----------



## RealDave (Jul 30, 2019)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...


Who defends the violence on Antifa?   Quit using Antifa as an excuse for your support of racism & bigotry.


----------



## RealDave (Jul 30, 2019)

Old Yeller said:


> Same day in Brooklyn 11 were shot by one.   Why no press on that?  Does not fit the White Supremecy angle you want to publish?


One is crime & gang violence.  This is some whacko that you decided to give access to an assault type weapons who killed for the fun of it.

What's next?  People die everyday in car accidents & cancer so why should we care about this?


----------



## RealDave (Jul 30, 2019)

Leo123 said:


> Vandalshandle said:
> 
> 
> > My thoughts and prayers go out to the 18 to 21 year old white supremacists in California who, because of a new CA law, must drive to Nevada to buy their semi-automatic rifles.
> ...



You have no idea how often a gun free zone prevents gun violence.

In this case, it forced the shooter to sneak into the area making it more likely to be caught & arrested.  Otherwise, they could just walk in & nothing could be done until people died.


----------



## irosie91 (Jul 30, 2019)

RealDave said:


> Old Yeller said:
> 
> 
> > Same day in Brooklyn 11 were shot by one.   Why no press on that?  Does not fit the White Supremecy angle you want to publish?
> ...



the area in which the shoot-up took place in Brooklyn ------is such that-----a shoot up
is NOT NEWS.    It did make news in Brooklyn-----one child dead


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 30, 2019)

RealDave said:


> Leo123 said:
> 
> 
> > Vandalshandle said:
> ...


If he wasn't carrying a rifle he could have just walked in with 4 or 5 handguns concealed on his person and done even more damage


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 30, 2019)

RealDave said:


> Who defends the violence on Antifa?   Quit using Antifa as an excuse for your support of racism & bigotry.




I can't remember even a single speech by the media or a Democrat politician, a single syllable even, against the radical leftists.

Not a word against Antifa, the Weather Underground, BLM or the Occupoopers.

This happened during Obama's reign as America's autocrat right in the neighborhood of Manhattan New York, the home of Donald J. Trump,  and not a word from Obama denouncing it?  The liberal who perpetrating this Crime of Desecration has never even been identified and punished to the fullest extent of the law.

Occupy Wall Street: Shocking photos show protester defecating on POLICE CAR | Daily Mail Online


----------



## RealDave (Jul 30, 2019)

2aguy said:


> An extreme gun control state, a gun free zone event....where they even had armed guards and metal detectors at all the gates....
> 
> The attacker cut his way through a fence to avoid the metal detectors....
> 
> ...


 So, instead of trying to stop a shooter from taking a weapon into the festival, they would all be alive if we just let all guns into the festival.

I get it.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 30, 2019)

RealDave said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...


Don't pretend that you leftist don't defend or outright ignore Antifas actions.


----------



## Correll (Jul 30, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > EvilEyeFleegle said:
> ...




With generations of interbreeding, more and more Americans are considering their ethnicity American.


----------



## NotYourBody (Jul 30, 2019)

westwall said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...



It seems like in this country we only identify the crazy people after they've already shot up a bunch of people. Does that seem effective?


----------



## Marion Morrison (Jul 30, 2019)

Correll said:


> EvilEyeFleegle said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...



Apparently that boy in CA did not.


----------



## irosie91 (Jul 30, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...



in the absence of a crystal ball------try to develop a urine test for psychosis


----------



## Flash (Jul 30, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...




We are doing a good job of identifying the people afflicted with TDS, a serious mental illness.  We need to watch them carefully because those people are very dangerous.


----------



## OldLady (Jul 30, 2019)

Leo123 said:


> EvilEyeFleegle said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...





Blues Man said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


_ It was conceived so the citizenry could not be subjugated by a corrupt , tyrannical government._
Maybe they had both reasons on their minds.  Considering what they had just been through with the King of England, can you blame them?  That is no longer a valid argument either, though, since we would have a snowball's chance in hell of fighting the US military with our personal collections of AR's, AK's and SKS's should a despotic government try to overthrow our democracy.


----------



## NotYourBody (Jul 30, 2019)

jasonnfree said:


> And yet, some of the most dangerous states have very loose gun laws and are run by republicans.
> 
> America's Most Dangerous States - SafeHome.org


Yikes! No wonder MAGAs are so afraid of everything all the time.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jul 30, 2019)

skye said:


> California has banned guns, right? but...this sort of tragedy still happens over there!
> 
> Perhaps a good guy  should have carried a gun  to defend himself and others,and the outcome would have been different.


Wrong. 

This is a lie.

California has not banned guns.


----------



## rightwinger (Jul 30, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...


NRA fantasy

How many lives did you save this year?


----------



## NotYourBody (Jul 30, 2019)

Leo123 said:


> Vandalshandle said:
> 
> 
> > My thoughts and prayers go out to the 18 to 21 year old white supremacists in California who, because of a new CA law, must drive to Nevada to buy their semi-automatic rifles.
> ...


The shooter was taken out within ONE MINUTE by police officers who were at the festival to provide security.

I prefer that method. I doubt Cletus could get the gun out of his holster in time. And guaranteed Sally Jane could not dig it out of her purse that fast. And many people thought the gunshots were fireworks. So they wouldn't be going for their guns until way too late.

You pretend that all the festival goers would be on high alert, guns at the ready. But that's what they paid the cops to do and it worked out as best as can be expected.


----------



## Defiant1 (Jul 30, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...



And you plan to identify them beforehand????


----------



## cnm (Jul 30, 2019)

It would be funny if it wasn't so sad. And true.


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 30, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> Leo123 said:
> 
> 
> > Vandalshandle said:
> ...




So what you suggesting?   Have a police presence throughout the whole community big enough for the police to respond within 60 seconds?

Most people aren't at a festival, they are in a barroom, a tavern, a cocktail lounge or other location.  Are you willing to pay for enough cops to keep an eye on all of those locations 24/7?


----------



## NotYourBody (Jul 30, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > Leo123 said:
> ...


He cut through the fence to avoid the metal detector.


----------



## Jitss617 (Jul 30, 2019)

rightwinger said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...


Because we vote democrat,, 2 million


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 30, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...




If the organizers of the event had electrified the fence. the perp would have never been able to breach the perimeter.

Sounds like they have some responsibility here too.


----------



## NotYourBody (Jul 30, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> NotYourBody said:
> 
> 
> > Leo123 said:
> ...



Me? I'm suggesting a ban on guns similar to Australia. But gun nutters are a fearful bunch, and there are a lot of you in this country. I don't hold out any hope that my suggestion will ever be followed.

Barring that, I prefer the Gilroy festival method. The festival organizers arrange and pay for security. Professional security. Not armchair cowboy security.


----------



## NotYourBody (Jul 30, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> NotYourBody said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


You go with that line of thinking. Maybe you can help those folks drum up a lawsuit.

I'm happy with the professional security who took out the shooter in less than one minute.


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 30, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > NotYourBody said:
> ...





Only a tiny fraction of shooting victims are whacked at festivals.   I'm trying to address the big problem


----------



## NotYourBody (Jul 30, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> NotYourBody said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...


You should start with crap like this -

https://www.star-telegram.com/news/nation-world/national/article233263433.html?intcid=connatix

Brought to you by the North Carolina deplorables at "*Cherokee*" Guns.


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

skye said:


> Police responded to the festival grounds around 5:30PM. Around 11 people were reportedly shot. One of them has died.
> 
> Never knew there was a garlic festival, prayers go to the victims.
> 
> ...


And still no mass shootings reported in countries with strong gun control this week.  Makes you wonder why they happen so often here...


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 30, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > NotYourBody said:
> ...




The store is in the Tremendous County of Cherokee, in North Carolina.   Why the "" around "Cherokee"?    The efforts of the Squad to disarm the American people is notorious


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 30, 2019)

OldLady said:


> Leo123 said:
> 
> 
> > EvilEyeFleegle said:
> ...


Interesting how's Vietnam going?


----------



## miketx (Jul 30, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > NotYourBody said:
> ...


Come on and take our guns. What are you waiting for?


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 30, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > NotYourBody said:
> ...




All libs want "australia type bans on guns"

This isn't a secret, and its why the "slippery slope" theory is legit.  Giving libs an inch is a mistake


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 30, 2019)

skye said:


> California has banned guns, right? but...this sort of tragedy still happens over there!
> 
> Perhaps a good guy  should have carried a gun  to defend himself and others,and the outcome would have been different.




I'm sure in all these posts someone pointed out not only was it in a gun free zone, they had guards and metal detectors at the entrances....he cut through a fence to get around them.......where all the helpless, unarmed victims were waiting for him.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> > Police responded to the festival grounds around 5:30PM. Around 11 people were reportedly shot. One of them has died.
> ...




They didn't have lots of mass shootings before they banned guns.....Britain averaged 1 every 10 years before they banned guns...

Your theory, More Guns = More Mass shootings

Britain.....1 every 10 years with guns.....after they banned guns .....the same

In science, when a theory doesn't actually work, it means the theory is wrong.


----------



## NotYourBody (Jul 30, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> NotYourBody said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...



Because I don't think the Cherokee people identify with Deplorables. 

Native Americans have been long-time victims of voter suppression efforts and as a group they largely vote for Democrats When they can vote.


----------



## irosie91 (Jul 30, 2019)

the squad seeks gun control?     I have a very interesting vignette-----apropos. 
In Islamic conquest----the very first law imposed on the hapless conquered----
is COMPLETE DIVESTMENT of all weapons for non-muslims----complete down to
daggers and bows and arrows    (it was the pre-gun era when the golden age of
Islamic conquest commenced.)      This very comprehensive law is STILL ON THE 
SHARIAH BOOKS.    Muslims,  of course, are exempted and can be armed to the
hilt at all times.   In the land of hubby's birth---MUSLIM MEN are habitually armed---
with daggers, hand grenades and pistols and machine guns.  -----worn like jewelry ---
even for causal strolls. -----non muslims---NUTHIN'      even in the wildernesses
inhabited by mountain lions    (not that the cities in habited by armed muzzies are
any safer)


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 30, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > NotYourBody said:
> ...




Australia's gun ban didn't stop gun crime...it is increasing....and it didn't stop public shootings.....they have been lucky in that their public shooters keep failing to kill 3 or more people.......except of course for the last one....

This Australian was on parole.....in gun free australia

Four dead, 1 hurt in Darwin mass shooting - 9News

An alleged gunman who went on a rampage killing four men and injuring a woman while looking for a man named "Alex" on Tuesday night was released from jail only a month ago.
Darwin man Ben Hoffmann, 45, received a 14-day sentence for breaching his curfew after he had been paroled in January after serving four years in prison for bashing a man with a baseball bat.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 30, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > NotYourBody said:
> ...




Public shootings in Australia since they banned guns...

Shots fired in Launceston siege

A siege in the Tasmanian city of Launceston has ended with police arresting a 24-year-old man and a woman, 40, after 33 shots were fired at police.

Police had brought in negotiators, a heavily armoured Bearcat truck and evacuated residents from the street during the 18 hour stand-off which began on Friday afternoon.


Timeline of major crimes in Australia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


16 January 1998 to 15 June 2009 – Melbourne gangland killings – A series of 35 murders of crime figures and their associates that began with the slaying of Alphonse Gangitano in his home, most likely by Jason Moran, the latest victim being Des Moran who was murdered in Ascot Vale on 15 June 2009.
16 August 1998 – Victorian police officers Gary Silk and Rodney Miller were shot dead in an ambush by Bendali Debs and Jason Joseph Roberts in the Moorabbin Police murders.

*3 August 1999 – La Trobe University shooting – Jonathan Brett Horrocks walked into the cafeteria in La Trobe university in Melbourne Victoria armed with a 38 caliber revolver handgun and opened fire killing Leon Capraro the boss and manager off the cafeteria and wounding a woman who was a student at the university.*

13 March 2000 – Millewa State Forest Murders – Barbara and Stephen Brooks and Stacie Willoughby were found dead, all three having been shot execution style and left in the forest.[60][61]

26 May 2002 – A Vietnamese man walked into a Vietnamese wedding reception in Cabramatta Sydney, New South Wales armed with a handgun and opened fire wounding seven people.

14 October 2002 – Dr. Margret Tobin, the South Australian head of Mental Health Services, was shot dead by Jean Eric Gassy as she walked out of a lift in her office building.
*21 October 2002 – Monash University shooting – Huan Xiang opened fire in a tutorial room, killing two and injuring five.*
25 October 2003 – Greenacre double murder – A man and a woman are shot dead in a house in the suburb of Greenacre, Sydney which was the result of a feud between two Middle Eastern crime families, 24-year-old Ziad Abdulrazak was shot 10 times in the chest and head and 22-year-old Mervat Hamka was shot twice in the neck while she slept in her bedroom, up to 100 shots were fired into the house from four men who were later arrested and convicted of the murders.

26 July 2004 – Security guard Karen Brown shot dead armed robber William Aquilina in a Sydney carpark after he violently bashed her and stole the hotel's takings. Brown was charged with murder but acquitted on the grounds of self-defence.[66][67]


*18 June 2007 – Melbourne CBD shooting – Christopher Wayne Hudson opened fire on three people, killing one and seriously wounding two others who intervened when Hudson was assaulting his girlfriend at a busy Melbourne intersection during the morning peak. He gave himself up to police in Wallan, Victoria on 20 June.[71]*

10 April 2010 – Rajesh Osborne shot and killed his three children, 12 year-old Asia, 10-year-old Jarius and 7-year-old Grace before killing himself in Roxburgh, Victoria.[_citation needed_]

28 April 2011 – 2011 Hectorville siege – Donato Anthony Corbo shot dead Kobus and Annetjie Snyman and their son-in-law Luc Mombers and seriously wounded Mr Mombers' 14-year-old son Marcel and a police officer at Hectorville, South Australia before being arrested after an eight-hour stand off.
1

29 January 2012 – Giovanni Focarelli, son of Comancheros gang member Vincenzo Focarelli, was shot dead whilst Vincenzo survived the fourth attempt on his life.[79]

*28 April 2012 – A man opened fire in a busy shopping mall in Robina on the Gold Coast shooting Bandidos bikie Jacques Teamo. A woman who was an innocent bystander was also injured from a shotgun blast to the leg. Neither of the victims died, but the incident highlighted the recent increase in gun crime across major Australian cities including Sydney, Brisbane and Adelaide.[citation needed]*

23 May 2012 – Christopher 'Badness' Binse, a career criminal well known to police, was arrested after a 44-hour siege at an East Keilor home in Melbourne's north west. During the siege, Binse fired several shots at police and refused to co-operate with negotiators; eventually tear gas had to be used to force him out of the house, at which point he refused to put down his weapon and was then sprayed with a volley of non-lethal bullets.[_citation needed_]

15 December 2012 – Aaron Carlino murdered drug dealer Stephen Cookson in his East Perth home by shooting him twice in the head and then he cut up and dismembered his body. He buried his arms legs and torso in the backyard of his house and he wrapped his head in a plastic bag and dumped it on Rottnest Island. The head of Cookson was later found washed up on Rottnest Island by an 11-year-old girl. Carlino was convicted of the murder and was sentenced to life in prison.[_citation needed_]
*8 March 2013 – Queen Street mall siege – Lee Matthew Hiller entered the shopping mall on Queen Street Brisbane Queensland armed with a revolver and threatened shoppers and staff with the revolver, causing a 90-minute siege which ended when Hiller was shot and wounded in the arm by a police officer from the elite Specialist Emergency Response Team. Hiller was then later taken to hospital and was treated for his injury; he pleaded gulity to 20 charges and was sentenced to four-and-a-half years in jail with a non-parole period of two years and three months.[*_*c*itation needed_]
29 July 2013 – Two bikie gang associates, Vasko Boskovski and Bassil Hijazi were shot dead in two separate shooting incidents minutes apart in South West Sydney. The previous week Bassil Hijazi had survived a previous attempt against his life after he was shot inside his car.[_citation needed_]

*9 September 2014 – Lockhart massacre* – Geoff Hunt shot and killed his wife, Kim, his 10-year-old son Fletcher, and his daughters Mia, eight and Phoebe, six before killing himself on a farm in Lockhart in the Riverina district near Wagga Wagga New South Wales. The body of Geoff Hunt and a firearm are later found in a dam on the farm by police divers and a suicide note written by Geoff Hunt is also found inside the house on the farm.[_citation needed_]

*22 October 2014 – Wedderburn shootings* – Ian Jamieson shot dead Peter Lockhart, Peter's wife Mary and Mary's son Greg Holmes on two farm properties in Wedderburn, Victoria over a property dispute. Jamieson surrendered to police after a three-and-a-half hour siege.[_citation needed_]
7 November 2014 – Jordy Brook carjacked a Channel 7 news cameraman at gun point during a crime spree on the Sunshine Coast, Queensland. He was later captured and arrested by police after luring police on a high speed chase and crashing the car.[_citation needed_]

12 November 2014 – Jamie Edwards and Joelene Joyce a married couple who were drug dealers are found shot dead in a car on a highway in the town of Moama, New South Wales.[86]


*15 December 2014 – 2014 Sydney hostage crisis – Seventeen people were taken hostage in a cafe in Martin Place, Sydney by Man Haron Monis. The hostage crisis was resolved in the early hours of 16 December, sixteen hours after it commenced, when armed police stormed the premises. Monis and two hostages were killed in the course of the crisis.[87]*

*27 June 2015 – Hermidale triple murder –* the bodies of three people, two men and a woman are found shot dead on a property in a rural farming community in the town of Hermidale west of Nyngan, the bodies of 28-year-old Jacob Cumberland his father 59-year-old Stephen Cumberland and a 36-year-old woman were found with gun shot wounds, the body of Jacob Cumberland was found on the drive way of the property, the body of the 36-year-old woman was found in the backyard of the property and the body of Stephen Cumberland was found in a burnt out caravan on the property. 61-year-old Allan O'Connor is later arrested and charged with the murders.

*10 September 2015 – A 49-year-old woman is shot dead in a Mc Donald's restaurant in Gold Coast by her 57-year-old ex partner, who then turned the gun on himself afterwards and shot himself dead.*
*2 October 2015 - 2015 Parramatta shooting* On 2 October 2015, Farhad Khalil Mohammad Jabar, a 15-year-old boy, shot and killed Curtis Cheng, an unarmed police civilian finance worker, outside the New South Wales Police Force headquarters in Parramatta, Australia. Jabar was subsequently shot and killed by special constables who were protecting the police station.


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 30, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > NotYourBody said:
> ...




The term "cherokee" here refers to the LOCATION, Cherokee County, not the Cherokee tribe


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 30, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > NotYourBody said:
> ...




The gun ban didn't work in Australia...

Gun city: Young, dumb and armed

*The notion that a military-grade weapon could be in the hands of local criminals is shocking, but police have already seized at least five machine guns and assault rifles in the past 18 months. The AK-47 was not among them.*

Only a fortnight ago, law enforcement authorities announced they were hunting another seven assault rifles recently smuggled into the country. Weapons from the shipment have been used in armed robberies and drive-by shootings.

*These are just a handful of the thousands of illicit guns fuelling a wave of violent crime in the world’s most liveable city.*

*----*

Despite Australia’s strict gun control regime, criminals are now better armed than at any time since then-Prime Minister John Howard introduced a nationwide firearm buyback scheme in response to the 1996 Port Arthur massacre.

Shootings have become almost a weekly occurrence, with more than 125 people, mostly young men, wounded in the past five year

-----------

While the body count was higher during Melbourne’s ‘Underbelly War’ (1999-2005), more people have been seriously maimed in the recent spate of shootings and reprisals.

*Crimes associated with firearm possession have also more than doubled, driven by the easy availability of handguns, semi-automatic rifles, shotguns and, increasingly, machine guns, that are smuggled into the country or stolen from licensed owners.*

*-------------*

These weapons have been used in dozens of recent drive-by shootings of homes and businesses, as well as targeted and random attacks in parks, shopping centres and roads.

“They’re young, dumb and armed,” said one former underworld associate, who survived a shooting attempt in the western suburbs several years ago.

“It used to be that if you were involved in something bad you might have to worry about [being shot]. Now people get shot over nothing - unprovoked.”

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

*Gun crime soars*
In this series, Fairfax Media looks at Melbourne’s gun problem and the new breed of criminals behind the escalating violence.

The investigation has found:


There have been at least 99 shootings in the past 20 months - more than one incident a week since January 2015
Known criminals were caught with firearms 755 times last year, compared to 143 times in 2011
The epicentre of the problem is a triangle between Coolaroo, Campbellfield and Glenroy in the north-west, with Cranbourne, Narre Warren and Dandenong in the south-east close behind
Criminals are using gunshot wounds to the arms and legs as warnings to pay debts
*Assault rifles and handguns are being smuggled into Australia via shipments of electronics and metal parts*
In response to the violence, it can be revealed the state government is planning to introduce new criminal offences for drive-by shootings, manufacturing of firearms with new technologies such as 3D printers, and more police powers to keep weapons out of the hands of known criminals.
============
The second part of the series....
Gun city: Gunslingers of the North West


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 30, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > NotYourBody said:
> ...




The gun ban didn't lower the homicide rates in Australia either.....actual research...

Australia’s 1996 Gun Confiscation Didn’t Work | National Review

University of Melbourne researchers Wang-Sheng Lee and Sandy Suardi concluded their 2008 report on the matter with the statement, “There is little evidence to suggest that [the Australian mandatory gun-buyback program] had any significant effects on firearm homicides.”

“Although gun buybacks appear to be a logical and sensible policy that helps to placate the public’s fears,” the reported continued, “the evidence so far suggests that in the Australian context, the high expenditure incurred to fund the 1996 gun buyback has not translated into any tangible reductions in terms of firearm deaths.”

A 2007 report, “Gun Laws and Sudden Death: Did the Australian Firearms Legislation of 1996 Make a Difference?” by Jeanine Baker and Samara McPhedran similarly concluded that the buyback program did not have a significant long-term effect on the Australian homicide rate.

*The Australian gun-homicide rate had already been quite low and had been steadily falling in the 15 years prior to the Port Arthur massacre. And while the mandatory buyback program did appear to reduce the rate of accidental firearm deaths, Baker and McPhedran found that “the gun buy-back and restrictive legislative changes had no influence on firearm homicide in Australia.”*

*=======*

*2007 report..

http://c3.nrostatic.com/sites/default/files/Baker and McPhedran 2007.pdf

Conclusions Examination of the long-term trends indicated that the only category of sudden death that may have been influenced by the introduction of the NFA was firearm suicide
------

However, this effect must be considered in light of the findings for suicide (non-firearm). Homicide patterns (firearm and non-firearm) were not influenced by the NFA, the conclusion being that the gun buy-back and restrictive legislative changes had no influence on firearm homicide in Australia. The introduction of the NFA appeared to have a negative effect on accidental firearm death. However, over the time period investigated, there was a relatively small number of accidental deaths per annum, with substantial variability. Any conclusions regarding the effect of the NFA on accidental firearm death should be approached with caution
=========*

*2008 report...*

*
http://c8.nrostatic.com/sites/default/files/Lee and Suardi 2008.pdf

In this paper, we re-analyze the same data on firearm deaths used in previous research, using tests for unknown structural breaks as a means to identifying impacts of the NFA. The results of these tests suggest that the NFA did not have any large effects on reducing firearm homicide or suicide rates. 
-------

6. Conclusion 

This paper takes a closer look at the effects of the National Firearms Agreement on gun deaths. Using a battery of structural break tests, there is little evidence to suggest that it had any significant effects on firearm homicides and suicides. In addition, there also does not appear to be any substitution effects – that reduced access to firearms may have led those bent on committing homicide or suicide to use alternative methods.*


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 30, 2019)

OldLady said:


> Leo123 said:
> 
> 
> > EvilEyeFleegle said:
> ...



That may be your opinion

But you underestimate what several million committed people can do and how much of the US military would oppose the government if it really came down to it?

I think it would be more than you do obviously.

And the second amendment even if it doesn't expressly state it is also about the right of an individual to protect his own life.  The framers all thought that self preservation was such an obvious and natural right that there was no reason to codify it


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 30, 2019)

Of course.....armed citizens at mass public shootings have a 94% success rate at stopping the shooter and/or limiting the dead and injured...

Armed Citizens Are Successful 94% Of The Time At Active Shooter Events [FBI]

*Of all the active shooter events there were 33 at which an armed citizen was present. Of those, Armed Citizens were successful at stopping the Active shooter 75.8% of the time (25 incidents) and were successful in reducing the loss of life in an additional 18.2% (6) of incidents. In only 2 of the 33 incidents (6.1%) was the Armed Citizen(s) not helpful in any way in stopping the active shooter or reducing the loss of life.

Thus the headline of our report that Armed Citizens Are Successful 94% Of The Time At Active Shooter Events.*


In the 2 incidents at which the armed citizen “failed” to stop or slow the active shooter, one is the previously mentioned incident with hunters. The other is an incident in which the CCWer was shot in the back in a Las Vegas Walmart when he failed to identify that there were 2 Active Shooters involved in the attack. He neglected to identify the one that shot him in the back while he was trying to ambush the other perpetrator.

We also decided to look at the breakdown of events that took place in gun free zones and the relative death toll from events in gun free zones vs non-gun-free zones.

Of the 283 incidents in our data pool, we were unable to identify if the event took place in a gun-free zone in a large number (41%) of the events. Most of the events took place at a business, church, home, or other places at which as a rule of law it is not a gun free zone but potentially could have been declared one by the property owner. Without any information in the FBI study or any indication one way or the other from the news reports, we have indicated that event with a question mark.

If you look at all of the Active Shooter events (pie chart on the top) you see that for those which we have the information, almost twice as many took place in gun free zones than not; but realistically the vast majority of those for which we have no information (indicated as ?) are probably NOT gun free zones.

If you isolate just the events at which 8 or more people were killed the data paints a different picture (pie chart on the bottom). In these incidents, 77.8% took place in a gun-free zone suggesting that gun free zones lead to a higher death rate vs active shooter events in general

=====

One of the final metrics we thought was important to consider is the potential tendency for armed citizens to injure or kill innocent people in their attempt to “save the day.” A common point in political discussions is to point out the lack of training of most armed citizens and the decrease in safety inherent in their presence during violent encounters.

As you can see below, however, at the 33 incidents at which Armed Citizens were present, there were zero situations at which the Armed Citizen injured or killed an innocent person. It never happened.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 30, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...


was there a metal detector?

Was there a fence?


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 30, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > NotYourBody said:
> ...




even after a democrat President sent them on the Trail of Tears?


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 30, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > NotYourBody said:
> ...


What other freedoms are you willing to give up to prevent criminals from committing crimes?


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> > Police responded to the festival grounds around 5:30PM. Around 11 people were reportedly shot. One of them has died.
> ...


mass shootings are the least of our murder problems


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 30, 2019)

RealDave said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > An extreme gun control state, a gun free zone event....where they even had armed guards and metal detectors at all the gates....
> ...




Likely......mass shooters do not target places where people can carry guns...we know this from the shooters we capture and the shooters who left detailed notes on their attacks....

Orlando, Pulse Night club shooter wanted to attack Disney land

Pulse shooter’s initial target was Disney site, prosecutors say


Prosecutors say the Orlando nightclub shooter intended to attack Disney World’s shopping and entertainment complex by hiding a gun in a stroller but became spooked by police and chose the gay club as his target.



3/5/18
The Washington Post's School Shooter Profile: A Chilling Account | National Review

The second thing: The shooter reveals that he thought seriously about whether his target would be a “gun free zone.” I mention this not to endorse any particular policy, but to make it clear that it is by no means rare for those who would do harm to first scope out their destinations and to make sure that they won’t encounter much resistance. The shooter openly explains that he chose the local elementary school, rather than the school he was really angry with (his own), because it lacked an armed guard. He also admits to having researched how long it took cops to respond in the area (15 minutes), and how long it would be before SWAT was on site (45 minutes). This echoes comments made by the shooter at Isla Vista, who considered carrying out his attack on Halloween, but decided against it because there’d be “too many cops walking around during an event like Halloween, and cops are the only ones who can hinder my plans.”
*The actual story linked above...*

“I HAVE TO BEAT **** **** . .” he wrote nine days before the Sept. 28, 2016, shooting in a misspelled reference to the Sandy Hook killer,**** ****. “Atleast 40.”

*Two days later, he debated whether he should attack his middle school, from which he’d been expelled, or his elementary school, just up the road. *

*He decided on Townville Elementary because it was closer and had no armed security. *


“Itll be like shooting fish in a barrel,” he wrote his friends, whose identities remain unclear, along with whether the FBI has tracked any of them down. The agency declined to comment, citing Jesse’s open case.

In the chat, he said he had researched police response times for the area and found that it would take them 15 minutes to get there, maybe 45 for SWAT. He said he would throw pipe bombs into each classroom before he got in a shootout with police and killed himself with his shotgun. He said he had been planning a massacre for two years.

=========
The Colorado theater shooter evidence...

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/09/10/did-colorado-shooter-single-out-cinemark-theater.html#ixzz2F4pLqhxu

Yet, neither explanation is right. Instead, out of all the movie theaters within 20 minutes of his apartment showing the new Batman movie that night, it was the only one where guns were banned. In Colorado, individuals with permits can carry concealed handgun in most malls, stores, movie theaters, and restaurants. But private businesses can determine whether permit holders can carry guns on their private property.

Most movie theaters allow permit holders carrying guns. But the Cinemark movie theater was the only one with a sign posted at the theater’s entrance.

A simple web search and some telephone calls reveal how easily one can find out how Cinemark compared to other movie theaters. According to mapquest.com and movies.com, there were seven movie theaters showing "The Dark Knight Rises" on July 20th within 20 minutes of the killer’s apartment at 1690 Paris St, Aurora, Colorado. At 4 miles and an 8-minute car ride, the Cinemark’s Century Theater wasn't the closest. Another theater was only 1.2 miles (3 minutes) away.

There was also a theater just slightly further away, 10 minutes. It is the "home of Colorado's largest auditorium," according to their movie hotline greeting message. The potentially huge audience ought to have been attractive to someone trying to kill as many people as possible. Four other theaters were 18 minutes, two at 19 minutes, and 20 minutes away. But all of those theaters allowed permitted concealed handguns.

So why would a mass shooter pick a place that bans guns? The answer should be obvious, though it apparently is not clear to the media – disarming law-abiding citizens leaves them as sitting ducks




FBI: Dearborn Heights ISIS supporter planned to attack Detroit church

In conversation's between Abu-Rayyan and the undercover agent, Abu-Rayyan described his desire to commit a martyrdom operation.

The complaint filed in federal court doesn’t specify which Detroit church he was allegedly planning to attack, only that it was close and could seat 6,000 members.

The complaint quotes Abu-Rayyan saying:

_*“It's easy, and a lot of people go there. Plus people are not allowed to carry guns in church. Plus it would make the news. Everybody would've heard. Honestly I regret not doing it. If I can't do jihad in the Middle East, I would do my jihad over here."*_

He had also told the undercover agent that a church would be an easy target because people are not allowed to carry guns there and that it would make the news.
----------------
Minnesota…...

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/minn-teen-made-bombs-stockpiled-guns-prep-school-massacre-police-article-1.1776006

The unhinged teen told cops, after being busted Tuesday, that he planned to shoot his sister, mom and dad with a .22-caliber rifle before he went to a rural field and set a fire to distract cops.

The 11th-grader then said he planned to go to Waseca Junior and Senior High School where he would toss Molotov cocktails and explode pressure-cooker bombs to try and kill “as many students as he could” in the cafeteria during lunchtime.

About 1,000 students, in 7th through 12th grade, attend the school.

LaDue, according to the notebook of his plan, would kill the school resource officer before continuing to kill other students. He was prepared to be gunned down by a SWAT Team, police said.



************************


Vince Vaughn is right about guns (and was brave to be so honest) | Fox News

Last June, Elliot Rodger, who killed six people in Santa Barbara, Calif., explained his own choice. In his 141-page “Manifesto,” Rodger turned down alternate targets because he worried that someone with a gun would cut short his killing spree.

That same month, Justin Bourque shot to death three people in Canada. His Facebook page made fun of gun bans, with pictures of defenseless victims explaining to killers that they weren’t allowed to have guns.

The diary of the Aurora, Colorado, “Batman” movie theater killer, James Holmes, was finally released this past week. It was clear that he was considering both attacking an airport and a movie theater, but he turned down the airport option because he was concerned about their “substantial security.”

Of course, there are numerous other examples such as the Columbine killersopposing the concealed carry law that was then working its way through the state legislature. The bill would have allowed people to carry permitted concealed handguns on school property. The killers timed their attack for the very day that final passage of the law was planned for in the legislature.

If you go to the link for the Colorado theater shooter they have a photo of his journal where he has notes about airports…..he lists one of the items…."Substantial Security"

http://crimeresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/james-holmes-notebook-dragged.pdf
**************

Sandy hook, did not have police resource officer

Building a safer Sandy Hook |  News21: Gun Wars

The high school and middle school, which already had armed resource officers, doubled down on security and restricted all visitors that didn’t have prior permission to enter.

h


----------



## cnm (Jul 30, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> But gun nutters are a fearful bunch, and there are a lot of you in this country.


Never a truer word. Look at 2aguy, absolutely trembling with fear. I bet he's so scared he can't go grocery shopping without being armed with a sidearm.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 30, 2019)

RealDave said:


> Leo123 said:
> 
> 
> > Vandalshandle said:
> ...




They don't... they are only safe because no one decided to attack them....as this shooting shows, this gun free zone with metal detectors was still not safe......


----------



## cnm (Jul 30, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> mass shootings are the least of our murder problems


But they show quite high in your mass murder problems.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 30, 2019)

cnm said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > mass shootings are the least of our murder problems
> ...


less than 1% of all murders

like I said not much of a problem


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 30, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> cnm said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...




In 2018 there were 12 mass public shootings....with 93 killed.  600 million guns in the country.   Cars and pools kill more people than this every single year....we need to ban cars and pools. 

Knives kill more people than rifles.......we need to ban knives.....

For 2017.....with now more than 17.25 million Americans carrying guns for self defense....

Rifles...still kill fewer people each year than knives... 403

Knives.....1,591

Hands and feet......696

Clubs.....467

Cars.....over 38,000


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 30, 2019)

cnm said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > mass shootings are the least of our murder problems
> ...




It is a good thing he didn't use a rental truck for the attack......

In Nice, France, a muslim terrorist using a rental truck murdered 86 people and injured 435....

this guy...3 dead, 12 injured.... trucks are deadlier than rifles.


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 30, 2019)

There has never been a mass shooting at an NRA or FOP convention, even though NRA members and police officers are among the best armed people in the country.

Coincidence?   I don't think so.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 30, 2019)

cnm said:


> NotYourBody said:
> 
> 
> > But gun nutters are a fearful bunch, and there are a lot of you in this country.
> ...




Awwww...you're thinking of me......

We are lucky he didn't decide to use fire.....

He killed 3 with a rifle....the guy in Japan killed 35 with fire....we need to ban gasoline....

Kyoto Animation arson attack - Wikipedia

The arson killed at least 35 people and injured an additional 33, and destroyed most of materials and computers in Studio


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 30, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> There has never been a mass shooting at an NRA or FOP convention, even though NRA members and police officers are among the best armed people in the country.
> 
> Coincidence?   I don't think so.


For the most part legal gun owners are some of the most law abiding people in the country

People with concealed carry permits even more so


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 30, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> There has never been a mass shooting at an NRA or FOP convention, even though NRA members and police officers are among the best armed people in the country.
> 
> Coincidence?   I don't think so.




When normal people have guns during a mass shooting attack....they have a 94% success rate at stopping the attack and saving lives...

Armed Citizens Are Successful 94% Of The Time At Active Shooter Events [FBI]

*Of all the active shooter events there were 33 at which an armed citizen was present. Of those, Armed Citizens were successful at stopping the Active shooter 75.8% of the time (25 incidents) and were successful in reducing the loss of life in an additional 18.2% (6) of incidents. In only 2 of the 33 incidents (6.1%) was the Armed Citizen(s) not helpful in any way in stopping the active shooter or reducing the loss of life.

Thus the headline of our report that Armed Citizens Are Successful 94% Of The Time At Active Shooter Events.*


In the 2 incidents at which the armed citizen “failed” to stop or slow the active shooter, one is the previously mentioned incident with hunters. The other is an incident in which the CCWer was shot in the back in a Las Vegas Walmart when he failed to identify that there were 2 Active Shooters involved in the attack. He neglected to identify the one that shot him in the back while he was trying to ambush the other perpetrator.

We also decided to look at the breakdown of events that took place in gun free zones and the relative death toll from events in gun free zones vs non-gun-free zones.

Of the 283 incidents in our data pool, we were unable to identify if the event took place in a gun-free zone in a large number (41%) of the events. Most of the events took place at a business, church, home, or other places at which as a rule of law it is not a gun free zone but potentially could have been declared one by the property owner. Without any information in the FBI study or any indication one way or the other from the news reports, we have indicated that event with a question mark.

If you look at all of the Active Shooter events (pie chart on the top) you see that for those which we have the information, almost twice as many took place in gun free zones than not; but realistically the vast majority of those for which we have no information (indicated as ?) are probably NOT gun free zones.

If you isolate just the events at which 8 or more people were killed the data paints a different picture (pie chart on the bottom). In these incidents, 77.8% took place in a gun-free zone suggesting that gun free zones lead to a higher death rate vs active shooter events in general

=====

One of the final metrics we thought was important to consider is the potential tendency for armed citizens to injure or kill innocent people in their attempt to “save the day.” A common point in political discussions is to point out the lack of training of most armed citizens and the decrease in safety inherent in their presence during violent encounters.

As you can see below, however, at the 33 incidents at which Armed Citizens were present, there were zero situations at which the Armed Citizen injured or killed an innocent person. It never happened.


----------



## danielpalos (Jul 30, 2019)

westwall said:


> EvilEyeFleegle said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...


promote the general Welfare


----------



## cnm (Jul 30, 2019)

2aguy said:


> Awwww...you're thinking of me......


So, is it true you're so scared you carry a sidearm while grocery shopping?


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 30, 2019)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...


I know who he was talking about and there was no reason to talk about them in that way given the situation of Nazis marching the streets and killing a young lady.

Trump could t go on attack mode against the Nazi for reasons I’ll let you figure out... instead he had to divert and attack ANTIFA with the both sides comment. We all know what’s going on here. Same ol games


----------



## cnm (Jul 30, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> For the most part legal gun owners are some of the most law abiding people in the country


Sure thing.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 30, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


Not true


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 30, 2019)

iceberg said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...


I know what he meant. Wrong time and place to defend monument people and attack ANTIFA. It was a water down comment


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 30, 2019)

cnm said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > For the most part legal gun owners are some of the most law abiding people in the country
> ...


I've seen that meme somewhere just can't remember where and for what purpose


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 30, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...


Next time time formulating am actual counter argument and explain yourself. That’s how debates work


----------



## cnm (Jul 30, 2019)

Look, you guys are happy enough that recurring mass murders and sky high firearm homicide rates come with easy access to handguns and military style semi automatic rifles. No need to be so stridently defensive, carry your selfishness with pride.


----------



## iceberg (Jul 30, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


so - you intentionally misrepresented it? NOT an attack but if you knew what he meant and characterized it as "racist" anyway - don't you see this is why people get tired of the RACIST comments flung at trump? people know better but do it anyway.


----------



## iceberg (Jul 30, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


um...(biting tongue from past failed efforts on this track)


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 30, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


Next time don't use a stupid example to make your point


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 30, 2019)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...


What’s not true


----------



## Mindful (Jul 30, 2019)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> cnm said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...



Me too. 

Still figuring out the purpose.


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 30, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


Well there you go again, coming up empty on making a substantive argument. Let me help. Why is my example stupid? What is false or wrong about what I said?


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 30, 2019)

iceberg said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...




Before Donald J Trump disembarked from the escalator in June 2015, no one thought he was a "racist".

A lot of people thought he was a blowhard, and a shameless self promoter who thought too highly of himself.   Others disliked him for other reasons, since his divorces were covered by the media.    But NO ONE opined that the man was "racist".

The only reason Trump is called a "racist" is that the D's always call Republicans "racist".

Both McCain and Romney were considered by libs to be literally Hitler, Trump had to expect the same treatment.


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

2aguy said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > skye said:
> ...


Yes countries that have never been filled with guns have never had a mass shooting problem.  Go figure.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 30, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...



WHo here is going to bring a fully automatic machine gun to a football game?

No one that's who

Ergo it was a stupid example


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...



Move to one of those countries.  We won't miss you at all


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 30, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > There has never been a mass shooting at an NRA or FOP convention, even though NRA members and police officers are among the best armed people in the country.
> ...


Here in Idaho..we don't need no stinkin' permits! Law abiding? Same as the unarmed populace here..most are---some aren't.


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

2aguy said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> > California has banned guns, right? but...this sort of tragedy still happens over there!
> ...


And where did the shooter get his gun for mass killing?


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 30, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...



As it should be.


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


That won’t fix the problem.  Need to deport the gun nuts.


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 30, 2019)

iceberg said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...


No I didn’t intentionally misrepresent it. This issue has been beaten to death, anybody who is paid attention knows what he said and the context that it was said in. I’m not saying he called Nazis good people. I’ve made that argument since it happened.  But when Nazis march the streets and kill a woman and the president goes on attack against the people protesting them and co flares the issues then that is watering down the severity of what they did. Sorry man but that is a form of defense. Disgusting, I know


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


We don't have a problem

mass shootings account for less than 1% of all murders


----------



## iceberg (Jul 30, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


trump is a blowhard shameless self promoter. of that i 100% agree. many of his "lies" are him just blowing things up to look good. not quite the same as "no classified material went through my private server" but hey - whatever ya know?

my point is - and i think this made it clear - is that people paint him as such and then LOOK for ways to prove they are right. slade and i have been around a few times on whether or not trump is racist and so far, there is zero proof of it, just opinion and speculation linked together by fudging the truth to get a jab in at best, a flat out lie at worst.

the word have been beat to shit and literally has no meaning anymore. or at least any weight behind it.


----------



## iceberg (Jul 30, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


the president was seeing and addressing the bigger picture of what got them ALL there. not trying to take sides.

demanding someone take your side all the time or they are evil is yes, disgusting. i know.


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


Tell that to the dead people.  Why does it happen weekly if we don’t have a problem?  Our homicide rate is 4-5X higher than countries with strong gun control,  that’s a lot of lives.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...



People die every day what would you say to them?


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 30, 2019)

iceberg said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...


I didn’t say racist... you’re the first one to bring in that word. I said it was a defense of the Nazis by making a vague watered down statement attacking their opponents and complimenting people they were protesting with


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


When it comes to mass shootings I’d say they are really rare when there is strong gun control.  Why do you support mass killers?


----------



## NotYourBody (Jul 30, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> NotYourBody said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...


It's a BAD look. The Cherokee name belongs to Native Americans.


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 30, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


The two guys I was speaking to in this thread both said that they feel we have the constitutional right to do being a machine gun to a school. Do you agree with that?

So no it wasn’t a stupid example it was defining the boundaries of where we draw the line in regulation. So where do you stand?


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...



I don't 

Why do you want to take guns away from people who will never commit a murder?


----------



## emilynghiem (Jul 30, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...



Dear Slade3200
bigrebnc1775 is right.
Fine people referred to historic preservationists
and others on both sides of the Confederate history debate
that were focused on historic issues not on white supremacists, nationalists or race.

More information came out later, after the liberal spin in the media was already established as predominant,
that diverse groups of people (some in SUPPORT of PRESERVING HISTORIC STATUES and some OPPOSED who believed such statues should be removed) came out to that protest, including *Asian and Black participants from Texas on BOTH sides of the debate*.

This fuller explanation and context was conveniently left out in the media hype.

_NOTE: So was the REST of Trump's more recent statement where he referred to Omar going BACK to her country of origin,
and FIX THE PROBLEMS IN THOSE PLACES. 

In other words, show you can fix the problems before trying to tell other people and govt how to fix them._


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 30, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


Yeah yeah and Rs called Obama hitler all the time. I dont care much about what the wingnut partisans have to say.


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


Yes you do.  You make it easy for them to arm up.  Because lives are more important than a bunch of tools needing gun courage.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 30, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...



I don't care if people own machine guns

I have no problem with the owners of any property setting the rules on what is permissible on their property.

That said there is no reason to stop anyone who can legally carry a concealed weapon from doing so anywhere


----------



## iceberg (Jul 30, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


here we go wordsmithing again. 

you intentionally misrepresented trump and what he said. of that we've made clear.  now why do you do that? it was not a defense of the nazis that may have in fact been there, it was saying there are good people who want things REMOVED and there are good people who want shit to STAY PUT.

so fine. you called him a nazi supporter or defender then, knowing that wasn't who he was addressing. i won't bother to ask why at this point.

moving on.


----------



## NotYourBody (Jul 30, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> was there a metal detector?
> 
> Was there a fence?


Yes


----------



## iceberg (Jul 30, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...


and that was just as stupid. like i've said many times, "revenge politics sucks" yet people say NOT FAIR when done to them and call it stupid.

then turn right around and do it themselves and say "but they did it first". you wanna do that feel free. just don't try to pass yourself off as an adult in the process.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...



No I don't.

I don't sell guns to anyone.

We already have gun laws on the books to deal with illegal possession of firearms and when those laws are enforced they work


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 30, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> The term "cherokee" here refers to the LOCATION, Cherokee County, not the Cherokee tribe
> It's a BAD look. The Cherokee name belongs to Native Americans.




The name "French's mustard" and "French fries" don't "belong" to the French people?  Or do they?

Do the Germans have any control over"German measles"?

How about the Thais over people who are "Siamese twins"?

Just because "Cherokee" also applies to a tribe of Indians doesn't mean it can't be used by anyone else.


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 30, 2019)

iceberg said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...


I’d hope the POTUS and the rest of America would take a very clear strong and definitive side against Nazis on American soil. That transcends politics, or at least it should. Look how Trump attacks other issues and opponents and look how he handled this one. Night and day. There was no need to bring up the good people on both sides. The situation was well past statutes and on to Nazis and a dead girl. But he needed to attack ANTIFA and point the finger and that’s how he did it.


----------



## NotYourBody (Jul 30, 2019)

2aguy said:


> NotYourBody said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...



You can find a paper to support any position you want. 

I would also be okay with a complete ban on any and all guns. With harsh felony punishments for offenders.


----------



## NotYourBody (Jul 30, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> NotYourBody said:
> 
> 
> > The term "cherokee" here refers to the LOCATION, Cherokee County, not the Cherokee tribe
> ...


I'm sure the Cherokee are thrilled.

I was born and raised in Oklahoma.


----------



## iceberg (Jul 30, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


and i would hope people would stop using RACIST and NAZI so casually cause they're "offended" at someone elses not agreeing with them.

anti-fa is a bunch of asswhipes who are out there actively shutting down people from being able to speak their mind and then crying foul when bitch slapped.


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


Yes you do, you make really dangerous weapons legal.  Because of you the weapon used was legally purchased.


----------



## emilynghiem (Jul 30, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...



Dear Slade3200
Having a local agreement on school policy within a district is LOCAL.
That's different from FEDERAL REGULATIONS trying to ban or regulate guns for everyone across states and the nation.

Why don't you get that these are different?

Schools can decide democratically on their own if students can give invocations or speeches
referencing things that the local admin can approve or disapprove, or the students can vote on.

Why can't you and other liberals understand that's totally DIFFERENT from
judges or Congress in DC "mandating a policy for the entire nation" where nobody has a say otherwise!

By common sense, schools would not allow weapons that disrupt or threaten to breach the peace in 
the classroom and school setting.

Why would you think that "federal legislation or regulation" is needed for something simple
like that which just requires common sense school policies, such as not bringing pets to school
unless approved by the teachers or administration.  Does that require Congress to pass federal laws?

This is one area that really separates liberals from conservatives.

Just because a local law or state law on safety or on car insurance is democratically
voted on by people on that level,
suddenly the LIBERAL mind makes a huge leap that this means it's okay for
FEDERAL GOVT to mandate such laws FOR THE ENTIRE NATION.

That's not people voting on it or having a say through their local district reps for their own
district or state.

Going through Congress means 400 million people across 50 states are all
competing to be represented, and that's why the Constitution was set up to
LIMIT what duties and decisions authorized to Federal Govt so it DOESN'T
involve individual rights that should be decided democratically on state and local levels.

Like Duh.

Why don't Liberals get this?
There is a HUGE difference between local policies that only affect that district or
a state at most, vs. nationalized policies that attempt to make ONE LAW for the
entire population across all 50 states through a central Congressional vote.

Can you not grasp the difference in representation that different
issues require that are better decided LOCALLY vs. NATIONALLY?


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 30, 2019)

emilynghiem said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...


Hi Emily, I understand that and am fine with preserving statues. I’m not a supporter of destroying statues... but that’s besides the point. I’ve explained in my last few posts


----------



## NotYourBody (Jul 30, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> NotYourBody said:
> 
> 
> > The term "cherokee" here refers to the LOCATION, Cherokee County, not the Cherokee tribe
> ...


It doesn't ALSO apply to Native Americans of the Cherokee tribe (not Indians). It is the name if these people.


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 30, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


Well there you ago, another who is fine with anybody taking a machine gun into schools... this is why it’s not a dumb question. It gets right to the heart of the issue and shows how far somebody will go.

To somebody like myself it is obviously dangerous and inappropriate to have guns in schools like that. I just don’t trust my fellow citizens to be cool calm and responsible all the time and I’d prefer to limit, not openly allow mass killing machines around my kids. People are over emotional idiots in general. If they want to carry they better damn well prove that they are knowledgeable in gun safety and show that they are stable/responsible people.


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 30, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...




Well, what are you willing to do about it?

Are you ready for all government schools to follow those in Urban areas and have metal detectors and body cavity searches for the students?


----------



## OldLady (Jul 30, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> NotYourBody said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


An electrified fence?  With all the kids there?  Are you serious?


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 30, 2019)

emilynghiem said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


The constitutionalists here don’t think states have the rights to limit or regulate the second amendment.


----------



## OldLady (Jul 30, 2019)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > Leo123 said:
> ...


Explain?


----------



## pismoe (Jul 30, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...


-------------------------------------   think it unAmerican and unethical for 'head doktors' to go around labeling people as being Crazy isn't it   'NYBod .


----------



## OldLady (Jul 30, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > Leo123 said:
> ...


Does it take 29 rifles to protect your own life?  How many handguns?
LIMITING and strictly registering and vetting owners of firearms would not take away the opportunity for responsible people from bearing arms.  The founders lived in a very different world, culturally and technologically.  That is why the Constitution was designed to change with the times.


----------



## Olde Europe (Jul 30, 2019)

P@triot said:


> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...



Gawd...

2,000 folks, densely packed, take 200 of them "packing heat".  None of them ever heard a shot fired in anger, none of them with the extensive training and discipline of professionals, a good bunch of them in all states of inebriation, and then they hear a few rounds shot from ... somewhere.  Everyone running around in panic, one out of ten with a gun, lots of others with things in their hands easily confused with guns, no one could pick the shooter out of a line-up, and no one even knows how many shooters there are.  You find would-be "good guys with a gun" in all states of mind, from wetting their pants to proving their manliness by "I got him!  I got the shooter!", and shooting at everything that moves.

Then the police arrive, all-out carnage still ongoing, putting down everyone with a gun, or moving suspiciously, just to save their own arses from being caught in the multiple lines of crossfire.

If you cannot see that would result in carnage not seen up to now outside war zones, you sure are the dumbest blockhead not named bigrebnc1775.  Truly, solving the puzzle how you learned to breathe would be worthy a Nobel Prize.


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 30, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


I think I schools have the right to make whatever rules and policy that they see fit. Same for counties and states.


----------



## pismoe (Jul 30, 2019)

OldLady said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...


---------------------------------------------------------    in the USA you can own any number of cars , motorcycles or guns that you like .   And that being said , only one gun at a time can be used at a time OldLady .  And your claim that the Constitution was DESIGNED to change with the times is your OPINION  OldLady .


----------



## iceberg (Jul 30, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...



that isn't what he said, now is it?
he has no problem with people owning machine guns. i would disagree but his opinion, his right.
he has no problem with people who own property setting the rules for what is allowed in on it. this would include schools and the like. if you don't want guns on there you can be a gun free zone. your call has he said.

he said he feels IF YOU ARE LICENSED you should be able to carry a concealed weapon anywhere. while i could think this contradicts his previous statement of letting someone set the rules for their property - he never said a thing about carrying machine guns around schools.

last i checked, a machine gun is NOT a concealed weapon so to link that to a school is you doing it for emotional impact and misconstruing what he did in fact say, twisting it to a loose interpretation you'd not allow someone to do to you. in essence you took what he said and slammed it to an extreme "machine guns in schools" statement OF WHICH HE NEVER SAID was cool. you said it for him then went on a rant about his views you just gave him.

i'd ask why you do that but i'm more afraid you'd tell me.


----------



## Vandalshandle (Jul 30, 2019)

OldLady said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > NotYourBody said:
> ...



Yes, they are serious, and no amount of common sense is going to penetrate this kind of insane thinking. A room full of gun nuts is about as rational as a room full of conspiracy theorists who are totally convinced that the CIA, FBI, LBJ, Cuba, and the mob all conspired together to kill JFK, and got away with it. You would make more profitable use of your time teaching physics to your dog.


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

pismoe said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


The 2nd amendment was clearly for defending the country, not self defense.  Militias aren’t for self defense.  Now that we have the worlds strongest military, the 2nd has no point.


----------



## NotYourBody (Jul 30, 2019)

OldLady said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > NotYourBody said:
> ...


It's how people think when they live in constant fear.


----------



## Defiant1 (Jul 30, 2019)

OldLady said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > NotYourBody said:
> ...




They would only have to touch it once to learn their lesson...


----------



## OldLady (Jul 30, 2019)

pismoe said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


No, it's not an opinion, Pismoe.  
Article 5
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 30, 2019)

iceberg said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


You missed my original question that he was responding to. I was talking to two others yesterday (patriot and bigrebnc) and asked if they supported any citizens ability to walk into a store and buy a machine gun as easy as buying a slurpy and then take it to a high school football game and hold it as they watched. Both posters I was talking to said yes they supported it. Schools and states don’t have the right to infringe on the second amendment. Blues man called it a stupid question and we went from there.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jul 30, 2019)

satrebil said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...


Typical rightwing sophistry.


----------



## Defiant1 (Jul 30, 2019)

OldLady said:


> pismoe said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...




Do you believe we have inalienable rights or only the rights "bestowed" upon us by the government?


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 30, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...




Which is it, counties or states?

In Pennsylvania, the state alone does gun control.  The county of Philadelphia has been largely put in their place that they can't ban weapons like NY or Baltimore.

In the state of Washington, the Leftist rulers impose massive gun control on the whole state, even in the civilized eastern reaches of the realm.


----------



## iceberg (Jul 30, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...



you mean where he said "who would bring a machine gun to a football game?" and followed up with no one, it's a stupid question?

Breaking News - Mass shooting: At Least 11 Shot At Gilroy Garlic Festival

i went back 250 posts and never saw him say it's fine to bring a machine gun to a school. please give me your direct reference.


----------



## Marion Morrison (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...








*"we found that about 86 percent of mass public shootings took place in gun-free zones from 2009 to 2016."*

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...pen-in-gun-free-zones/?utm_term=.bfa951cdbf83


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 30, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...


Well that depends on what is trying to be legislated. Some laws are appropriate for federal, like restrictions on automatic weapons, other rules can be handled statewide or by localities. How about you answer my question. Do you believe in a completely unrestricted 2nd amendment? So any citizen can easily buy an auto and take it to a school football game. No questions asked... do you support that?


----------



## NotYourBody (Jul 30, 2019)

pismoe said:


> NotYourBody said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...



We should at least try to identify the crazy people trying to buy a gun.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...



FYI an AR 15 is not "really" dangerous
In fact there are a hell of lot more things that are more dangerous than guns out there in the world.

What you people can't seem to understand is that I am not responsible for the bad acts of another person.

Maybe we should all have our drivers licenses suspended because some people drive drunk huh?


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 30, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...



Where did I say that?

It's pretty tough to carry a fully automatic rifle in a concealed fashion

But if I was going to let anyone own a fully automatic rifle it would be a person with a concealed carry permit as that group of people is the most law abiding group of people in the country


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 30, 2019)

OldLady said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...



It doesn't matter how many guns a person owns.

People who possess and use guns legally are not the problem here.

Why do you want to make law abiding people out to be the bad guys here?


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

Marion Morrison said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


Bet they didn’t get the gun in a gun free zone did they?  The problem is easy access to weapons for mass killing.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> pismoe said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...



and the fact that a person has the absolute right to defend his life was so obvious that the founders didn't think it needed to be codified 

I guess they couldn't imagine a person could ever think otherwise


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


And yet they have been used to kill over 50 people really quickly by one shooter . Seems dangerous to me.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...



So?

Anyone could do the same thing with a really big truck and a snow plow

And it's not the gun that is dangerous it's the person shooting it that is the danger


----------



## Defiant1 (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Marion Morrison said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...




What is your criteria for defining a "problem?"


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 30, 2019)

iceberg said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...


I had two posters literally say bring guns into schools. And then blues guy calls it a stupid question and when pressed responds with this...
“I don't care if people own machine guns

I have no problem with the owners of any property setting the rules on what is permissible on their property.

That said there is no reason to stop anyone who can legally carry a concealed weapon from doing so anywhere”

You are right he never said the words “bring guns into school”... he played around giving a direct answer so I shot back... I’ll take back my comment and ask him to further clarify if he believes the second amendment can and should be restricted by federal, state and or local laws or should it not. If not then legally anybody would be able to buy and bring a gun into a school. If so then he believes we can regulate it


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > pismoe said:
> ...


I’m getting pretty old and have never needed a gun for defense, nor do I know anyone who has.  A life seems well defended without guns. And since countries with strong gun control have homicide rates a fraction of ours, much better defended with fewer guns.

And they didn’t think they had to point out weapons for mass killing should be illegal.  That’s common sense.


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

Defiant1 said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Marion Morrison said:
> ...


People dying regularly,  something that doesn’t happen in other countries.


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 30, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


Where in the constitution does it say concealed? It does say shall not be infringed. Are you supporting conceal laws and regulations on firearms? If so then I apologize for mischaracterizing your statement


----------



## Defiant1 (Jul 30, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> pismoe said:
> 
> 
> > NotYourBody said:
> ...



You don't think that is being done now?
Have you ever seen the NICS form?
What would you do different?


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


I feel pretty safe from trucks on the 3rd floor of this building.  They put up barriers and close roads to take care of that problem.


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...





Actually, it does happen in other countries all the time.   America is in the middle of the pack as far as murder rates.  The homicide rates in places like Congo, Mexico, El Salvador is far higher than in America.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


I don't care about you.

I do not live my life by the standards you set for yourself.

I have been the victim of a violent crime.  I know there is real violence in the world and I have the scars to prove it.

And if you want to make everything that can be used to kill many people at once illegal then you'd find that a lot of things you don't think are "dangerous" would be illegal


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...



Doesn't negate the fact that it's the person who is the danger  not the gun


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Defiant1 said:
> ...


Yes unstable countries.  How about Germany, UK, Japan, France?


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


I don't care what goes on in other countries


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


And a dangerous person with easy access to guns is a whole lot more danger than an unarmed one.


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...


Didn’t think you had an intelligent response.  So you prefer lots of murder.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...



And it still only accounts for less than 1% of all murders


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


Which is a lot of death in a country of over 300 million.  A huge percent of murder involves firearms.  Hundreds die each year just in accidents.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...



We already know how to reduce murders committed with firearms and that is to actually enforce the gun laws we already have on the books.

And I still don't give a shit about what other countries do,

There is no real free speech in any of those countries you want to be like either.


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


Yes we do.  Homicides dropped drastically after we got background checks.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...



So now you want to make everything that can accidentally kill you illegal too?

MAybe it would be easier for you to list the things you think should be legal


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...




The people seeking to come into America as Illegals nowadays aren't coming from Germany, or Japan, or France or the UK.

They ARE, however, coming in from Mexico, other Latin American and African countries.

That makes the murder rates there a lot more relevant.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


 And they dropped even more when we were actually prosecuting gun offenses as federal crimes

Virginia Project Exile

*Study 1*
*Firearm Homicide Rates, Project Exile*
Rosenfeld and colleagues (2005) found a statistically significant intervention effect for Project Exile. Firearm homicides in Richmond exhibited a 22 percent yearly decline, compared with the average reduction of about 10 percent per year for other large U.S. cities. The difference is statistically significant.


----------



## pismoe (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


--------------------------------------   YOU just keep HIDING and being Scared .  I expect that kind of behavior from you and yer ilk   Brian .


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


Just sharing the facts.  We can do away with useless things like guns that can accidentally kill you.


----------



## Jitss617 (Jul 30, 2019)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> satrebil said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...


More educated responses from the left


----------



## iceberg (Jul 30, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


so like i said - you took pieces of a conversation and put them together on your own - each step requiring an assumption on your part to link the two.

i've pointed this out to you a lot, DamnDude  has also and others i'm sure.

before i say someone is ok with bringing a machine gun to school i'm going to ask the direction question. not ask things like "so you think people should own machine guns" and get a yes and then extrapolate to our own ends and in effect, create a strawman along the way. and it looks like he answered your questions, you just didn't like them or they were not what you wanted him to say, so you went this route.

from my vantage point anyway.


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


We have the highest incarceration rate in the world.  Yet countries with strong gun control and fewer in jail have much lower homicide rates.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...



HOw many other things that can accidentally kill you are "useless"

And FYI self defense with the best tool for the job is extremely useful


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

pismoe said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


The scared ones run around with guns like you while our children die.  Sad.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


And we tend to incarcerate mostly nonviolent criminals.


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...




outlawing guns won't make access any less easy for dangerous people.

Dangerous individuals- juvenile delinquents, felons, the insane, Illegal aliens- still aren't permitted to buy weapons in legal outlets.   They have to go to guys selling out of their cars, hotel rooms, backrooms of bars, cocktail lounges and taverns.   Those guys don't do background checks.  

Of course, Draconian gun control will just push law abiders into the black market for their self-preservation needs.   Is that what libs want?


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


Haven’t needed one.  Think those involved in criminal activities are most likely to need it.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> pismoe said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


not one person has ever died as a result of my gun ownership


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


We incarcerate a lot of everyone.


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > pismoe said:
> ...


This mass shooter would have said the same thing a few days ago.


----------



## pismoe (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


-------------------------------   Instability can happen pretty quickly , see 'germany' of the 30s and 40s   Brian .    See 'germany' and other 'euro' countries TODAY with their  imported populations of violent third worlders   Brian .


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...




Those are countries that really have little in common with America.   Those countries which we are similar with have similar rates


----------



## emilynghiem (Jul 30, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> emilynghiem said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...



Dear Slade3200
The way to say this using Constitutional language with a Constitutionalist
is the Second Amendment is part of the Bill of Rights. So the rest of the
Bill of Rights has to be equally enforced and obeyed to prevent any criminal
abuses of the 2nd Amendment.

This way of explaining it precludes and prevents any need for additional regulations.
Except maybe to REQUIRE that people invoking the Second Amendment be
LAW ABIDING CITIZENS who agree to uphold the rest of the Constitution.

(which includes right of the people PEACEABLY to assemble and to
SECURITY in their persons, houses, and effects and not to be deprived
of liberty without DUE PROCESS OF LAWS. So all Constitutionalists
believe in those principles as part of the Bill of Rights. by enforcing
all these principles consistently in the SAME CONTEXT, then
the 2nd Amendment then cannot be abused to violate laws or rights of others)

the people who invoke and defend the 2nd Amendment ALREADY believe
in enforcing the other laws within the same context. So this isn't adding
any new regulations, it's just enforcing Constitutional laws as a whole.


----------



## Defiant1 (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...




Not enough.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


no we incrcerate more people for noviolent crimes than we do for violent crimes


----------



## Defiant1 (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...




And your plan that would have stopped him?


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

pismoe said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...


You claiming we are unstable?


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 30, 2019)

iceberg said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...


I apologized to him and ask him to clarify his position. Thanks for keeping me in check


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...



irrelevant.

Unless you want to start convicting people of crimes they haven't committed


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

Defiant1 said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


Not letting him legally buy a rifle for mass killing would be a good start.


----------



## pismoe (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


-------------------------------------------   its the price paid to have the FREEDOM to own effective guns Brian .   Same as deaths on the highways and byways where we have more deaths caused by cars and vehicles .     Vehicle deaths are just the price paid for the FREEDOM to own and use , drive cars and vehicles  Brian .


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


It’s a fact.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


you mean not letting him buy any rifle though don't you?


----------



## Defiant1 (Jul 30, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...




You know they would if they could, especially against conservatives.


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

pismoe said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


We don’t need the freedom to quickly become a mass killer.


----------



## Defiant1 (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...




So rifles are for mass killing?


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Defiant1 said:
> ...


Bolt action is fine.  Most countries with strong gun control allow certain rifles.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


So what?

How many people with penises have committed rape?

In your mind all people with penises are just rapists in waiting.

Maybe we should just castrate everyone with a penis so as to end all rape


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> pismoe said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...




America is fairly unstable.   We have a large number of citizens in this country that still don't recognize the 2016 Presidential Election results as legit and are still trying to overturn them


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

Defiant1 said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Defiant1 said:
> ...


Semi autos with high capacity magazines.  See the Vegas and Orlando mass shootings.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...



once again IDGAF about other countries


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > pismoe said:
> ...


Compared to Mexico we are very stable.


----------



## Defiant1 (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...



So if a car pulls up in your driveway and 4 thugs with their pants below their asses get out, you want a bolt action rifle?


----------



## pismoe (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> pismoe said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


--------------------------------    READ about the purpose and the reasoning behind the 'Second Amendment'  Brian .


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


Yes you prefer lots of murder.


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 30, 2019)

emilynghiem said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > emilynghiem said:
> ...


How do the other elements of the bill of rights justify the gun laws we currently have in the books. Connect the dots for me if you will


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

pismoe said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > pismoe said:
> ...


I have.  With the strongest military in the world we don’t need militias.


----------



## emilynghiem (Jul 30, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...



Make up your mind then Slade3200
1. if you don't take it literally calling Obama "Hitler" then do you treat liberals
calling Trump Hitler or Racist just as flippantly?
2. Do you want to be taken seriously and your objections addressed and included/represented?
Why treat "rightwing" as not counting seriously, but then want your issues to be considered?

Whatever way you want to be taken,
if you take others that way, you get reciprocal treatment in return.

Respect is earned. If you want to be represented, it makes
sense to respect how others represent their views, issues,
concerns and objections instead of both sides trying to overrule each other.

Wouldn't we be better off ADDRESSING each other's objections
so we can solve problems EFFECTIVELY instead of imposing back and forth?

What science or math problems were ever solved by erasing and excluding
half the data? Doesn't it just make sense if we are going to construct reforms,
policies and programs that REPRESENT THE AMERICAN PUBLIC this means
INCLUDING not excluding input from ALL PEOPLE, not just ones we identify with.

What happened to the Golden Rule, of treating others as you want to be treated?
How else are we going to achieve "equal justice under law" for EVERYONE
if we keep competing to ignore, overrule and exclude opposing groups???


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 30, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


What odds to you give him to actually answer the question and clarifying the position? ;-)


----------



## pismoe (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


-----------------------------------------------------   and an unstable 'south america' and mexico and drug cartels may one day need to be fought using effective privately owned guns  , who knows eh Brian ??


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 30, 2019)

emilynghiem said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...


I live by the golden rule. I have my opinions and political leanings but do my best to give all sides a fair shot. Not sure what your gripe with me is. I don’t support the lefts hyperbole about Trump. But I also call out a lot of his bullshit


----------



## iceberg (Jul 30, 2019)

emilynghiem said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...


and this is my point not to just slade, but both sides who do this all the time.

they say it's ignorant to call Obama/Trump names like hitler, nazi, racist and other extreme names and defend their chosen side it would seem to the "death". but then they turn around and do the very same thing they called stupid but only now it's ok cause they're doing it to someone they hate.

if someone else doing an action makes them stupid, then i would fall under that same "stupid" connotation if i do the same thing.


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 30, 2019)

pismoe said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...





America's privately own firearms is what keeps America stable.

If we continue to keep the border open,and confiscate the weapons of American citizens, allowing MS13 et al to run wild---how stable would we be then?


----------



## iceberg (Jul 30, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> emilynghiem said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


for someone who doesn't support the hyperbole, you sure to engage in it a lot.

trump is full of shit a lot. yes. but that's not nazi, communist, racist or the like. somewhere along the way we've lost sense of meaning in words and can only use the most extreme to describe people, devaluing the meaning of extreme words in the end.


----------



## Defiant1 (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...




Both were very poor kill ratios given the crowd size.  Add the time allowed in the Orlando shooting and it's a piss poor ratio.
In fact in I would say it was a poor choice of weapons in both shootings.
In Orlando a shotgun and handguns would have resulted in a higher ratio.
In Vegas the bump stocks made most of his bullets miss, then destroyed the barrels of the weapons.
There are more accurate weapons available.  He should have crashed his airplane into the crowd.
That's even better than a rental truck.


----------



## Dick Foster (Jul 30, 2019)

OK for all of the anti gun nut lefttards out there, answer this question. A good portion of households in Switzerland have an evil military assault rifle stashed in a closet so where are the waves of gun violence and mass shootings? If it's the guns as you say then the problem should exist there but if it's people  and not guns it's long past time for you to shut your stupid yaps because you don't have brains enough to be preaching to anyone about anything. In fact you should stay away from the voting booth altogether too.


----------



## emilynghiem (Jul 30, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> emilynghiem said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...



Great Slade3200 as long as you treat both sides the same
and stick to where the two agree, then we can still establish common truth.


----------



## NotYourBody (Jul 30, 2019)

Defiant1 said:


> NotYourBody said:
> 
> 
> > pismoe said:
> ...


I would ban all guns and enact stiff felony prison sentences for offenders.

Barring that, I would look for something that has not already failed. Because the crazies are still buying legal guns.

In reality, gun nutters are too afraid to ever get their white knuckles loose from their guns willingly.

I expect the next Democrat president to take executive action. The Supremes see to be okay with that notion.


----------



## emilynghiem (Jul 30, 2019)

iceberg said:


> emilynghiem said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...



Yes iceberg it's equally stupid and detracting when either sides
engages in this.

it looks like Slade3200 acknowledges as much of the hype/hyperbole on the left
is equally dismissable. So that means we can cut all that crap out,
and just stick to the real issues, shall we?


----------



## iceberg (Jul 30, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...


from reading his replies, he has clarified it. but no, not to the manner you wish.

my take on bluesman:
if you're licensed you should be able to own a gun even up to a machine gun. logic being that to get licensed you've gone through every gambit and check that can be thrown at you and came up clean. while i may not agree with private people owning machine guns, it doesn't matter as he gave a trail from idea to reasoning behind it.

if you're licensed you should be able to carry concealed weapons where you wish. he never said a thing about machine guns in schools and even said no one would or should take them to a football game. i assume he means a school game but in any event, he clarified his point.

as for what other people do - don't care really. i care about what i do cause i'm the only one i can control. sometimes.


----------



## NotYourBody (Jul 30, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


If everyone could carry a bomb, think how safe we would be.


----------



## iceberg (Jul 30, 2019)

emilynghiem said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > emilynghiem said:
> ...


i wish. but he can be hard headed (as we all can) in seeing this at times. when you REALLY HATE SOMEONE objectivity is so very hard to come by. me and hillary for example. there's a lot of things i think about her and none on the good side. but this doesn't mean she deserves or should have less rights than the rest of us. while i think she's "gotten away" with things, it happens in life. there will simply never be a final reckoning here on earth that will satisfy us when looking at those we emotionally cannot stand.

we've let ourselves be driven by 90% emotions and that is a hallmark of the left. being emotional in your arguments. i'm more a math person and does it add up? i try not to take emotional shortcuts but i'm human, it can happen. but i still try to avoid it. i seldom if ever call obama, hillary and others jr high DEMOCRAP / RETHUGLICAN type names cause that's elementary playground bullshit and nothing adults in my mind should be doing.

when people just dive into the name calling i've found it's usually because they have nothing else to offer. Slade3200  does this but hes not completely driven by it. in this thread he even saw it and backed up a bit. more than most do so credit where credit is due. someone like edward37  will just rant and rave in hate and never bother to put it down. terminally a child in my mind but hey - his life.

anyway - time to go do something hopefully a bit more productive today and make some mind maps for projects i've got going on at work.


----------



## NotYourBody (Jul 30, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> Actually, it does happen in other countries all the time.   America is in the middle of the pack as far as murder rates.  The homicide rates in places like Congo, Mexico, El Salvador is far higher than in America.



I bet if we keep going, we can catch up.


----------



## emilynghiem (Jul 30, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > NotYourBody said:
> ...



Dear NotYourBody
You are welcome to enact whatever bans you want in YOUR district
that is democratically decided under the terms your local residents agree
to be governed under.

Similar to prolife who want to ban abortions and don't want to fund any of that either.
You are free to set up such policies within your own districts and fund whatever
you want to follow by democratic process you all agree to.

However, this does not give you authority to impose your beliefs
on other people in other districts and states. Alaskan laws
apply to citizens within that state. Same with Texas laws that Texans decide democratically.

If we can agree to respect the same democratic process for all people,
maybe we can stop this posturing and MISREPRESENTATION that electing
people by party gives anyone the right or authority to impose their parties BELIEFS
on the rest of the nation by abusing govt to establish such beliefs at the expense of other CREEDS.

That's against Civil Rights and Equal Protection of people from "discrimination by CREED"
to establish your beliefs and deprive others of their rights and liberties without DUE PROCESS.

That's fine if you establish your own beliefs and policies locally by democratic process
within Constitutional protections and limits on govt.

But quit this abusive fraud of promoting the false notion that anyone
can impose and enforce federal legislation that deprives other citizens
of the same rights to due process and democratic representation.

You are doing a huge disservice by undermining Constitutional laws
principles and process by falsely teaching it is lawful to take your
local policy and mandate it for the entire nation through Congress.

That's unconstitutional, and we all share responsibility to start teaching this correctly!
www.ethics-commission.net


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 30, 2019)

iceberg said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > emilynghiem said:
> ...


I’ve never called trump Nazi commie or racist. He is an opportunist and while trying to appear tough and gain political points he has made racist remarks, emboldened bigots, and stirred hate and division... many left wingnuts have done the same. But yes I focus more on Trump, he is the POTUS after all


----------



## Olde Europe (Jul 30, 2019)

Dick Foster said:


> OK for all of the anti gun nut lefttards out there, answer this question. A good portion of households in Switzerland have an evil military assault rifle stashed in a closet so where are the waves of gun violence and mass shootings? If it's the guns as you say then the problem should exist there but if it's people  and not guns it's long past time for you to shut your stupid yaps because you don't have brains enough to be preaching to anyone about anything. In fact you should stay away from the voting booth altogether too.



Ludicrous.  What you know about gun regulations in Switzerland can be written on a needle.  A very, very tiny needle.  Because, quite obviously, your gun propaganda handlers didn't feed you the goods on that.


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 30, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > Actually, it does happen in other countries all the time.   America is in the middle of the pack as far as murder rates.  The homicide rates in places like Congo, Mexico, El Salvador is far higher than in America.
> ...




Only if America adopts the same kind of Gun Control they have in Mexico and other countries.    The reputation of American citizens of being armed is a real discouragement to MS13 gangsters and Islamic State terrorists and they limit their activities here.


----------



## NotYourBody (Jul 30, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...


They are not coming here to kill Meemaw. They are coming here for work.

Try not to be so afraid all the time.


----------



## iceberg (Jul 30, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


last time we got into it was because you were saying trump was making racist statements about GO BACK HOME comments. any attempt to tone that down didn't fare well with you and it just got ugly.

now we find the very people he was talking to/about said the same thing 4+ years ago yet for them it's not racist.

that word changes meaning as people need it to and that's a huge part of our problem.


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 30, 2019)

emilynghiem said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > emilynghiem said:
> ...


I’m always going to be swayed by my personal preference and focus. That doesn’t mean I’m deaf to good counter arguments, but we are emotional beings and it would be ignorant for me to think that my arguments aren’t shaped by my opinions


----------



## pismoe (Jul 30, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > Actually, it does happen in other countries all the time.   America is in the middle of the pack as far as murder rates.  The homicide rates in places like Congo, Mexico, El Salvador is far higher than in America.
> ...


----------------------------------------------   if the USA keeps importing the mentioned third worlders the USA will probably Catch UP   'NYBod.


----------



## emilynghiem (Jul 30, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...



Dear NotYourBody
carrying bombs and other hazardous explosives
violates the right of people to security, by causing
a breach or disruption of the peace and threats to public safety.
(see Amendments One, Four, and Fourteen among others
such threats would violate: www.ethics-commission.net)

Again if we taught Constitutional laws consistently,
maybe we'd enforce better RESPECT for the equal rights and
protections of others instead of treating freedom to mean lawlessness.

Having Constitutional rights and freedoms does NOT MEAN
abusing these to the point of BREACHING other Constitutional laws
such as liberty, due process, SECURITY and equal protections.

By teaching these in full context, none of the rights can be
taken OUT OF CONTEXT to violate other laws or rights.

Wouldn't that be the most effective way to enforce laws?
By teaching that they CHECK THEMSELVES when taught
in context with the rest of the Bill of Rights and Constitution?


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 30, 2019)

pismoe said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


And the opinion of many, many others..in fact..probably a majority of Americans believe that the Constitution is a 'living document".  I know you find that view abhorrent..but..as you say..that's your OPINION.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 30, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...



Once again we have a reduction to the ridiculous.

All that signifies is that you have no real argument.


----------



## Defiant1 (Jul 30, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...




I don't know about bombs, but hand grenades would be useful.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


Good for you but your life is not the standard that applies to anyone else but you

And I wasn't involved in any criminal activities when I was jumped and beaten to the tune of 3 cracked ribs, a lacerated spleen, a fractured eye orbital and a severe concussion

Only a moron would think his little sheltered life is the standard for everyone


----------



## Defiant1 (Jul 30, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > NotYourBody said:
> ...




So you don't believe a person has an *inalienable right* to protect their life, their family, and their property?


----------



## NotYourBody (Jul 30, 2019)

Defiant1 said:


> So if a car pulls up in your driveway and 4 thugs with their pants below their asses get out, you want a bolt action rifle?


That seems pretty random. Does it happen to you often?


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 30, 2019)

iceberg said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


I think he is padding his answers hiding behind laws that are currently in the books when I’m trying to get clear about his opinion on our right to make laws that regulate guns. There are many absolutists out there they truly believe that no regulations should be in place as that’s what the constitution says. They want guns everywhere as they think it makes everybody safer. I disagree with this viewpoint and I like to see where the person I’m debating stands. If it is determined that we do have the right and responsibility to regulate guns then we can move into what makes sense.

This debate often gets locked up by the 2nd amendment as an unalienable Right that shall not be infringed upon. Cant get into common ground in regulations when you debating somebody who believes that it can’t be regulated


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 30, 2019)

Defiant1 said:


> NotYourBody said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


not really as they are too indiscriminate

an effective self defense weapon is one that can be directed accurately


----------



## OldLady (Jul 30, 2019)

Defiant1 said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > pismoe said:
> ...


Isn't there something about "natural rights" like life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness?  I don't know.  I'm not a philosopher.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 30, 2019)

OldLady said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...



And you don't realize that you position is against the natural right of self preservation do you?

I firearm is the single most effective tool for self defense.


----------



## pismoe (Jul 30, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> pismoe said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...


-----------------------------------   Not me .    There seem to be enough like me to keep thing halfway going my way for my lifetime at least .   Lots of fights , money spent but things are ok for my generation I think .   Depending on your age its YOU and younger Americans that are fecked as things change  'EEFleegle


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 30, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > So if a car pulls up in your driveway and 4 thugs with their pants below their asses get out, you want a bolt action rifle?
> ...




It definitely happens to some people , you know.   Sure, a more limited weapon is all that some people need.  But others, depending on the area they live in or the acquaintances they keep, need more powerful weapons.   That's why EACH INDIVIDUAL should choose what weapons they need, not the government.


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 30, 2019)

iceberg said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...


Go back home is not a racist comment but Trumps was more than that... no need to get back into that discussion, that’s a whole different can of worms


----------



## iceberg (Jul 30, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


its hard to get into a regulation discussion with a gun rights advocate when the left says GET RID OF THEM ALL after saying WE'RE NOT COMING FOR YOUR GUNS.

most gun rights people would be willing to talk about options except that historically the left never stops at "just 1 statue" to be removed, now do they? they tend to treat a compromise or agreement as a starting point to go after the rest of what they want.

hell it wasn't til recently the media stopped saying an AR15 was an automatic weapon. it is not. it never has been. it's also not an assault rifle but over time, the left, as they tend to do, has degraded the word to fit their views and gets pretty upset if you don't follow along on that journey. when pressed for how an AR15 is different from a browning longtrac rifle (also a semi-automatic in .308 form in this example) they can't do it. when they realized an AR is about the same as a .22 in how they fire, they now want all semi-automatics gone. the more they learn about a topic the more they want it gone, not compromised.

you tell me - how do you reasonably find common ground with people who won't allow that to happen but keep altering the landscape until they get what they FEEL they want?


----------



## iceberg (Jul 30, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


except that is all he said. the rest was you putting YOUR 2+2=Racist comment together by making assumptions we've already also discussed in this thread about blues man and what he was actually saying vs. what you were saying he was saying.

when it's only racist when 1 person does it, it's not racist.

and your not liking the manner in which he answers your questions doesn't make his answers wrong or hiding either.


----------



## Defiant1 (Jul 30, 2019)

OldLady said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...



Exactly. But they aren't the only "natural rights." Jefferson used the words "amongst them."
If you truly believe we have these natural rights, you have to believe we have them outside the concept of any government.
If you believe these rights are more important than any other, i.e. right to vote, right of free speech against your government, right to an attorney, etc.,then you have to believe you have the inalienable, "natural right" to protect them.


----------



## pismoe (Jul 30, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > Defiant1 said:
> ...


---------------------------------------------   SELF PRESERVATION ---   I think that its an urge r thinking that many millennials  softies and liberals , dems have forgotten and don't understand .


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 30, 2019)

iceberg said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...


Well you speak with a person at a time. I’m on the left, I believe in smart regulation, I own guns, I don’t want to take them away. But when you use the slippery slope argument like you opened with and say the left wants to take guns away. I as somebody on the left is not represented and you end up defining me by something I never said... this is the same thing you’ve been critiquing me of doing.


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 30, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


Interesting subject you brought up..those private purchases that are exempt from background checks. Congress has attempted to close that loophole..the misnamed 'gun show loophole' for years. The NRA and the Right consistently oppose the law.

Now, you just bought up the very circumstances that proponents of such a law use in their arguments..so, where do you stand on such a law being enacted/ And..if you would, give me your logic?
I understand that the Black Market in guns won't go away..but most citizens are law abiding..so I contend that such a law might make a significant difference. Every time a gun is sold, or given to another party..paper should be done on it..and a background check performed. Easy to implement..just bring the form to the nearest registered dealer and use his access..charge a $5 fee to defray costs.  Yes, I'd make failure to do so a criminal offense.

After all..as you say..most of us are law-abiding...I've bought guns from private individuals and from dealers and see no problem in such a law.

Before the posts and funny's start rolling in..I do NOT recognize the 'slippery slope' argument as valid.  The 2nd is here to stay..and a little regulation won't hurt..and might help.


----------



## Defiant1 (Jul 30, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > So if a car pulls up in your driveway and 4 thugs with their pants below their asses get out, you want a bolt action rifle?
> ...



House invasions are on the rise.
The more you leftists diminish personal property rights, demonize law enforcement, the more you say, "you didn't build that", tell people they have a right to housing, food, healthcare, the more brazen the thugs become.


----------



## OldLady (Jul 30, 2019)

Dick Foster said:


> OK for all of the anti gun nut lefttards out there, answer this question. A good portion of households in Switzerland have an evil military assault rifle stashed in a closet so where are the waves of gun violence and mass shootings? If it's the guns as you say then the problem should exist there but if it's people  and not guns it's long past time for you to shut your stupid yaps because you don't have brains enough to be preaching to anyone about anything. In fact you should stay away from the voting booth altogether too.


You have been listening to 2AGuy too long.
The Swiss own less than half as many guns as we do and they also need a license to own one and permission to carry one anywhere.


----------



## iceberg (Jul 30, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


except i'm saying this as a general rule of what the left does, NOT YOU. if you want to wear that mantle because you're on the left, feel free. i, while being usually on "the right" don't have all my beliefs there and don't protect every RIGHT talking point available.

so if i say "the left" is doing something i mean a hallmark of "the left" is doing it - NOT you. if you wish to take offense to it and take it personally even after stating to me you are not part of *that* mindset, that's on you.

all i am saying is the gun advocates are not going to talk about control because the hallmark of the left is CONTROL = REMOVAL, not understanding.

ie - the leftist media is wrong about AR15's. instead of correcting themselves, they change the meaning of words around to still be right. when they can't refute logic / facts, they then broaden their scope vs. apply a focus to the core.

again - you want to defend something you don't believe, have fun but it's going to make for a very fucked up conversation.


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 30, 2019)

iceberg said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...


He told three American citizens to go back to the shitty broken countries they came from. That’s not the same as go home. Home is the USA. Come on Ice. I’m not spinning this, dont equivocate the two statements. You don’t find it racist. Fine. But don’t equivocate, you know it was a different and more pointed attack than “if you don’t like it leave” or “go back home”


----------



## iceberg (Jul 30, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


Obviously I don't believe it to be different at the core. Please refrain from telling me what I know and we can stop having stupid arguments.


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 30, 2019)

iceberg said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...


Well when do you ever have a conversation with “The Left” that is an arbitrary label that is used as a strawman in political debates. I dont like labels but we are unfortunately defined by them all the time. I’m not a dem or a rep. I actually agree with more republican policies than dems, but I’m a leftard as far as this board is concerned... so whatever


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 30, 2019)

Defiant1 said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


Not really a dog in this fight..but...sure..with bolt-action I could drop 2 in 10 seconds or less..probably less...do you think the other 2 will keep coming? I doubt it..they'll spray and pray with their illegally owned guns..and get the fuck outta Dodge..I'd plug at least one more as he ran..but, of  course, that would be illegal..as the threat to my life would have ended. I  would NOT want a fully auto..or an AK semi.

Truth be told...I'd prefer the shotgun..rifle does concern me at close ranges...the chances of a round going right through my target...and ending up somewhere i did not intend...are there.


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 30, 2019)

iceberg said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...


Well we have different thresholds for what we find to be appropriate or not. Just stop accusing me of lying about it via assumptions. I’m expressing my view of his comments. And to me that tweet was racist and inappropriate. It’s the first time I’ve accused him of such


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 30, 2019)

Dick Foster said:


> OK for all of the anti gun nut lefttards out there, answer this question. A good portion of households in Switzerland have an evil military assault rifle stashed in a closet so where are the waves of gun violence and mass shootings? If it's the guns as you say then the problem should exist there but if it's people  and not guns it's long past time for you to shut your stupid yaps because you don't have brains enough to be preaching to anyone about anything. In fact you should stay away from the voting booth altogether too.


Culture is totally different..and the small population in comparison to ours makes the argument invalid..IMO. BTW..I don't think it's guns either...as I've said before it's culture and how we view violence. We will not legislate gun violence away. We can make it a bit harder..if we choose.


----------



## NotYourBody (Jul 30, 2019)

emilynghiem said:


> NotYourBody said:
> 
> 
> > Defiant1 said:
> ...


Dear emilynghiem

I am a smallish white woman, with not very much muscle mass, living on the California/Tijuana Border.

I have zero power to force a president to call for a national emergency and issue an executive order. I have no influence on the Supreme Court. I don't have any of the Supreme's phone numbers and Trump blocked me ages ago.

You are giving me far more power than i actually have. Perhaps that's why the GOP is so fearful. They see the boogie woman around every corner. 

Good grief get hold of yourself!

I am harmless. But I do go to Tijuana for lunch and shopping on occasion and I frequently ride public transportation. Two very very dangerous situations. Yet I've never been attacked and never had need of a gun. I don't get why people are afraid of everything everywhere always.


----------



## NotYourBody (Jul 30, 2019)

pismoe said:


> NotYourBody said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...


I believe that herd is already storming out of the barn. I'm not sure you can turn it around at this point. Even with a wall.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 30, 2019)

Mindful said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > cnm said:
> ...


college-educated disconnected from the military,


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 30, 2019)

OldLady said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...


If I have to explain the reference you're not going to understand the explanation.


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 30, 2019)

pismoe said:


> EvilEyeFleegle said:
> 
> 
> > pismoe said:
> ...


Hmm..I'm sure you know that we have had a Supreme Court sitting that believed in the living document point of view..in our lifetimes..I refer you to the Warren Court--and his successor Warren Burger ---it is only in the last 20 years that the constructionists have regained the upper hand. The Living Document point of view was taught as gospel in most schools..in the 60's and 70's.
The wheel turns....


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 30, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> emilynghiem said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


And likewise, I have explained the Presidents position on what he said.


----------



## OldLady (Jul 30, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > Defiant1 said:
> ...


That six year old who was gunned down this weekend at the Garlic Festival had the right to life, too.  So do the 10,000 Americans murdered every year by someone else's gun.  This argument is not going to get you anywhere.


----------



## emilynghiem (Jul 30, 2019)

Defiant1 said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > Defiant1 said:
> ...


 
Well Said Defiant1 and cc OldLady 
Even if some rights aren't totally naturally but involve govt
YES agreed we still have a natural RIGHT OF DEFENSE of our own beliefs
and representation in these matter.

Examples of some rights that become POLITICAL and not fully natural
* gun rights involve safety and responsibility that affect other people 
and are INHERENTLY CONNECTED WITH Enforcing/Defending LAWS not violating them.
So laws involve GOVT, and so gun rights are interconnected with agreements by laws.
They don't exist on their own purely by human nature (like the right of DEFENSE DOES).
Guns involve agreements with others under laws we decide mutually democratically by consent.
* voting rights involve the political system of govt, so that gets politically
and are not naturally occurring. But the right to participate in DEMOCRATIC PROCESS
involving assembling, free speech and expression ARE natural human activities and rights.
* abortion and health care involve services that need to be rendered medically safely.
so this is going to involve govt regulations on the MEDICAL licensing.
But it DOESN'T mean govt has to regulate the TERMS of policies and payments
which can remain localized or individuals FREE CHOICE and not govt regulated.
Just the professional safety and services/facilities might need govt regulation to ensure
uniform protections.

Because health care involves labor and resources of others, this isn't a naturally occurring right.
You can't force other people to provide their labor and resources for free unless they voluntarily agree.
And it involves personal choices and BELIEFS that govt is not designed to regulate.

Thanks for bringing this up.
We need to have this discussion and clarification.

Yes we have a natural right to choose, defend and represent our beliefs, views and consent.
but the actual content of the policies can involve resources or rights of other people that
are outside our own individual rights that exist and occur purely by human nature and design.


----------



## NotYourBody (Jul 30, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > NotYourBody said:
> ...


How about a crossbow?


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


Glory Bee please by all means be the first at the door to make that attempt lol
Shit son make provocative outlandish comments and you call gun owners nuts lol


----------



## Dick Foster (Jul 30, 2019)

Another point for the anti gun illeriate mongrels here, most sniper rifles are bolt action and not semi automatic. What that means is a good shooter with a bolt action, even a single shot , can easily take down people from so far away they'll hit the ground dead before they or any people nearby even hear the shot. All of a sudden, out of nowhere, the bodies start dropping. And before you think crazy people can't shoot I'll remind you what Lee Harvey Oswald, a full on left leaning commie nut case with a really crappy rife did.

Maybe that's the answer, we just outlaw Democrats from having ANY firearms whatsoever then everybody will be happy.


----------



## edward37 (Jul 30, 2019)

iceberg said:


> emilynghiem said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...


Edward37 is a realist  and sees no good points in this immature slob in the WH


----------



## bodecea (Jul 30, 2019)

Mississippi Walmart...T's & P's....


----------



## Defiant1 (Jul 30, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > Defiant1 said:
> ...



The crossbow is an offensive weapon not a defensive weapon.


----------



## iceberg (Jul 30, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


great. so i can understand and be sure - are you saying the stance of the left is NOT coming after guns?

i don't like labels also, but when a trait is far too common to one side, it can and will get referenced. if you need specific examples of the left being full of shit, holler. i can find CNN with animated gifs showing rocket launchers on AR15's and gyrating like giant dildo. i can show you the left in colorado who is after banning high capacity mags and think they are "single use". i can show you people on "the left" who say we're not coming after guns and then their making statements that they are.

while i agree generalities can be and are used in debates far too often, that doesn't mean they're 100% wrong to do or use.

or would you disagree? if so, then fine. i'll just watch out for any stereotypes from you and react accordingly.


----------



## iceberg (Jul 30, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...



dude - i am not the only one to say you have a  very bad habit of making 2+2=whatever and you make large assumptions off limited information. i'm not telling you what to say - say whatever you want. but what i am telling you is if i see you or *anyone* make false assumptions based off non-existent logic, i will say so.

you made a lot of jumps to get to "Racist" and several people made that comment. you don't want people to say these things, don't do it. but again, not telling you NOT to, just telling you what happens when you do.


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 30, 2019)

edward37 said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > emilynghiem said:
> ...




If the D's win next year, what kind of punishment do you see Sleepy Joe or whoever else it is, delivering to the Deplorables in Flyover country?


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 30, 2019)

iceberg said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...


That’s a good question. I’d say by definition classic liberals and conservatives both of whom support individual freedoms support less gun control while big government progressives fight for more gun control. You will find people all over the “Left” that supports gun rights, but Ideologically speaking progressives would be the group pushing for government regulation. Although I’d argue that most people fall all over the spectrum depending on the issue


----------



## pismoe (Jul 30, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> pismoe said:
> 
> 
> > EvilEyeFleegle said:
> ...


--------------------------------------------   As  I said , I think that my generation is cool and good for my generation .   Its you younger guys and kids that should be concerned about a whole lot of things as 'the wheel turns' .   Course , many of youse guys are DOPERS and unsuitable  for Adult Freedom and Responsibility anyway EEFl.


----------



## iceberg (Jul 30, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


then in this case i'm speaking to the liberals i have seen that when you try to tell them functionally there is no difference between the AR-15 and a browning longtrac semi-automatic, they refuse to go "wow, i misunderstood that weapon" and instead say "then semi-automatics needs to go also".

i have *never* heard someone go "wow, i was wrong about that rifle" and to a man/woman/child i've discussed this with, the more they learn the less they want to know and the more they want to control. i don't doubt there are those on the left who are NOT like this, i've just not met one in conversation yet.


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 30, 2019)

iceberg said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...


Trumps buddy, the mooch who is on TV non stop defending the Prez, called the comments racist. Was he making assumptions as well? What motivation does he have to be dishonest? Perhaps he, like I, truly read these comments as racist and unacceptable 

Anthony Scaramucci Calls Trump Attack On 4 Democrats 'Racist And Unacceptable' | HuffPost


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

Dick Foster said:


> OK for all of the anti gun nut lefttards out there, answer this question. A good portion of households in Switzerland have an evil military assault rifle stashed in a closet so where are the waves of gun violence and mass shootings? If it's the guns as you say then the problem should exist there but if it's people  and not guns it's long past time for you to shut your stupid yaps because you don't have brains enough to be preaching to anyone about anything. In fact you should stay away from the voting booth altogether too.


They have much stronger gun control than us and they are making it stronger.  Shall we make our laws more like theirs?


----------



## edward37 (Jul 30, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


He better watch his ass now  Trump lets nothing get in his way for revenge A mean spirited mentally ill immature nitwit


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


I stated what would help the problem.


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 30, 2019)

iceberg said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...


I think a lot of people are scared, frustrated, and heartbroken from the horrendous gun violence that happens in this country and they just want to do something to try and limit the carnage. Regulating guns is something g that makes sense to them so that’s what they push because guns scare them. Others feel protected by them and want to defend their rights to carry. It’s a very heated and emotional debate which needs more understanding and compassion like most political issues


----------



## Defiant1 (Jul 30, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...



New Yorkers can't be trusted as true conservatives.


----------



## iceberg (Jul 30, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


there are a lot of people who called it racist. there are a lot of people who call him eating a tub of chicken racist.

like i said - the word has been so devalued and de-sensitized, no one really cares about having that "on them" like they used to.


----------



## iceberg (Jul 30, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


but this is also why you're not likely to get that debate or discussion from gun owners. they've met far too many who won't listen to the mechanics behind their fears and simply expand their fears instead.

when you can think of a good way to rationalize with someone who is willing to keep their views alive despite learning to the contrary, let me know and i'll help get this discussion going.


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

iceberg said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...


The debate is rather simple.  If more guns made us safer we would have the lowest homicide rate in the world.  Instead ours is 4-5x higher than countries with strong gun control.  We also have regular mass shootings, law enforcement shoots hundreds, law enforcement is shot and killed weekly, hundreds die each year in gun accidents...   the effect of too many guns is clear, and not good.


----------



## pismoe (Jul 30, 2019)

pismoe said:


> EvilEyeFleegle said:
> 
> 
> > pismoe said:
> ...


----------------------------------------   I mean , look at it logically .   On a different subject but as an example do you remember that thread where many younger and assumed by me to be female posters wanted the Judge Kavanauh to be assumed guilty rather than the American standard of Innocent till proven Guilty .  The next generation and especially kids are going to have a fecked up  USA .     ---------------------   And YES , any of these young dopers are judged by USA Government that they are unsuitable for gun ownership if they admit to being Dopers    Edward .


----------



## pismoe (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Dick Foster said:
> 
> 
> > OK for all of the anti gun nut lefttards out there, answer this question. A good portion of households in Switzerland have an evil military assault rifle stashed in a closet so where are the waves of gun violence and mass shootings? If it's the guns as you say then the problem should exist there but if it's people  and not guns it's long past time for you to shut your stupid yaps because you don't have brains enough to be preaching to anyone about anything. In fact you should stay away from the voting booth altogether too.
> ...


--------------------------   the 'swiss' are stupid  Brian .


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

pismoe said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Dick Foster said:
> ...


They have a much lower homicide rate, are we stupider then?


----------



## Dick Foster (Jul 30, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> Dick Foster said:
> 
> 
> > OK for all of the anti gun nut lefttards out there, answer this question. A good portion of households in Switzerland have an evil military assault rifle stashed in a closet so where are the waves of gun violence and mass shootings? If it's the guns as you say then the problem should exist there but if it's people  and not guns it's long past time for you to shut your stupid yaps because you don't have brains enough to be preaching to anyone about anything. In fact you should stay away from the voting booth altogether too.
> ...



Thanks for proveing my point dumbass. It's the people and NOT the guns. 
Guess what it didn't use to be a problem here either but that was back when we locked all the nut cases up in insane asylums instead of turning them loose on the streets and calling them democrats.


----------



## pismoe (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


----------------------------------------  its about FREEDOM and not about SAFETY   Brian .


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 30, 2019)

cnm said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Awwww...you're thinking of me......
> ...



I actually rarely carry.   I have my CCW, and carry when I think I should....fear has nothing to do with it.   I am not afraid of a car crash, but I wear a seat belt, I watch both ways before I cross the street and manage to do so without a hint of fear...... Fear really has nothing to do with carrying a gun.  It is merely a tool in case a specific situation happens.  When those situations do happen, and they do all across the country, rape, robbery and murder....someone who has a legal gun on their hip can handle it.......someone without is at the mercy of the criminal.

Having the option is great.   I have had times where people knock on the door late at night, and knowing I have a weapon in case they are criminals is as reasuring as having a fire extingquisher in case the dryer starts on fire.

Americans use their legal guns at home and in public 1.1 million times a year....according to the Centers for Disease Control research.   That means those people would have been victims...of rape, robbery or murder...but are alive, safe, and not scared for life...because they had a gun to stop the attack.

You....you would prefer that those women be raped, those people are brutally beaten and robbed....and they are murdered, and their families should lose them to a criminal..

That is your choice...I prefer the other choice..that the criminal is stopped.


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

pismoe said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...


Why do you value the freedom to quickly become a mass killer?  What about freedom to live?


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

2aguy said:


> cnm said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


Please provide the cdc study.  Your lies are tiring,  they never studied number of gun defenses.


----------



## pismoe (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> pismoe said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


--------------------------------------  I want the ability to own effective guns and  i'm not concerned with much lower homicide , suicide , accidental death . accidents or anything like that  Brian .  [swiss are stupid]


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> The debate is rather simple.  If more guns made us safer we would have the lowest homicide rate in the world.  Instead ours is 4-5x higher than countries with strong gun control.  We also have regular mass shootings, law enforcement shoots hundreds, law enforcement is shot and killed weekly, hundreds die each year in gun accidents...   the effect of too many guns is clear, and not good.




Not true.  America's murder rate is in the middle of the pack.

The number of guns available is only one factor.

I reading some history this past weekend- about the Crusades as well as the Punic Wars.  Very violent time, many people killed.   The surprising fact is that these event happened BEFORE firearms were even invented.

Libs who think gun control is a panacea should take that into their pipe and smoke it.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 30, 2019)

cnm said:


> Look, you guys are happy enough that recurring mass murders and sky high firearm homicide rates come with easy access to handguns and military style semi automatic rifles. No need to be so stridently defensive, carry your selfishness with pride.




We had 12 mass public shootings in 2018 with 93 killed.  Cars killed over 38,000, pools killed over 3,500.......

Americans use their legal guns to save lives 1.1 million times a year....knowing actual facts, numbers, truth and reality, it is you who are afraid....of guns......for no rational reason.

As to gun murder.....in 2017 there were 10,982 gun murders...again, cars killed over 38,000 people, drug over doses over 70,000.

Of those 10,982, 70-80% or more of the victims are criminals...murdered by other criminals...

That leaves 2,196 innocent people, murdered with guns.....again, cars...38,000.  Of those 2,196, the majority of them are friends, family and associates of criminals involved in the criminal life style...

There are 600 million guns in this country, on the low count,.......and over 17.25 million people carry guns for self defense....

As more Americans own and carry guns?   Over the last 26 years , gun murder...down 49%, gun crime down 75%, violent crime 72%...

Your entire premise is wrong.....in science...if your premise is executed and the exact opposite happens....that means your premise....hypothesis....is wrong....

In science...you are wrong.


----------



## OldLady (Jul 30, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


A disgruntled employee just killed two people in a Walmart in Mississippi.  What happened to the days of going on FaceBook and saying filthy things about your ex-supervisor who just fired you?  Now they have to take a gun and kill people?


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > cnm said:
> ...




Here, Troll...this is the CDC....the Department of Justice found 1.5 million defensive gun uses a year.....

What Do CDC's Surveys Say About the Frequency of Defensive Gun Uses? by Gary Kleck :: SSRN



*Abstract*
In 1996, 1997, and 1998, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) conducted large-scale surveys asking about defensive gun use (DGU) in four to seven states. Analysis of the raw data allows the estimation of the prevalence of DGU for those areas. Data pertaining to the same sets of states from the 1993 National Self-Defense Survey (Kleck and Gertz 1995) allow these results to be extrapolated to the U.S. as a whole. CDC’s survey data confirm previous high estimates of DGU prevalence, disconfirm estimates derived from the National Crime Victimization Survey, and indicate that defensive uses of guns by crime victims are far more common than offensive uses by criminals. CDC has never reported these results.

=========



Reason article on the revised paper..



A Second Look at a Controversial Study About Defensive Gun Use



-------



Original version before he went back to revise it...

The actual paper by Kleck revealing the CDC hiding data..



SSRN Electronic Library

The timing of CDC’s addition of a DGU question to the BRFSS is of some interest. Prior to 1996, the BRFSS had never included a question about DGU. Kleck and Gertz (1995) conducted their survey in February through April 1993, presented their estimate that there were over 2 million DGUs in 1992 at the annual meetings of the American Society of Criminology in November 1994, and published it in the Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology in the Fall of 1995. CDC added a DGU question to the BRFSS the very first year they could do so after that 1995 publication, in the 1996 edition. CDC was not the only federal agency during the Clinton administration to field a survey addressing the prevalence of DGU at that particular time. The National Institute of Justice (NIJ) financed a national survey devoting even more detailed attention to estimating DGU prevalence, which was fielded in November and December 1994, just months after preliminary results of the 1993 Kleck/Gertz survey became known. Neither CDC nor NIJ had ever financed research into DGU before 1996. Perhaps there was just “something in the air” that motivated the two agencies to suddenly decide in 1994 to address the topic. Another interpretation, however, is that fielding of the surveys was triggered by the Kleck/Gertz findings that DGU was common, and that these agencies hoped to obtain lower DGU prevalence estimates than those obtained by Kleck/Gertz. Low estimates would have implied fewer beneficial uses of firearms, results that would have been far more congenial to the strongly pro-control positions of the Clinton administration.

CDC, in Surveys It Never Bothered Making Public, Provides More Evidence That Plenty of Americans Innocently Defend Themselves with Guns



Kleck's new paper—"What Do CDC's Surveys Say About the Frequency of Defensive Gun Uses?"—finds that the agency had asked about DGUs in its Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System in 1996, 1997, and 1998.

Those polls, Kleck writes,

are high-quality telephone surveys of enormous probability samples of U.S. adults, asking about a wide range of health-related topics. Those that addressed DGU asked more people about this topic than any other surveys conducted before or since. For example, the 1996 survey asked the DGU question of 5,484 people. The next-largest number questioned about DGU was 4,977 by Kleck and Gertz (1995), and sample sizes were much smaller in all the rest of surveys on the topic (Kleck 2001).

Kleck was impressed with how well the survey worded its question: "During the last 12 months, have you confronted another person with a firearm, even if you did not fire it, to protect yourself, your property, or someone else?" Respondents were told to leave out incidents from occupations, like policing, where using firearms is part of the job. Kleck is impressed with how the question excludes animals but includes DGUs outside the home as well as within it.

Kleck is less impressed with the fact that the question was only asked of people who admitted to owning guns in their home earlier in the survey, and that they asked no follow-up questions regarding the specific nature of the DGU incident.

From Kleck's own surveys, he found that only 79 percent of those who reported a DGU "had also reported a gun in their household at the time of the interview," so he thinks whatever numbers the CDC found need to be revised upward to account for that. (Kleck speculates that CDC showed a sudden interest in the question of DGUs starting in 1996 because Kleck's own famous/notorious survey had been published in 1995.)

At any rate, Kleck downloaded the datasets for those three years and found that the "weighted percent who reported a DGU...was 1.3% in 1996, 0.9% in 1997, 1.0% in 1998, and 1.07% in all three surveys combined."





Kleck figures if you do the adjustment upward he thinks necessary for those who had DGU incidents without personally owning a gun in the home at the time of the survey, and then the adjustment downward he thinks necessary because CDC didn't do detailed follow-ups to confirm the nature of the incident, you get 1.24 percent, a close match to his own 1.326 percent figure.

He concludes that the small difference between his estimate and the CDC's "can be attributed to declining rates of violent crime, which accounts for most DGUs. With fewer occasions for self-defense in the form of violent victimizations, one would expect fewer DGUs."

Kleck further details how much these CDC surveys confirmed his own controversial work:

*The final adjusted prevalence of 1.24% therefore implies that in an average year during 1996–1998, 2.46 million U.S. adults used a gun for self-defense. *



This estimate, based on an enormous sample of 12,870 cases (unweighted) in a nationally representative sample, strongly confirms the 2.5 million past-12-months estimate obtained Kleck and Gertz (1995)....CDC's results, then, imply that guns were used defensively by victims about 3.6 times as often as they were used offensively by criminals.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 30, 2019)

OldLady said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...




24/7 news cycle and glorification of the killers...


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> pismoe said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...




1.1 million Americans each year live because they have the ability to own and carry guns.

In 2018 there were 12 mass public shootings, 93 killed.  Cars killed over 38,000, drowning killed over 3,500....

The numbers don't support you.


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

2aguy said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


Gary Klerk does not do studies for the cdc.  And he has a history of messing up the numbers.  You are blatantly lying again.


----------



## xyz (Jul 30, 2019)

skye said:


> California has banned guns, right?


No, they haven't.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...




And you lie with your number.....those countries always had low murder rates due to cultural factors....World Wars and their impact on their societies.....before they banned and confiscated guns.......after banning guns their gun murder rates did not change....so your theory is wrong.


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

2aguy said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > pismoe said:
> ...


You claim as many defenses as we have violent crimes.  That is funny.  100% are defended?  Too funny.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...




Moron, he found and published the research.......he doesn't have a history of messing up numbers, he is attacked because he actually did research into gun self defense....the CDC attempt was to refute him....and they came up with 1.1 million, the Department of Justice also did their own research to refute him, and came up with 1.5 million times a year......those are 3 studies our of 17 on gun self defense...and none of them support your theory.


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 30, 2019)

2aguy said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > pismoe said:
> ...



7,000 people each year die of melanoma, should America seek to destroy the sun?


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

2aguy said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


Due to always having low gun ownership rates.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...




Wrong, violent crimes go unreported, in particular rape....you don't know what you are talking about.


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

2aguy said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


He is not the cdc you lying scum.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...




Wrong...culture.....their criminals do not choose to use their illegal guns to commit murder......ours do.   Britain can't stop the flood of illegal guns into their country, yet their criminals don't commit murder as often...yet...but they are building up to it...

Police struggle to stop flood of firearms into UK


Police and border officials are struggling to stop a rising supply of illegal firearms being smuggled into Britain, a senior police chief has warned.

Chief constable Andy Cooke, the national police lead for serious and organised crime, said law enforcement had seen an increased supply of guns over the past year, and feared that it would continue in 2019

The Guardian has learned that the situation is so serious that the National Crime Agency has taken the rare step of using its legal powers to direct every single police force to step up the fight against illegal guns.

The NCA has used tasking powers to direct greater intelligence about firearms to be gathered by all 43 forces in England and Wales.

Another senior law enforcement official said that “new and clean” weapons were now being used in the majority of shootings, as opposed to guns once being so difficult to obtain that they would be “rented out” to be used in multiple crimes.

*Cooke, the Merseyside chief constable, told the Guardian: “We in law enforcement expect the rise in new firearms to continue. We are doing all we can. We are not in a position to stop it anytime soon.*

“Law enforcement is more joined up now than before, but the scale of the problem is such that despite a number of excellent firearms seizures, I expect the rise in supply to be a continuing issue.”

The increasing supply of guns belies problems with UK border security and innovations by organised crime gangs. Smugglers have increasingly found new ways and innovative routes to get guns past border defences.


*Cooke said that the dynamics of the streets of British cities had changed and that criminals were more willing to use guns: “If they bring them in people will buy them. It’s a kudos thing for organised criminals.”*

*Simon Brough, head of firearms at the NCA, said: “The majority of guns being used are new, clean firearms ... which indicates a relatively fluid supply.”*

He said shotguns were 40% of the total, with an increase in burglaries to try and steal them. 

*Handguns are the next biggest category,* most often smuggled in from overseas, with ferry ports such as Dover being a popular entry point into the UK for organised crime groups: 

“We’re doing a lot to fight back against it,” Brough said, adding that compared to other European countries, the availability in the UK was relatively lower.
==========

Crime will continue to rise until us bobbies are released from the shackles of the PC police

The national crime figures released this week confirmed what my colleagues and I have known for some time. Violent crime is out of control and criminals now see certain cities and towns across the country as places where they can act with impunity.

This is not just about gangland battles in the likes of Brixton or Tottenham. What we are facing is a national crisis, fast spreading across the provinces.

*In the West Midlands, for example, we had a murder rate last year on a par with that of London. Gun crime in our region is running at similarly high levels and violent thugs in my area have developed a*


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...




Follow the link, get his paper, get the link to the CDC research.......you moron.


----------



## OldLady (Jul 30, 2019)

2aguy said:


> cnm said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...





2aguy said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


Not so sure about that.  I really doubt if this guy wanted fame as much as payback, for whatever slight he had gotten at work.  Now see, the way I look at this is, if the guy did not have a gun or did not know someone who would gladly let him borrow theirs, he would not have taken lives today.  He would not have marched into that Walmart and stabbed those people or hit them with a brick or anything else.  He might have put sugar in their gas tanks or started an ugly rumor about their sisters, but that would have been about it.
It is the easy, 24/7 access to guns that allows this to happen over and over and over.  Does an incident like this inspire some other assholes?  Sure, sometimes, but not for fame.  Just as a great idea.


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...




America has a lot of violent crimes which are never reported, Brain.  If some thug comes up to my mum with a knife and she pulls out her handgun, the thug will probably leave in a hurry and not leave a calling card.  The crime will never be reported and that will be that.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 30, 2019)

OldLady said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > cnm said:
> ...




The majority of killers in prison come from single parent homes without fathers......look up the guys involved and you will likely see that issue.....

Single parent teenage mothers, raising young males without fathers is driving our violent crime...and the violent crime in Europe.....fix that, and the violence rates will go down.


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 30, 2019)

pismoe said:


> EvilEyeFleegle said:
> 
> 
> > pismoe said:
> ...


At the age of 65..it's good to be called a younger guy! Of course..i might well be..in comparison..***smiles***


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 30, 2019)

OldLady said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > cnm said:
> ...




And 1.1 million times a year normal people use their legal guns to save lives...more than guys like this.........lives saved.....


----------



## pismoe (Jul 30, 2019)

xyz said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> > California has banned guns, right?
> ...


-------------------------------------   not BANNED them but lots of restrictions and regulations and laws that are all unsuitable and dreamed up by enemy politicians .  Sorta like 'new zealand'   XYZ.


----------



## xyz (Jul 30, 2019)

pismoe said:


> xyz said:
> 
> 
> > skye said:
> ...


I'm sure it's easier to get a gun in California than New Zealand.


----------



## pismoe (Jul 30, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> pismoe said:
> 
> 
> > EvilEyeFleegle said:
> ...


----------------------------------------------   Well , maybe not YOU but you are sure fecking up the next generations America   EEFl .


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 30, 2019)

xyz said:


> pismoe said:
> 
> 
> > xyz said:
> ...




New Zealand has more guns than Australia and a lower gun murder rate than Australia......culture, not guns.....the real issue, not the "I hate guns" issue.


----------



## NotYourBody (Jul 30, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


The thug will wait for her to dig it out of her purse?


----------



## iceberg (Jul 30, 2019)

OldLady said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...


when in ireland last week i heard about a dude who took a knife and went on a rampage.

Knife crime deaths at highest level since WW2

lots of other links on it. violence is the issue. not the method they choose to express it. find out why people are violent and work on that, we may get somewhere. keep banning shit, they'll just use something else til we wind up making it illegal to kill people with rocks. well that's already illegal.


----------



## pismoe (Jul 30, 2019)

xyz said:


> pismoe said:
> 
> 
> > xyz said:
> ...


------------------------------------   MAYBE , I hope so but all the laws are unsuitable  XYZ .


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 30, 2019)

Dick Foster said:


> EvilEyeFleegle said:
> 
> 
> > Dick Foster said:
> ...


Stupid POS..it's not 'your' point..and I've been saying the same in this forum for a long time now. But I guess you're just too ignorant to have read the myriads of posts that say exactly that..our culture is one of violence..and guns are just one way we express that fact. Gun control will not solve this issue..neither will owning 100+ guns.

You knee-jerk partisan hacks stink up the joint with your unthinking parroting of pundits and your lack of any original thought.

As for your ignorant point about the mentally ill...guess who let them all out of the asylums..in the name of budget balancing...if you are the best the Right can do...they're hurting for certain!


----------



## NotYourBody (Jul 30, 2019)

2aguy said:


> xyz said:
> 
> 
> > pismoe said:
> ...


It will be interesting to watch New Zealand. They are enacting some strict gun laws since the Christchurch shooting.

New Zealand's Plan To Buy Back Illegal Firearms Angers Gun Advocates

They aren't playing around with this mass shooting nonsense.


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 30, 2019)

iceberg said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...




Lots of weapons are dangerous, here is a video of a man killing 3 trained, armed assassins with a pencil.


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 30, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


Nope..but one should wear sunscreen..avoid going out too long...wear long sleeves--in short, take precautions, right?
Both owning and carrying a gun..and controlling access  to weapons..are precautions. One can have both...in fact, we do.


----------



## pismoe (Jul 30, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


--------------------------   nowadays many women takes their gun ownership , gun use and defense  seriously and there are many new fangled ways for woman to carry their guns so they can be gotten to very quickly  'NYBod .


----------



## OldLady (Jul 30, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


No, but you don't see people "protecting" themselves from melanoma by spending MORE time in the sun.  What we need is more good guys with guns?  No gun free zones?


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 30, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > xyz said:
> ...




They already did it in Australia and it failed...

Four dead, 1 hurt in Darwin mass shooting - 9News

An alleged gunman who went on a rampage killing four men and injuring a woman while looking for a man named "Alex" on Tuesday night was released from jail only a month ago.
Darwin man Ben Hoffmann, 45, received a 14-day sentence for breaching his curfew after he had been paroled in January after serving four years in prison for bashing a man with a baseball bat.

Australia’s 1996 Gun Confiscation Didn’t Work | National Review

University of Melbourne researchers Wang-Sheng Lee and Sandy Suardi concluded their 2008 report on the matter with the statement, “There is little evidence to suggest that [the Australian mandatory gun-buyback program] had any significant effects on firearm homicides.”

“Although gun buybacks appear to be a logical and sensible policy that helps to placate the public’s fears,” the reported continued, “the evidence so far suggests that in the Australian context, the high expenditure incurred to fund the 1996 gun buyback has not translated into any tangible reductions in terms of firearm deaths.”

A 2007 report, “Gun Laws and Sudden Death: Did the Australian Firearms Legislation of 1996 Make a Difference?” by Jeanine Baker and Samara McPhedran similarly concluded that the buyback program did not have a significant long-term effect on the Australian homicide rate.

*The Australian gun-homicide rate had already been quite low and had been steadily falling in the 15 years prior to the Port Arthur massacre. And while the mandatory buyback program did appear to reduce the rate of accidental firearm deaths, Baker and McPhedran found that “the gun buy-back and restrictive legislative changes had no influence on firearm homicide in Australia.”*

*=======*

*2007 report..

http://c3.nrostatic.com/sites/default/files/Baker and McPhedran 2007.pdf

Conclusions Examination of the long-term trends indicated that the only category of sudden death that may have been influenced by the introduction of the NFA was firearm suicide
------

However, this effect must be considered in light of the findings for suicide (non-firearm). Homicide patterns (firearm and non-firearm) were not influenced by the NFA, the conclusion being that the gun buy-back and restrictive legislative changes had no influence on firearm homicide in Australia. The introduction of the NFA appeared to have a negative effect on accidental firearm death. However, over the time period investigated, there was a relatively small number of accidental deaths per annum, with substantial variability. Any conclusions regarding the effect of the NFA on accidental firearm death should be approached with caution
=========*

*2008 report...*

*
http://c8.nrostatic.com/sites/default/files/Lee and Suardi 2008.pdf

In this paper, we re-analyze the same data on firearm deaths used in previous research, using tests for unknown structural breaks as a means to identifying impacts of the NFA. The results of these tests suggest that the NFA did not have any large effects on reducing firearm homicide or suicide rates. 
-------

6. Conclusion 

This paper takes a closer look at the effects of the National Firearms Agreement on gun deaths. Using a battery of structural break tests, there is little evidence to suggest that it had any significant effects on firearm homicides and suicides. In addition, there also does not appear to be any substitution effects – that reduced access to firearms may have led those bent on committing homicide or suicide to use alternative methods.*


----------



## Leo123 (Jul 30, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> pismoe said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...



Still only opinion.   The Constitution IMO is a moral document for a society.   Morals are no good or might as well be absent if one can constantly change them so suit personal desires.


----------



## irosie91 (Jul 30, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



prince-----even murder and violent rapes are not reported------LOTS .    In NYC  a mugging is not news unless someone decides to mug something like
------uhm......MADONNA    (is she still newsworthy?).     In my lifetime I have hosted lots of cases of acute lead poisoning to the brain-------I do not recall any ending up on the news-------don't tell anyone------I am not available


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 30, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > xyz said:
> ...




They didn't have mass shootings before this one.......for the rarest of rare events, they are banning guns....using your logic, since over 1,500 people a year are murdered with knives here in the U.S. we need to ban knives....cars killed over 38,000 people...ban them.....

And here....public shootings in Australia since the ban....
Terror’ gunman was on parole

POLICE are investigating possible terror links to a siege in which officers gunned down one man and found another dead in Melbourne’s southeast.

A *senior law enforcement figure said the gunman was on parole for a criminal offence and rated as a low-risk figure of interest to counter-terror authorities.*

*The Herald Sun has revealed the gunman was Yacqub Khayre, a Somali refugee who was known to counter-terrorism police.*

Police shot and killed Khayre, a second man was found dead in the foyer of an apartment building in Brighton *and three cops sustained gunshot wounds in the bloody hostage drama.*

A male caller to the Channel 7 newsroom in Melbourne said: “This is for IS” and “this is for Al-Qaeda.” The station said a woman could be heard screaming in the background.

A Victoria Police statement confirmed police are investigating whether the incident is terrorism related.


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

6/2/17  fully automatic weapon used to ambush police..


‘Psycho’ gunman may have set trap

Multiple people confirmed Maddison phoned police on Monday morning, with one person saying the call was made from a public phone box directly to the Tactical Crime Squad office.

Snr Constable Forte was a Tactical Crime Squad officer.

Later that day police spotted Madison in a vehicle in Mary St, Toowoomba, and followed him up to 40km before he pulled over on Wallers Rd near Gatton.

Maddison got out of his vehicle and opened fire on police with an automatic weapon, killing Snr Constable Forte.

-------

Maddison, 40, was last year facing a raft of charges including eight counts of assault occasioning bodily harm, assault occasioning bodily harm while armed, two counts of deprivation of liberty, torture, common assault, unlawfully wounding another and threatening violence.

-------

*It has been reported that Senior Constable Forte was trying to save his partner’s life as their car was sprayed with Maddison’s machine gun fire.*

===========
1/17/17 shooting in mall parking lot...

Carpark shooting: ‘It was chaos’

A SHOOTING at a Melbourne carpark last night has left a man in his 20s with multiple gunshot wounds.

The shooting happened at a 24-hour shopping mall at Campbellfield in Melbourne’s north near the intersection of Sydney and Mahoney roads about 9.30pm.

A witness told the Herald Sun the man appeared to have wounds to his groin and legs.

A woman was on the phone calling triple-0 and “holding him trying to stop the bleeding”.

The victim was heard to say he was dizzy, and wanted to drink water.

Members of the man’s family arrived at the scene soon after.

The witness said there was a lot of screaming and confusion.

“There were people with kids, and a witness was holding a baby. People were screaming and yelling. It was chaos,” the witness said.


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

12/28/16

Deadly shooting ‘gang related’

ONE man is dead and another has been critically injured after a shooting in Sydney’s southwest late this afternoon.

A third man has just presented himself to hospital with injuries related to the shooting.

Emergency services were called to Western Sydney Parklands off Cowpasture Road in Wetherill Park late this afternoon.

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

No Cookies | Herald Sun

A 28-year-old man accused of gunning down a young cricketer Rahat Khan in Melbourne’s north has made his first court appearance.

Kamil Yucel, of Dallas, appeared at Melbourne Magistrates Court on Saturday charged with murder, following his arrest on Friday night.

Yucel, sporting a beard and grey windcheater, was remanded in custody during the brief hearing and ordered to reappear in the same court for a filing hearing on Wednesday.


Mr Khan, 20, from Dandenong, died of gunshot wounds in Millewa Crescent, Dallas, on Tuesday evening after a friend driving him pulled over to ask for help.
============
http://www.news.com.au/national/crime/horrific-cctv-footage-of-walid-wally-ahmads-final-moments-emerge/news-story/01ba6594b2b17282294810420d458a26

THE final chilling moments of Walid “Wally” Ahmad’s life have been revealed in horrific CCTV footage of the gangland murder.

The footage, revealed by The Daily Telegraph, shows the shooter — who remains unknown and on the loose — approaching Ahmad as he sat with a friend and his bodyguard, Nael Halid, at the Bankstown Central shopping centre.




==============
Shots fired at police impound yard

A POLICE impound yard in Melbourne came under shooting attack late last night.

Several shots were fired at the yard in Preston, in the city’s north, hitting windows and the building itself, police said.

Shocked staff called triple-0 from inside, but no one was injured. Detectives later found bullet holes in the exterior of the building the staff had been in, and in the windows.


================
Multiple shots fired into a Melbourne gym

STAFF at a South Melbourne gym were shocked to find bullet holes in their building this morning.

The shots were fired into the side of the building and roller door of the Whiteman St fitness centre before 6.30am.


============
shooting...

Man shot dead in Melbourne may have been moved

A SHOOTING victim was being rushed to hospital by a friend when he died on the way in suburban Melbourne, police believe.

The victim died in Millewa Crescent in Dallas, in Melbourne’s north, after the driver of the car he was in pulled over and called for help.



===========


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 30, 2019)

pismoe said:


> EvilEyeFleegle said:
> 
> 
> > pismoe said:
> ...


In your opinion...and having read your posts and having an idea of where your head is at....Might be that I'm un-feckin' them! Demographics support my point of view..as you are well aware..yeah...the dino's are going out with a bang..but they ARE going.


----------



## NotYourBody (Jul 30, 2019)

iceberg said:


> violence is the issue. not the method they choose to express it. *find out why people are violent* and work on that, we may get somewhere. keep banning shit, they'll just use something else til we wind up making it illegal to kill people with rocks. well that's already illegal.



Oh we don't do that anymore as a society. That all stopped when Reagan de-funded mental health programs. Oopsie!

Now we just keep making it easier for violent people, including teenagers, to have access to the simplest way to kill a bunch of people quickly. Some people call that winning.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 30, 2019)

OldLady said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...




Mass shooters do not target places where people can carry guns...we know this from actual mass public shooters...that is a fact...

Also, when armed citizens are allowed to have their guns when a mass shooter targets a location, they are 94% effective at stopping them and reducing death and injury......

Armed Citizens Are Successful 94% Of The Time At Active Shooter Events [FBI]

*Of all the active shooter events there were 33 at which an armed citizen was present. Of those, Armed Citizens were successful at stopping the Active shooter 75.8% of the time (25 incidents) and were successful in reducing the loss of life in an additional 18.2% (6) of incidents. In only 2 of the 33 incidents (6.1%) was the Armed Citizen(s) not helpful in any way in stopping the active shooter or reducing the loss of life.

Thus the headline of our report that Armed Citizens Are Successful 94% Of The Time At Active Shooter Events.*


In the 2 incidents at which the armed citizen “failed” to stop or slow the active shooter, one is the previously mentioned incident with hunters. The other is an incident in which the CCWer was shot in the back in a Las Vegas Walmart when he failed to identify that there were 2 Active Shooters involved in the attack. He neglected to identify the one that shot him in the back while he was trying to ambush the other perpetrator.

We also decided to look at the breakdown of events that took place in gun free zones and the relative death toll from events in gun free zones vs non-gun-free zones.

Of the 283 incidents in our data pool, we were unable to identify if the event took place in a gun-free zone in a large number (41%) of the events. Most of the events took place at a business, church, home, or other places at which as a rule of law it is not a gun free zone but potentially could have been declared one by the property owner. Without any information in the FBI study or any indication one way or the other from the news reports, we have indicated that event with a question mark.

If you look at all of the Active Shooter events (pie chart on the top) you see that for those which we have the information, almost twice as many took place in gun free zones than not; but realistically the vast majority of those for which we have no information (indicated as ?) are probably NOT gun free zones.

If you isolate just the events at which 8 or more people were killed the data paints a different picture (pie chart on the bottom). In these incidents, 77.8% took place in a gun-free zone suggesting that gun free zones lead to a higher death rate vs active shooter events in general

=====

One of the final metrics we thought was important to consider is the potential tendency for armed citizens to injure or kill innocent people in their attempt to “save the day.” A common point in political discussions is to point out the lack of training of most armed citizens and the decrease in safety inherent in their presence during violent encounters.

As you can see below, however, at the 33 incidents at which Armed Citizens were present, there were zero situations at which the Armed Citizen injured or killed an innocent person. It never happened.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 30, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > violence is the issue. not the method they choose to express it. *find out why people are violent* and work on that, we may get somewhere. keep banning shit, they'll just use something else til we wind up making it illegal to kill people with rocks. well that's already illegal.
> ...




Wrong...Reagan didn't defune mental health programs that started with Carter, the ACLU and the other left wing groups that believe the mentall ill should crap outside and live under bridges instead of getting care.


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 30, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...


Cool movie..but it's just a movie..fiction. Not a lot of trained assassins hunting dudes with a pencil--i take your point that everything can be used as a weapon..but I've seldom read about someone coming into a festival and penciling 11 people...LOL!


----------



## Leo123 (Jul 30, 2019)

OldLady said:


> pismoe said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...



That doesn't prove your claim that the Constitution was designed to change.  Article 5 describes the process of amending the Constitution not completely changing or replacing it.  It is only your opinion that the Constitution was designed to change with the times.   BTW The Constitution is a WRITTEN document so the correct word is actually EMEND.

_*"The question of whether to use amend or emend is a vexing one for many people, complicated by the fact that the words sound quite similar and have meanings that overlap to a considerable degree. Both words can be used with the meanings “to improve” or “to correct,” but there are subtle differences. Emend is most often used in connection with changes to some form of written material, such as a text or manuscript; while such documents may also be described as amended, amend can apply to improvements or corrections made to things other than writing, as in “he amended his behavior.” The confusion is compounded by the fact that one of the most frequently encountered uses of amend is in reference to a document: the Constitution of the United States."*_

Definition of AMEND


----------



## NotYourBody (Jul 30, 2019)

pismoe said:


> NotYourBody said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...


Perhaps they do. I've never know a woman who carried a gun except my old TX grandma and she could not have hit the state of Oklahoma if she was standing on the border. She was blind as a bat.

I still hope Mum and Meemaw are faster than the thug, who has likely done this many times before.


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 30, 2019)

Leo123 said:


> EvilEyeFleegle said:
> 
> 
> > pismoe said:
> ...


Interesting..I'd not refer to the constitution as a 'moral' document...an ethical one..perhaps. Albeit flawed in that respect..after all it codified slavery for the purpose of representation in a govt. that the slaves had no say in--hardly the correct ethical stance.

I'd call the Constitution our bedrock legal framework--and laws change..as cultures do..so do morals and ethics


----------



## Dick Foster (Jul 30, 2019)

2aguy said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...



Have you noticed how futile it is trying to propose intelligent arguments to and reason with brain dead morons?


----------



## Olde Europe (Jul 30, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> the small population [of Switzerland] in comparison to ours makes the argument invalid..IMO.



What?

Grasping at straws, or what is it?  It's municipalities / towns / districts, states, and the federal government sitting atop just like in the U.S.  Population size has nothing whatsoever to do with, say, per capita murder rates or per capita gun ownership.  And why doesn't China with a bit more by way of population have a murder rate far in excess of that of the U.S.?  Really, help me out here, for this doesn't even begin to make sense.


----------



## NotYourBody (Jul 30, 2019)

2aguy said:


> Wrong...Reagan didn't defune mental health programs that started with Carter, the ACLU and the other left wing groups that believe the mentall ill should crap outside and live under bridges instead of getting care.



^^Fake News.

The Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1980 signed by Reagan repealed President Carter’s Mental Health Systems Act, which was supposed to continue federal funding for mental health programs.

Mental Health Systems Act of 1980 - Wikipedia


----------



## Leo123 (Jul 30, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> Interesting..I'd not refer to the constitution as a 'moral' document...an ethical one..perhaps. Albeit flawed in that respect..after all it codified slavery for the purpose of representation in a govt. that the slaves had no say in--hardly the correct ethical stance.
> 
> I'd call the Constitution our bedrock legal framework--and laws change..as cultures do..so do morals and ethics



So you separate ethics from morality?   The definition of ethic is:

_*"Definition of ethic*_

_*1 ethics plural in form but singular or plural in construction : the discipline dealing with what is good and bad and with moral duty and obligation  *_

_*2a : a set of moral principles : a theory or system of moral value"*_

Definition of ETHIC

You see, language and definitions are part of our language which is how we communicate and connect with each other.  When you redefine long held language definitions,  morals and ethics progressively  or through sheer ignorance, depending on current wants and desires, a society cannot survive.


----------



## Dick Foster (Jul 30, 2019)

Olde Europe said:


> EvilEyeFleegle said:
> 
> 
> > the small population [of Switzerland] in comparison to ours makes the argument invalid..IMO.
> ...



Forget it, he's out of gas and he knows it. Push him aside and move on. Trying to reason with idiots like that is like pissing in the ocean and expecting the sea level to rise.


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 30, 2019)

iceberg said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...


To be honest the only problems I’ve encountered is in the media and in message boards like this. I know many adamant gun owners and anti gun people and have never had a bad discussion. When you get real people one on one and can talk with mutual respect I think there is much more common ground than is presented in the media.


----------



## Defiant1 (Jul 30, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> pismoe said:
> 
> 
> > NotYourBody said:
> ...




So what is your advice to women when faced with a thug who wants to rape them?

Pee themselves?
Or, don't resist, after they leave go to the pharmacy for the morning after pill?


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 30, 2019)

iceberg said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...


Ok, but what about my question. Why would his buddy the mooch lie about it? Is it possible that he is just being honest?


----------



## Leo123 (Jul 30, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > violence is the issue. not the method they choose to express it. *find out why people are violent* and work on that, we may get somewhere. keep banning shit, they'll just use something else til we wind up making it illegal to kill people with rocks. well that's already illegal.
> ...



So it's not the fault of the shooter himself?  OH NO!!!! According to you and the left-loonies  It MUST be the 'evil' gun or the 'evil' Reagan......I'm surprised you and the loonie Democrats haven't found a way to blame Trump yet!!!


----------



## NotYourBody (Jul 30, 2019)

Defiant1 said:


> NotYourBody said:
> 
> 
> > pismoe said:
> ...



The best thing they can do is get advice from a professional law enforcement officer about how they should handle that kind of situation.

Not some gun nutter.


----------



## Leo123 (Jul 30, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> The best thing they can do is get advice from a professional law enforcement officer about how they should handle that kind of situation.
> 
> Not some gun nutter.



Are you kidding!!??  Let's see....Woman walking down the street, gets grabbed by a rapist.......she says..... as she picks up her cell-phone...."Wait!!   I'm calling the cops to get advice!"


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 30, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > NotYourBody said:
> ...




Not every cop is infallible, you know.

There are a fair number of guys that aren't that swift


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 30, 2019)

2aguy said:


> NotYourBody said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...


Well..your both mistaken on this one....the move to de-institutionalize was widely supported by mental health professionals of the time. They had some good--they thought--reasons...and the cost benefits made it an easy sell..to politicians of both parties. Reagan gets an unfair judgement by many...when, in fact, at the time he was going with both the recommendations of the professionals and the pressure to cut costs. In California..10 years later, when Prop. 13 passed..it exacerbated the problem...as the scramble to make up the financial shortfall caused by capping property taxes ensued.

HOW RELEASE OF MENTAL PATIENTS BEGAN

Yes, Reagan did defund mental health institutions at the federal level while President. To the applause of most in his party. But I think it unfair to lump a policy that had widespread support all on his head. Kennedy endorsed the change in policy as early as 1963--most felt that the institutions were inhumane. Most now feel that it was a mistake...but hindsight is always 20/20.

I wonder how Reagan felt when he was shot by a mentally ill man...Hinkley spent the next 30 years in a mental hospital..i guess funding wasn't an issue..in his case.


----------



## Defiant1 (Jul 30, 2019)

Leo123 said:


> NotYourBody said:
> 
> 
> > The best thing they can do is get advice from a professional law enforcement officer about how they should handle that kind of situation.
> ...




The vile thing here is not they live in a fantasy world, it's they want to force us into living in that world.


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

2aguy said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


Yes with strong gun control criminals choose not to.  Good gun control argument.


----------



## Leo123 (Jul 30, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> Not every cop is infallible, you know.
> 
> There are a fair number of guys that aren't that swift



Yes and, even if there were all swift they can't be everywhere at the same time.  However, if patrons were armed the perp can be taken down at the point he brandishes.


----------



## NotYourBody (Jul 30, 2019)

Leo123 said:


> Are you kidding!!??  Let's see....Woman walking down the street, gets grabbed by a rapist.......she says..... as she picks up her cell-phone...."Wait!!   I'm calling the cops to get advice!"


Only if she's a stupid MAGAt voter. Normal women have already done this, many times.

If you are a man, you may not know how often women are trained to protect ourselves. Workplaces, churches, mother's day out groups, old lady red hat groups, YMCA and on and on and on. They all have programs on occasion that teach us how to protect ourselves. Put on by your local friendly police departments.


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

2aguy said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


Oh?  You have a study on how many go unreported?  Your imaginary number requires a lot.


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

2aguy said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


No cdc study exists, hence you cannot
Link it.  Caught lying again.


----------



## Defiant1 (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...




You can't be this ignorant.

Well, unless you are.

The man broke the law when he drove across the border with the weapon he bought in Nevada.
He then broke the law every day he was in possession of that weapon in California.

Do you think he cared?


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 30, 2019)

Olde Europe said:


> EvilEyeFleegle said:
> 
> 
> > the small population [of Switzerland] in comparison to ours makes the argument invalid..IMO.
> ...


To the rescue...the Swiss solutions, as it were, do not scale up. Again, as we have discussed before..because the cultures are different..the same goes for China..or anywhere, really..the US is unique in its tolerance  and even its approval, of violent solutions.

Population DOES have a lot to do with the implementation of law..and the effectiveness of introducing new concepts. As you pointed out to me, America has a number of diverse cultures...while the Swiss are homogeneous, to a large extent.

I think that applying 'per capita' stats is a trap..in this discussion...since it is the cultural influence that plays the largest role.


----------



## Leo123 (Jul 30, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> Leo123 said:
> 
> 
> > Are you kidding!!??  Let's see....Woman walking down the street, gets grabbed by a rapist.......she says..... as she picks up her cell-phone...."Wait!!   I'm calling the cops to get advice!"
> ...



A MAGA woman would have a GUN.   Yes, and maybe she was taught how to use it by law enforcement.  Generally women do not have the upper body strength of a man and a gun can give her a better chance.


----------



## pismoe (Jul 30, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> Leo123 said:
> 
> 
> > Are you kidding!!??  Let's see....Woman walking down the street, gets grabbed by a rapist.......she says..... as she picks up her cell-phone...."Wait!!   I'm calling the cops to get advice!"
> ...


-----------------------------------------   as a general rule most men can knock the zhit out of most any women 'NYBod .


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 30, 2019)

Dick Foster said:


> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> > EvilEyeFleegle said:
> ...


Why, I was thinking the same about you...how very odd! Not that you have attempted anything resembling, 'reason'. Nor would i expect it.


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

Defiant1 said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


Weak gun laws made it so easy.


----------



## RealDave (Jul 30, 2019)

Defiant1 said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Defiant1 said:
> ...



So you're OK with the ban?


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

Leo123 said:


> NotYourBody said:
> 
> 
> > Leo123 said:
> ...


Seems like I regularly read news about women accidentally shooting themselves or children.


----------



## RealDave (Jul 30, 2019)

Dick Foster said:


> OK for all of the anti gun nut lefttards out there, answer this question. A good portion of households in Switzerland have an evil military assault rifle stashed in a closet so where are the waves of gun violence and mass shootings? If it's the guns as you say then the problem should exist there but if it's people  and not guns it's long past time for you to shut your stupid yaps because you don't have brains enough to be preaching to anyone about anything. In fact you should stay away from the voting booth altogether too.


Are you referring to this: Mandatory conscription is actually extremely popular in *Switzerland*, with 73 percent of Swiss citizens voting against a referendum to abolish the practice. After their military service, the Swiss are kept in reserve until age 30–34, if they were an officer — during which time they must keep their service weapon.

So having ex military officers have guns is the same as whacked out gun nuts & crazies arming themselves to the teeth?


----------



## NotYourBody (Jul 30, 2019)

pismoe said:


> NotYourBody said:
> 
> 
> > Leo123 said:
> ...



I still take my advice from law enforcement over gun nutters. That's just me. ymmv,


----------



## pismoe (Jul 30, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> > EvilEyeFleegle said:
> ...


----------------------------------------------   the 'swiss' are stupid .   One of the 'swiss' claims to  fame has been that they have never been invaded due to both mountainous Geography and they  were all Milita and were armed since ealy times   EEFlee.  --------------    'swiss are stupid' .


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 30, 2019)

Leo123 said:


> EvilEyeFleegle said:
> 
> 
> > Interesting..I'd not refer to the constitution as a 'moral' document...an ethical one..perhaps. Albeit flawed in that respect..after all it codified slavery for the purpose of representation in a govt. that the slaves had no say in--hardly the correct ethical stance.
> ...


Totally agree...Some philosophers make a distinction between morals and ethics. But many people use the terms morals and ethics interchangeably when talking about personal beliefs, actions, or principles. For example, it’s common to say, “My morals prevent me from cheating.” It’s also common to use ethics in this sentence instead.

However--there is a difference...basically, Morals are an internal code of conduct and belief, while ethics are an external one

Ethics vs Morals - Difference and Comparison | Diffen

*"Ethics* and *morals* relate to “right” and “wrong” conduct. While they are sometimes used interchangeably, they are different: *ethics* refer to rules provided by an external source, e.g., codes of conduct in workplaces or principles in religions. *Morals* refer to an individual’s own principles regarding right and wrong."

So, as you see, I've redefined nothing--just applied the term in what I felt was a correct manner.

I hope this clears up any confusion you might have over my usage of language.


----------



## Leo123 (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Seems like I regularly read news about women accidentally shooting themselves or children.



So...Because some idiot women shoot themselves and/or their children that somehow, in your mind, rationalizes taking guns from everyone else?   Geez, you must think women are fucking dumb.


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

Leo123 said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Seems like I regularly read news about women accidentally shooting themselves or children.
> ...


It proves it isn’t very good protection.


----------



## pismoe (Jul 30, 2019)

RealDave said:


> Dick Foster said:
> 
> 
> > OK for all of the anti gun nut lefttards out there, answer this question. A good portion of households in Switzerland have an evil military assault rifle stashed in a closet so where are the waves of gun violence and mass shootings? If it's the guns as you say then the problem should exist there but if it's people  and not guns it's long past time for you to shut your stupid yaps because you don't have brains enough to be preaching to anyone about anything. In fact you should stay away from the voting booth altogether too.
> ...


-------------------------------------  ex military officers ,  big fecking deal as I say that with as much disdain as possible.    We gotta buncha them in 'gabby giffords' gun control group trying to disarm Americans .     Sounds like you worship uniforms , special hats and official authority .      That's an unAmerican and Servile attitude but I  notice that its a common attitude of younger than ME people .     Musta been your poor schooling , cartoons and or parents   RDave .


----------



## Leo123 (Jul 30, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> Leo123 said:
> 
> 
> > EvilEyeFleegle said:
> ...



While it is undoubtedly true that words can change over time, the push by certain political factions to completely change the definitions set forth in our Constitution to me, is NOT a natural 'grass roots' development.   A society, IMO, needs bedrock ethics and morals in order to keep that society viable.   Once bits of that bedrock are removed on a regular basis, that society will crumble and be vulnerable to the latest blowhard tyrannical system.


----------



## iceberg (Jul 30, 2019)

OldLady said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > cnm said:
> ...


look around - people are violent all over the place, time and time again. guns are a tool, not the reason.


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

iceberg said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


Violent people with less deadly tools kill fewer people.


----------



## pismoe (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Leo123 said:
> 
> 
> > NotYourBody said:
> ...


------------------------------------------   the 'swiss' and the women you talk about are ALL Stupid   Brian .


----------



## Olde Europe (Jul 30, 2019)

Dick Foster said:


> Forget it, he's out of gas and he knows it. Push him aside and move on. Trying to reason with idiots like that is like pissing in the ocean and expecting the sea level to rise.



Eye is one of the most reasonable, respectable posters on here, and a pleasure to debate.  Which is why that lapse is so surprising.

From you, I have yet to read anything to indicate you are anything other than a vulgar lout, and way overconfident in your knowledge, your intelligence, and your powers of persuasion.


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

It is funny that the same people who say we must stop Iran from getting nukes are ok handing out mass killing weapons in our country.


----------



## pismoe (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Leo123 said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


--------------------------------------------   for some stupid WOMEN according to You Brian .


----------



## Leo123 (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Leo123 said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...



No it proves you think women are FUCKING DUMB!!!   Why do you use a woman to make your stupid point anyway?


----------



## westwall (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...







No, they merely change the tools they use.


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

pismoe said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Leo123 said:
> ...


For many men and women.  Hundreds killed each year.


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

westwall said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...


I don’t see that in countries with strong gun control.


----------



## pismoe (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> It is funny that the same people who say we must stop Iran from getting nukes are ok handing out mass killing weapons in our country.


----------------------------------    2 different issues  Brian .   I simply want 'irans' balls squeezed because of their taking hostages 40 some years ago .   And TRUMP going after 'iran' due to nukes is only a good excuse for ME   Brian .


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 30, 2019)

Olde Europe said:


> Dick Foster said:
> 
> 
> > Forget it, he's out of gas and he knows it. Push him aside and move on. Trying to reason with idiots like that is like pissing in the ocean and expecting the sea level to rise.
> ...


I 'm blaming it on the solar flare....LOL!


----------



## westwall (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...







That's because you are a one trick pony and a robot with no desire to educate yourself.  And the truck attack below is only one of many.

*Nice attack: What we know about the Bastille Day killings*
*Dozens of people were killed, including children, when a lorry ploughed into a large crowd watching a fireworks display in Nice to mark the Bastille Day holiday.*

*Attack in Nice: What we know*


----------



## pismoe (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> pismoe said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


------------------------------------------------   there are over 320 million people in the USA so your number of hundreds per year is NEGLIGABLE   Brian .


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

westwall said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...


And how long ago was that?  We have regular mass shootings.  You clowns have a small handful of rare examples.  A few barriers will stop that from happening again.


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

pismoe said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > pismoe said:
> ...


It’s hundreds more than countries with strong gun control.


----------



## RealDave (Jul 30, 2019)

pismoe said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > Dick Foster said:
> ...


Look, assfuck, I think people who were actually TRAINED to handle weapons & had a roll in the military where they learned when to use them is a tad different than a bunch of you assfucks running around carrying a loaded weapon, with little training, & thinking it makes you hot shit.


----------



## westwall (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...







Three years ago.  And that one truck killed more than all of the mass shootings we have had since Las Vegas.  NEXT!


----------



## RealDave (Jul 30, 2019)

westwall said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...


  You left out the "less deadly" part, dumbass.


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

westwall said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...


3 years ago.  And we just had another mass shooting.  Shootings all the time, and you have 3 years ago....


----------



## iceberg (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...


you are a fucking idiot.

bye.


----------



## RealDave (Jul 30, 2019)

westwall said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...


  Trucks have a purpose.  An assault type rifle doesn't.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


You misstated maybe you leftist should leave to a country that you are trying to make America into.
You would have to lie so much and have less stress


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

iceberg said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...


Sorry you don’t like the facts.


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...


??


----------



## pismoe (Jul 30, 2019)

RealDave said:


> pismoe said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...


-------------------------------------   so you can also call names eh RDave .   Now just find a 'uniform' or Official Hat of Authority and shine his or her  Shoes   RDave .  [chuckle]


----------



## RealDave (Jul 30, 2019)

Leo123 said:


> NotYourBody said:
> 
> 
> > The best thing they can do is get advice from a professional law enforcement officer about how they should handle that kind of situation.
> ...


So she is saying "Wait until I get my gun out of my purse" instead?


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 30, 2019)

RealDave said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


good thing a purpose is not necessary for a right.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


as expected don't ask for an explanation


----------



## pismoe (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> pismoe said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


--------------------------------   the America is the only Nation that matters to a Real American  Brian .


----------



## RealDave (Jul 30, 2019)

2aguy said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...


  Other than bars & hotels.  They were not no gun zones.


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

pismoe said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > pismoe said:
> ...


And a real American wants to save lives.


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...


I was hoping for a translation of your gibberish.


----------



## RealDave (Jul 30, 2019)

2aguy said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


 OK, People who were raised in homes without their father are no longer able to own guns.

Is that what you had in mind?


----------



## pismoe (Jul 30, 2019)

RealDave said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


------------------------------------------    read about the Purpose of the 'second amendment'  RDave .


----------



## Defiant1 (Jul 30, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> Leo123 said:
> 
> 
> > Are you kidding!!??  Let's see....Woman walking down the street, gets grabbed by a rapist.......she says..... as she picks up her cell-phone...."Wait!!   I'm calling the cops to get advice!"
> ...




Do you think women who purchase handguns, take classes to safely use and carry a handgun, are ignorant of the classes you cited?


----------



## RealDave (Jul 30, 2019)

2aguy said:


> cnm said:
> 
> 
> > Look, you guys are happy enough that recurring mass murders and sky high firearm homicide rates come with easy access to handguns and military style semi automatic rifles. No need to be so stridently defensive, carry your selfishness with pride.
> ...


 Cars transport us to work & the grocery & the school etc   what do guns do?.


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

pismoe said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...


For militias to protect country.  No longer needed with worlds strongest military.


----------



## westwall (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> pismoe said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...








The PEOPLE are the militia.  That has been proven to you many, many times.  But, because it doesn't comport to your warped thought processes, you don't care about facts.


----------



## NotYourBody (Jul 30, 2019)

Defiant1 said:


> NotYourBody said:
> 
> 
> > Leo123 said:
> ...


I think it makes them feel foolishly safe.


----------



## pismoe (Jul 30, 2019)

read and learn about the Purpose of the 'second amendment'  Brian and RDave .


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

westwall said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > pismoe said:
> ...


We have the strongest military in the world.


----------



## Olde Europe (Jul 30, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> To the rescue...the Swiss solutions, as it were, do not scale up. Again, as we have discussed before..because the cultures are different..the same goes for China..or anywhere, really..the US is unique in its tolerance  and even its approval, of violent solutions.
> 
> Population DOES have a lot to do with the implementation of law..and the effectiveness of introducing new concepts. As you pointed out to me, America has a number of diverse cultures...while the Swiss are homogeneous, to a large extent.
> 
> I think that applying 'per capita' stats is a trap..in this discussion...since it is the cultural influence that plays the largest role.



The Swiss, believe it or not, are just as diverse as the Americans.  There is also no scaling up of solutions necessary.  A law enacted, and enforced, that's all.  I think, that was successfully accomplished before in the U.S., and I see no reason to believe it won't be possible again.  Now, were Swiss gun regulations implemented, you bet you'll find a few who would lose every last bit of their tiny minds, which is a reason why Washington won't touch the issue for the time being, but frankly, population size has nothing whatsoever to do with it.

And yes, the only measure that is relevant here is per capita, and it coexists very well with more sociological issues, such as "culture".  You know, the thing that changes as we speak.


----------



## pismoe (Jul 30, 2019)

pismoe said:


> read and learn about the Purpose of the 'second amendment'  Brian and RDave .


-----------------------------   HEED my advice  Brian and RDave .


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


sorry dude it was pretty much self explanatory


----------



## westwall (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...








Yeah, but the 2nd Amendment isn't about that.  You have been told what the 2nd is for, and still you try and deflect away from its original purpose.


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...


Learn grammar....


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

westwall said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...


I have read it many times and it’s clearly for militias to defend the country.


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 30, 2019)

westwall said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...


Do support any regulations of firearms such as.... Auto ban, Carry permits, no guns allowed in schools?


----------



## Defiant1 (Jul 30, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > NotYourBody said:
> ...




So what if it does.  You and your ilk are always feeling foolishly oppressed, or disrespected, or eye raped, or countless other idiotic things.


----------



## Defiant1 (Jul 30, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...




The only regulations I support are felons and those adjudicated mentally incompetent not being able to possess weapons.
Anything else is infringing on the inalienable right to bear arms.


----------



## Marion Morrison (Jul 30, 2019)

RealDave said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > cnm said:
> ...





Defiant1 said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...



Same here, all the rest is bullshit.

I should be able to have a full auto G18 with a suppressor. Actually I am able to, you just have to jump through hoops.

But..I have an aversion to automatic pistols. I would not carry one with a round in the chamber.


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 30, 2019)

Defiant1 said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...


Ok... Then to sell a gun it must be determined if the purchaser is a felon and/or mentally competent. Is that right? How would that be done?


----------



## pismoe (Jul 30, 2019)

Defiant1 said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...


--------------------------------------------    mostly agree , except a nonviolent felon released after doing his time should have ALL RIGHTS Restored  Defiant .


----------



## Marion Morrison (Jul 30, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...



I know you're pining for an "Enter Big Brother" type scenario here, but fuck you. You don't get it. 

Generally people know who they're selling guns to in private sales.


----------



## pismoe (Jul 30, 2019)

aw the mental deal , who is mentally diseased eh ??   Just so they are non violent I have no problem with crazy people until they do violent things Slade .


----------



## Defiant1 (Jul 30, 2019)

pismoe said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...



Pismoe, I agree completely.
I was going to add that but I thought it would be too much for the other side to absorb.


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 30, 2019)

Marion Morrison said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > Defiant1 said:
> ...


Why can’t you act like a grown up and just answer the question? 

You’re an idiot if you think retail workers know every person they are selling to. So how about you contribute to the conversation with actual substance


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 30, 2019)

pismoe said:


> aw the mental deal , who is mentally diseased eh ??   Just so they are non violent I have no problem with crazy people until they do violent things Slade .


Good for you. I’m just asking questions here. Somebody else brought up felons and mental


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> Marion Morrison said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


They lose on substance...


----------



## Marion Morrison (Jul 30, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> Marion Morrison said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...



Aw, you mad I called out how you were trying to steer the conversation? Too bad, so sad. 

I have friends that are convicted felons I'd sell a gun to in a heartbeat. They're family men that work every day and support their families. They made a mistake a long time ago.


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 30, 2019)

Marion Morrison said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > Marion Morrison said:
> ...


I didn’t bring up felons you dumbass. I asked a question and somebody else answered. Try and keep up


----------



## Marion Morrison (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > Marion Morrison said:
> ...


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

Marion Morrison said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


Just stating facts bro.  Funny seeing you carry on like a child...


----------



## Defiant1 (Jul 30, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...



No, I'm not a dealer.  If I was I would have a Fed. license.
The burden is on the buyer.
The law says those are not to possess firearms. So the law is they shouldn't be buying.


----------



## Marion Morrison (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Marion Morrison said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...



Oh hey there Mr. adult and serious



































Commie gun-grabbing anti-American piece of shit fuck!


----------



## Brain357 (Jul 30, 2019)

Marion Morrison said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Marion Morrison said:
> ...


You really represent this message board well.


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 30, 2019)

Marion Morrison said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


You’re the one saying “fuck you” and posting childish memes and emoji. Get a hold of your emotions and come back once you’ve figured out how to act like a grown up and not a dramatic troll


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


SEEMS YOU LACK THE SKILLS TO PARTICIPATE IN ADULT DISCUSSION FORUMS


----------



## NotYourBody (Jul 30, 2019)

Defiant1 said:


> NotYourBody said:
> 
> 
> > Defiant1 said:
> ...


You are mistaking me for one of your snowflake MAGA females. I'm safe here on the border. I don't need a gun to make me feel less afraid because I am not afraid.


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 30, 2019)

Defiant1 said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > Defiant1 said:
> ...


So you don’t support felons or mental people from getting gun but you want no measures in place to prevent them from getting guns? So your basically just making a legal play where if one commits a crime with a gun they get a harsher sentence... that’s your deterrent?

And what constitutions somebody mentally ineligible to own a gun? How do they know?


----------



## Marion Morrison (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Marion Morrison said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...



I know your gun-grabbing lying ass from Falena's lame site, bitch. Did you ever figure out what kind of gun you have, moron?


----------



## pismoe (Jul 30, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > NotYourBody said:
> ...


----------------------------------------   doesn't have anything to do with being AFRAID .   Owning guns is simply about being PREPARED .   If you have a gun , a fire extinguisher and a spare tire in your car you are PREPARED for a kitchen grease fire , a flat tire or a Rapist   'NYBod .


----------



## Defiant1 (Jul 30, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > NotYourBody said:
> ...





NotYourBody said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > NotYourBody said:
> ...




Nobody is insisting you need a gun.
You are free to make you own choice, respect others to make their choice.


----------



## pismoe (Jul 30, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > NotYourBody said:
> ...


-------------------------------------------   you are SAFE up to the moment that you aren't safe or unafraid   NYBode.


----------



## RealDave (Jul 30, 2019)

pismoe said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > pismoe said:
> ...



So you diss the military & law enforcement just like your orange hero.


----------



## RealDave (Jul 30, 2019)

Defiant1 said:


> NotYourBody said:
> 
> 
> > Defiant1 said:
> ...


  Except your choice can kill people.


----------



## Defiant1 (Jul 30, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...




I'm a proponent of the 3 strike rule.
3 strikes, life in prison.

Example:
Commit a crime - Strike 1
Have a gun while committing a crime -  Strike 2
Use the gun while committing a crime, firing the weapon, assaulting with the weapon - Strike 3


----------



## RealDave (Jul 30, 2019)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...



You don't have a right to own an AR-15.  The USSC said so.


----------



## pismoe (Jul 30, 2019)

RealDave said:


> pismoe said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...


-----------------------------------   not me , they Volunteer for their jobs , money and benefits so pay them on Friday .   As for the retired let them have a few beers while they enjoy their retirements   RDave .


----------



## Defiant1 (Jul 30, 2019)

RealDave said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > NotYourBody said:
> ...




Let's hope so.

BTW, I was in the Navy do I get an exemption from your arbitrary restrictions.


----------



## Marion Morrison (Jul 30, 2019)

RealDave said:


> pismoe said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...




When you only have seconds, the police are just minutes away.


----------



## pismoe (Jul 30, 2019)

pismoe said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > pismoe said:
> ...


.


----------



## hjmick (Jul 30, 2019)

RealDave said:


> pismoe said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...




Because training makes all the difference in the world, right?

Thousand Oaks mass shooting raises questions about veterans’ transitions back to civilian life – Daily News

More than two dozen parishioners killed in rural Texas church shooting

Graphic body-camera video shows deputy shoot man inside his own home

The list of "trained" people committing heinous acts of firearm fueled violence is long... so don't for one fucking second pretend your training makes the slightest bit of difference to mine. In the end, it's not the fucking training, you shit stain, it's the person.


Why is it you served? Obviously it wasn't to defend the Constitution... Maybe you just wanted run around with a loaded weapon and feel like hot shit?

Piss off.


----------



## NotYourBody (Jul 30, 2019)

Defiant1 said:


> NotYourBody said:
> 
> 
> > Defiant1 said:
> ...


I don't have to respect it. I think it shows unreasonable fear. However, I do not insist you live by my rules nor do I have the power to make you live by them. If I did, things would be sure different in this country.

I have no power to change the law. I am one small vote. I am not a threat to you.


----------



## pismoe (Jul 30, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > NotYourBody said:
> ...


---------------------------   sure you are a threat as a liberal and ASSUMED 'dem' voter that are looking to Disarm American Gun OWNERS of effective and Efficient Weapons 'NYBod


----------



## NotYourBody (Jul 30, 2019)

pismoe said:


> NotYourBody said:
> 
> 
> > Defiant1 said:
> ...


I am PREPARED every time I leave my house. I rode city buses all over downtown San Diego yesterday, and back out to my suburban city. Trust me, I was fully prepared to keep myself safe and I did. Even amongst the crazy homeless, who are mostly white btw and a lot of veterans. I just didn't need to prepare with a gun.

Now if some white nationalist nutter had decided to shoot up downtown San Diego, I would not be able to defend against that. And I don't want some wanna be gunslinger thinking they should do that on my behalf. 

I'll take my chances, thanks anyway. If I die, I guess I'll be one of those innocents your ilk claim are required sacrifices for freedom. 

I'm a sheep. Not a goat. I don't want your gun help.


----------



## NotYourBody (Jul 30, 2019)

pismoe said:


> NotYourBody said:
> 
> 
> > Defiant1 said:
> ...


One vote. And it belongs to me. Not you. I can do with it as I please. I understand that frightens you. I really don't care.


----------



## pismoe (Jul 30, 2019)

pismoe said:


> NotYourBody said:
> 
> 
> > Defiant1 said:
> ...


----------------------------------------------   see right above as I describe WHY you are a threat .   As far as you taking care of yourself . No one cares how you do or don't do that   'NYBod .


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jul 30, 2019)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...


Yet another mass shooting and yet another thread filled with rightwing demagoguery, fallacies, and lies.

Indeed, yet another mass shooting and again no viable, constructive solutions from the reprehensible right as to how to address mass shootings – instead conservatives do nothing but deflect and spew the same tired, moronic sophistry.


----------



## NotYourBody (Jul 30, 2019)

pismoe said:


> pismoe said:
> 
> 
> > NotYourBody said:
> ...


Well there is nothing in this world you can do to reduce my 'threat' to you. Not one thing. Your gun won't help you unless you are coming to kill me. Are you? Should I get some traps ready?


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 30, 2019)

Defiant1 said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > Defiant1 said:
> ...


Ok thanks for explaining that but you didn’t answer any of my questions


----------



## Deplorable Yankee (Jul 30, 2019)

The moronic progressive NAZIs they always look to punish law abiding citizens after a shooting ...cause theyre giant fags who are full of shit


----------



## Hugo Furst (Jul 30, 2019)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...




"yet another thread filled with rightwing demagoguery, fallacies, and lies."

responding to leftwing demagoguery, fallacies, and lies.

"no viable, constructive solutions from the reprehensible right as to how to address mass shootings – instead conservatives do nothing but deflect and spew the same tired, moronic sophistry"

and no viable, constructive solutions from the reprehensible left as to how to address mass shootings – instead liberals do nothing but deflect and spew the same tired, moronic sophistry.

Pot, meet kettle.


----------



## Defiant1 (Jul 30, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...




Only in a court of law can anyone's rights be removed.
If a person is adjudicated guilty of a felony, their right to possess a weapon and to vote, removed.
Same if they are adjudicated mentally incompetent.


----------



## pismoe (Jul 30, 2019)

I simply told YOU Why and How you are a threat as are ALL 'dems' and people like you   NYBod .


----------



## NotYourBody (Jul 30, 2019)

pismoe said:


> I simply told YOU Why and How you are a threat as are ALL 'dems' and people like you   NYBod .



Okay then. I'll pretend to be sorry I'm keeping you up at night with my dangerous self. 

There there. 
It'll be okay.
Bless your precious heart.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 30, 2019)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


My solution is no more compromise work with the laws already on the book or continue to keep your thumb up your ass.


----------



## pismoe (Jul 30, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> pismoe said:
> 
> 
> > I simply told YOU Why and How you are a threat as are ALL 'dems' and people like you   NYBod .
> ...


------------------------------------------------   as a 'dem' voter and supporter YOU are the Real American persons Enemy   'NYBod .


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 30, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Wrong...Reagan didn't defune mental health programs that started with Carter, the ACLU and the other left wing groups that believe the mentall ill should crap outside and live under bridges instead of getting care.
> ...




Moron

HOW RELEASE OF MENTAL PATIENTS BEGAN

Dr. Bertram S. Brown, a psychiatrist and Federal official who was instrumental in shaping the community center legislation in 1963, agreed that Presidents Eisenhower, Kennedy and Johnson were to some extent misled by the mental health community and Government bureaucrats.

''The bureaucrat-psychiatrists realized that there was political and financial overpromise,'' he said.

Dr. Brown, then an executive of the National Institute of Mental Health and now president of Hahnemann University in Philadelphia, stated candidly in an interview: ''Yes, the doctors were overpromising for the politicians. The doctors did not believe that community care would cure schizophrenia, and we did allow ourselves to be somewhat misrepresented.''

''They ended up with everything but the kitchen sink without the issue of long-term funding being settled,'' he said. ''That was the overpromising.''

Dr. Brown said he and the other architects of the community centers legislation believed that while there was a risk of homelessness, that it would not happen if Federal, state, local and private financial support ''was sufficient'' to do the job.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 30, 2019)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...




An your entire post is a lie.....we have solutions, you don't want them....

Lock up actual gun criminals for 30 years, do not let them out on bail...this would dry up 95% of gun crime.

End gun free zones...we know from actual mass public shooters they target these locations...and when an armed citizen has their legal gun with them, they are 94% effective against mass public shooters.....

You are the one who spews...you did not state one "common sense" gun law that you want, because you know they have nothing to do with common sense, stopping gun criminals or mass shooters.  What they actually do is punish normal gun owners who did not use their legal guns for crime.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 30, 2019)

RealDave said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > NotYourBody said:
> ...




Your choice created gun free zones.....we know from actual mass public shooters, either captured or from their notes, they target gun free zones.

Also, democrat catch and release policies for violent gun criminals creates 95% of our gun crime and gun murder problem.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 30, 2019)

RealDave said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...



No, actually they didn't....if fact, twit....Justice Scalia, the guy who wrote the opinion in D.C v Heller later stated in Friedman v Highland Park that yes, we do have the right to own the AR-15 rifle....you know this, you have been shown this over and over.....in fact, he states the AR-15 by name.......by name, you twit.

This is what Scalia actually wrote about those rifles and in particular the AR-15 rifle...

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/15pdf/15-133_7l48.pdf

That analysis misreads Heller. The question under Heller is not whether citizens have adequate alternatives available for self-defense. 

*Rather, Heller asks whether the law bans types of firearms commonly used for a lawful purpose—regardless of whether alternatives exist. 554 U. S., at 627–629.*

 And Heller draws a distinction between such firearms and weapons specially adapted to unlawful uses and not in common use, such as sawed-off shotguns. Id., at 624–625.

 The City’s ban is thus highly suspect because it broadly prohibits common semiautomatic firearms used for lawful purposes. 

*Roughly five million Americans own AR-style semiautomatic rifles. See 784 F. 3d, at 415, n. 3. The overwhelming majority of citizens who own and use such rifles do so for lawful purposes, including self-defense and target shooting. See ibid. Under our precedents, that is all that is needed for citizens to have a right under the Second Amendment to keep such weapons. See McDonald, 561 U. S., at 767–768; Heller, supra, at 628–629. *


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 30, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...




We have a system in place already.......if you are adjudicated dangerously mentally ill, you can't own a rifle.

We already have the law that states that felons can't buy, own or carry a gun.  If they are caught with a gun, they can already be arrested...oh, I guess you want them "more" arrested........

And yes....the harsher sentence will deter criminals from using guns but not effect normal gun owners...how do we know this....

Japan....

http://www.atimes.com/article/japans-gun-control-laws-strict-yakuza-turn-toy-pistols/



Ryo Fujiwara, long-time writer on yakuza affairs and author of the book, The Three Yamaguchi-Gumi, says that the punishment for using a gun in a gang war or in a crime is now so heavy that most yakuza avoid their use at all – unless it is for an assassination.

“In a hit, whoever fires the gun, or is made to take responsibility for firing the gun, has to pretty much be willing to go to jail for the rest of their life. That’s a big decision. The repercussions are big, too. No one wants to claim responsibility for such acts – the gang office might actually get shut-down.”

The gang typically also has to support the family of the hit-man while he is in prison, which is also a financial burden for the organization.

Japan’s Firearms and Swords Control Laws make it a crime to illegally possess a gun, with a punishment of jail time of up to 10 years.

Illegal possession more than one gun, the penalty goes up to 15 years in prison. If you own a gun and matching ammunition, that’s another charge and a heavier penalty. The most severe penalty is for the act of discharging a gun in a train, on a bus, or most public spaces, which can result in a life sentence.

---

*A low-ranking member of the Kobe-Yamaguchi-gumi put it this way: “All of the smart guys got rid of their guns a long-time ago. The penalties are way too high. You get life in prison if you just fire a gun. That’s not fun.”*


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 30, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...




Auto Ban.....what do you mean by this?  If you mean full automatic, no.

Carry permits....no, they are unConstitutional.....a fee or test to exercise a Right is UnConstitutional....

No guns allowed to be carried by law abiding citizens with lawful business in schools....no.

Gun free school zones are targeted by some mass public shooters.  We know from actual mass public shooters either captured or from their notes that they target gun free zones.  If a parent is legally allowed to carry a gun, they should be able to take it with them into the school.  As long as they don't draw the weapon without cause, what is the problem?  If they take the weapon out they can already be arrested for disturbing the police.

We already have every law we need to deal with gun criminals...the problem is that once we catch them, democrats like you keep letting them out of jail and prison.  There were 12 mass public shootings in 2018.  93 people, total, killed in those shootings.

The vast majority of gun murder, the other 10,899 are criminals who are already banned from buying, owning and carrying a gun...we can already arrest them with all the laws we already have.........again, it is people like you letting them out of prison that causes the gun crime and gun murder...

you are the problem.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 30, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...



We already have federally mandated background checks that do this.  Then, if a felon is later caught carrying or owning an illegal gun we can already arrest them under current law.

They get past the current, federally mandated background checks by stealing the guns or getting freinds and family to buy the gun for them, or they have other straw buyers buy the gun, because all of those people can pass any background check you create.

We have everything we need to stop gun crime....you just don't care about those things because you want to ban guns for normal people...


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 30, 2019)

RealDave said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > cnm said:
> ...




They provide food, sport, and according to the Centers for Disease Control, Americans use their legal guns 1.1 million times a year to stop violent rape, robbery and murder...that is what guns do....they save the lives of innocent people.......

Can you do math....?

Criminals...10,982 gun murders, 70-80% of the victims are other criminals....

Americans use their legal guns 1.1 million times a year to stop criminals....

That is what guns do.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 30, 2019)

RealDave said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...




No, twit.   You hate guns, so you don't want to understand the problem...you want to ban guns.

The problem is that we have young males raised without fathers...fathers to teach them self control.   We also have a problem in that democrats keep letting repeat gun offenders, people caught with illegal guns over and over again, out of jail and prison, and they are the ones shooting each other.

Your kind keeps letting them out...stop f******g doing that and our gun crime problem drops 95%.


----------



## cnm (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> When it comes to mass shootings I’d say they are really rare when there is strong gun control. Why do you [Bluesman] support mass killers?


It's a necessary condition of easy access to handguns and military style semi automatic rifles.


----------



## cnm (Jul 30, 2019)

Hey, 2aguy, you never answered. Are you so scared that you carry a sidearm when you go grocery shopping?


----------



## cnm (Jul 30, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> Why do you want to make law abiding people out to be the bad guys here?


Because the latest shooter was law abiding until he wasn't. How come you can't grasp that?


----------



## cnm (Jul 30, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> Actually, it does happen in other countries all the time. America is in the middle of the pack as far as murder rates. The homicide rates in places like Congo, Mexico, El Salvador is far higher than in America.


I love it when third world countries are used to justify US policies. You've chosen your level well.


----------



## cnm (Jul 30, 2019)

Defiant1 said:


> So if a car pulls up in your driveway and 4 thugs with their pants below their asses get out, you want a bolt action rifle?


How scared can one poster be? But then I guess some will have drug deals go bad more often than others.


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 30, 2019)

cnm said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > Actually, it does happen in other countries all the time. America is in the middle of the pack as far as murder rates. The homicide rates in places like Congo, Mexico, El Salvador is far higher than in America.
> ...




Those are the nations where America gets its Illegal Aliens from.

It seems sort of silly to compare America with countries we have nothing in common with.


----------



## pismoe (Jul 30, 2019)

cnm said:


> Hey, 2aguy, you never answered. Are you so scared that you carry a sidearm when you go grocery shopping?


---------------------------------    everyone in the USA has the FREEDOM and carries whenever they decide to carry .     We are not yet 'euroland' ,  'new zealand' or some other 'nanny state'  CNM .


----------



## Defiant1 (Jul 30, 2019)

cnm said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > Why do you want to make law abiding people out to be the bad guys here?
> ...



He wasn't law abiding.


----------



## pismoe (Jul 30, 2019)

cnm said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > Why do you want to make law abiding people out to be the bad guys here?
> ...


--------------------------------------------  most gun people like me  don't really Care , why can't YOU grasp that  ??   And as the old saying goes , ---   zhit happens plus its the price we pay for the FREEDOM to own guns  CNM .


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 30, 2019)

Defiant1 said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > Defiant1 said:
> ...


That’s interesting... would you apply the same standard to the first amendment and remove all censorship regulations? Allow Max Strength Penis Enlargement LLC to toss up a billboard next to the local elementary school with their world famous Mandingo modeling his 13 inch python?


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 30, 2019)

2aguy said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...


Why am I the problem? I’m just asking questions. And these laws we have in place wouldn’t exist if we did things your way, is that right? Everybody would be legally allowed to have a gun because that is their right. There would be now restrictions to purchase, we could go buy a machine gun with a slurpy at the local 7-11, is that right?


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 30, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...



711 doesn't carry firearms for sale, and the libs can't force them to do it.

The real issue isn't the 2nd Amendment, but instead people's God Given right to keep and bear arms.  Nothing more basic than the right to defend yourself.    Not who should or shouldn't carry firearms for sale.

Right now, there is a good system.  Legitimate stores show discretion and sell weapons to responsible people.  Do you have a problem with this system we have now?

Or would you prefer to force citizens into the backroom of cocktail lounges for cash sales of firearms and zero discretion or background checking?


----------



## pismoe (Jul 30, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


----------------------------------------------   I would NOT  mind seeing the  return of unregulated gun purchase and use like it was prior to the mid 60s Slade .


----------



## pismoe (Jul 30, 2019)

I remember my DAD buying 2 guns in the mid 60s , cash sale and walk out with the guns in WOLFS hardware store and it was about the mid 60s   Slade .


----------



## pismoe (Jul 30, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


--------------------------------------------   and that's how it should be Slade .


----------



## pismoe (Jul 30, 2019)

and does anyone remember Mail Order guns which were probably stopped in the mid to late 60s ??


----------



## pismoe (Jul 30, 2019)

I remember seeing AD's in the back of Hunting magazines selling war surplus USA Garands and Colt .45 for 10 or 15 Dollars , mail order , delivered to your door  Slade .


----------



## pismoe (Jul 30, 2019)

and how did Sears and Monkey Wards sell their mail order guns shown in their catalogs .


----------



## Marion Morrison (Jul 30, 2019)

pismoe said:


> I remember seeing AD's in the back of Hunting magazines selling war surplus USA Garands and Colt .45 for 10 or 15 Dollars , mail order , delivered to your door  Slade .



And no mass shootings. Ofc Mental Hospitals were still open then, kids could pray in school, and people went to church more often.


----------



## pismoe (Jul 30, 2019)

pismoe said:


> I remember seeing AD's in the back of Hunting magazines selling war surplus USA Garands and Colt .45 for 10 or 15 Dollars , mail order , delivered to your door  Slade .


------------------------------------------------------    so , perhaps you remember what I am talking about eh Marion ??


----------



## Leo123 (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> pismoe said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...



The you should be for 0 gun control so you don't disarm the innocent law abiding citizens.


----------



## Leo123 (Jul 30, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> I think it makes them feel foolishly safe.



Well I think it doesn't make them foolishly safe.


----------



## Leo123 (Jul 30, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> You are mistaking me for one of your snowflake MAGA females. I'm safe here on the border. I don't need a gun to make me feel less afraid because I am not afraid.



The border patrol carries weapons and they are 'on the border' I suspect you are insulated.   Your not an illegal alien are you?


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 30, 2019)

Marion Morrison said:


> pismoe said:
> 
> 
> > I remember seeing AD's in the back of Hunting magazines selling war surplus USA Garands and Colt .45 for 10 or 15 Dollars , mail order , delivered to your door  Slade .
> ...




Of course we prayed in school in Catholic school back in the day. We did not have any shootings. 

And the religious brothers who ran the school were well versed in brutality to keep the young men in line and avoid the shootings


----------



## Leo123 (Jul 30, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> For militias to protect country.  No longer needed with worlds strongest military.



Well, when the "Bad Orange Man' sends troops to your door, raise your hands and give up....OK?


----------



## Marion Morrison (Jul 30, 2019)

pismoe said:


> pismoe said:
> 
> 
> > I remember seeing AD's in the back of Hunting magazines selling war surplus USA Garands and Colt .45 for 10 or 15 Dollars , mail order , delivered to your door  Slade .
> ...



No, that was before my time. I remember you could walk into the store with cash and walk out with any gun you could afford immediately, though.


----------



## Marion Morrison (Jul 30, 2019)

OldLady said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > cnm said:
> ...



I see you failed to mention the devaluation of a human being's life.


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 31, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


No I don’t have a problem with the current system. I’d like to see some improvements made to the background check database and wouldn’t mind a registration system to help with criminal investigations. But I think we are doing a fine job. I definitely don’t think regulations are unconstitutional and should be done away with. That is so silly in my opinion


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 31, 2019)

pismoe said:


> I remember my DAD buying 2 guns in the mid 60s , cash sale and walk out with the guns in WOLFS hardware store and it was about the mid 60s   Slade .


That’s great Pis... back when we used to be free. The good ol days!


----------



## cnm (Jul 31, 2019)

iceberg said:


> then in this case i'm speaking to the liberals i have seen that when you try to tell them functionally there is no difference between the AR-15 and a browning longtrac semi-automatic, they refuse to go "wow, i misunderstood that weapon" and instead say "then semi-automatics needs to go also".


That's because you won't have mentioned that the magazine capacity of the AR 15 is multiples of that of the Browning and you won't have explained the implications of it being removable/replaceable. Standard gun nut deviance.


----------



## cnm (Jul 31, 2019)

2aguy said:


> I actually rarely carry.


So what about all these citizen prevented shootings? You're leaving it up to the police to do it instead?


----------



## cnm (Jul 31, 2019)

2aguy said:


> New Zealand has more guns than Australia and a lower gun murder rate than Australia......culture, not guns.....the real issue, not the "I hate guns" issue.


Military style semi automatics and handguns are effectively banned. That is the difference.


----------



## cnm (Jul 31, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> I think that applying 'per capita' stats is a trap..in this discussion...since it is the cultural influence that plays the largest role.


For gods' sakes, you were the one applying the population argument.


----------



## cnm (Jul 31, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> It seems sort of silly to compare America with countries we have nothing in common with.


I wondered why you didn't bother comparing the US with first world nations.


----------



## cnm (Jul 31, 2019)

Defiant1 said:


> cnm said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


What convictions did he have?


----------



## Olde Europe (Jul 31, 2019)

cnm said:


> EvilEyeFleegle said:
> 
> 
> > I think that applying 'per capita' stats is a trap..in this discussion...since it is the cultural influence that plays the largest role.
> ...



You do understand that "population size" and "per capita" are quite different metrics, no?


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 31, 2019)

cnm said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > When it comes to mass shootings I’d say they are really rare when there is strong gun control. Why do you [Bluesman] support mass killers?
> ...




No, it isn't ...........

Your theory...more guns = more gun crime.

26 years of experience:  More Americans own and carry guns over the last 26 years.

Result....Gun crime went down 75%.  Gun murder went down 49%.  Violent crime went down 72%

In science....you, real science....when you have a theory that states one thing, and when you test that theory the exact opposite thing happens, that means your theory is wrong.

Your theory, More Guns = More Gun crime

Over 26 years more guns, more people carrying guns

Result:  Gun murder down 49%, gun crime down 75%, violent crime down 72%.

The exact opposite of your theory happened....

In science, that means your theory is wrong.

And don't go off on the tangent that I can't prove that people owning and carrying guns was a direct cause of the lower rates....that isn't your theory.....your theory is regardless of any other factor, more guns in more hands = more gun crime.....

You are wrong.

We have about 18 million semi-automatic rifles in private hands....how many were used to commit murder in 2017, the last year we have stats for?   

403

Cars killed over 38,000....

Drowning killed over 3,500

knives killed 1,591

So...according to your logic, we now need to ban cars, pools and knives......as well as clubs and hands and feet...

Rifles...... 403

Knives.....1,591

Hands and feet......696

Clubs.....467


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 31, 2019)

cnm said:


> Hey, 2aguy, you never answered. Are you so scared that you carry a sidearm when you go grocery shopping?




I did answer, in detail....go back and look.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 31, 2019)

cnm said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > Why do you want to make law abiding people out to be the bad guys here?
> ...




Wrong...again.....90% of people who commit murder have long histories of crime and violence......they are not normal people who snap and then kill.......that is the truth.

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."*


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 31, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...




You fail to understand.....those regulations effect the public space .... carrying a gun effects no one unless you actually break the law.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 31, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...



Registration doesn't help criminal investigations...how do we know, from Canada, in particular.....they tried to register 15 million long guns and had to stop....the expense, the cost in manpower and resources and they didn't help solve crime....

A street gun has a long life on the street before it is finally captured in a crime, which means knowing the original owner has nothing to do with who used it for the crime...

Canada Tried Registering Long Guns -- And Gave Up

15 million guns.....1 billion dollars...and it didn't work....



The law passed and starting in 1998 Canadians were required to have a license to own firearms and register their weapons with the government. According to Canadian researcher (and gun enthusiast) Gary Mauser, the Canada Firearms Center quickly rose to 600 employees and the cost of the effort climbed past $600 million. In 2002 Canada’s auditor general released a report saying initial cost estimates of $2 million (Canadian) had increased to $1 billion as the government tried to register the estimated 15 million guns owned by Canada’s 34 million residents.

The registry was plagued with complications like duplicate serial numbers and millions of incomplete records, Mauser reports. One person managed to register a soldering gun, demonstrating the lack of precise standards. And overshadowing the effort was the suspicion of misplaced effort: Pistols were used in 66% of gun homicides in 2011, yet they represent about 6% of the guns in Canada. Legal long guns were used in 11% of killings that year, according to Statistics Canada, while illegal weapons like sawed-off shotguns and machine guns, which by definition cannot be registered, were used in another 12%.

So the government was spending the bulk of its money — about $17 million of the Firearms Center’s $82 million annual budget — trying to register long guns when the statistics showed they weren’t the problem.

There was also the question of how registering guns was supposed to reduce crime and suicide in the first place. From 1997 to 2005, only 13% of the guns used in homicides were registered. Police studies in Canada estimated that 2-16% of guns used in crimes were stolen from legal owners and thus potentially in the registry. The bulk of the guns, Canadian officials concluded, were unregistered weapons imported illegally from the U.S. by criminal gangs.

Finally in 2011, conservatives led by Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper voted to abolish the long-gun registry and destroy all its records. Liberals argued the law  had contributed to the decline in gun homicides since it was passed. But Mauser notes that gun homicides have actually been rising in recent years, from 151 in 1999 to 173 in 2009, as violent criminal gangs use guns in their drug turf wars and other disputes. As in the U.S., most gun homicides in Canada are committed by young males, many of them with criminal records. In the majority of homicides involving young males, the victim and the killer are know each other.



----------

3/24/18



Ten Myths Of The Long Gun Registry | Canadian Shooting Sports Association


*Myth #4: Police investigations are aided by the registry.*
Doubtful. Information contained in the registry is incomplete and unreliable. Due to the inaccuracy of the information, it cannot be used as evidence in court and the government has yet to prove that it has been a contributing factor in any investigation. Another factor is the dismal compliance rate (estimated at only 50%) for licensing and registration which further renders the registry useless. Some senior police officers have stated as such: “The law registering firearms has neither deterred these crimes nor helped us solve any of them. None of the guns we know to have been used were registered ... the money could be more effectively used for security against terrorism as well as a host of other public safety initiatives.” Former Toronto Police Chief Julian Fantino, January 2003. 




3/24/18



https://www.quora.com/In-countries-...olved-at-least-in-part-by-use-of-the-registry



*Tracking physical objects that are easily transferred with a database is non-trivial problem. *Guns that are stolen, loaned, or lost disappear from the registry. The data is has to be manually entered and input mistakes will both leak guns and generate false positive results.

*Registries don’t solve straw-purchases. *If someone goes through all of the steps to register a gun and simply gives it to a criminal that gun becomes unregistered. Assuming the gun is ever recovered you could theoretically try and prosecute the person who transferred the gun to the criminal, but you aren’t solving the crime you were trying to. Remember that people will prostitute themselves or even their children for drugs, so how much deterrence is there in a maybe-get-a-few-years for straw purchasing?

*Registries are expensive*. Canada’s registry was pitched as costing the taxpayer $2 million and the rest of the costs were to be payed for with registration fees. It was subject to massive cost overruns that were not being met by registrations fees. When the program was audited in 2002 the program was expected to cost over $1 billion and that the fee revenue was only expected to be $140 million.

*No gun recovered. *If no gun was recovered at the scene of the crime then your registry isn’t even _theoretically_ helping, let alone providing a practical tool. You need a world where criminals meticulously register their guns and leave them at the crime scene for a registry to start to become useful.

Say I have a registered gun, and a known associate of mine was shot and killed. Ballistics is able to determine that my known associate was killed with the same make and model as the gun I registered. A registry doesn’t prove that my gun was used, or that I was the one doing the shooting. I was a suspect as soon as we said “known associate” and the police will then being looking for motive and checking for my alibi.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 31, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...



Do you understand that criminals, by Supreme Court ruling, do not have to register their illegal guns...because it violates their 5th Amendment protection against self incrimination?   So the very people you want to target, do not have to comply with your proposal......

only normal people would suffer the consequences of not registering their guns....do you see how stupid that is?

Haynes v. United States - Wikipedia

As with many other 5th amendment cases, felons and others prohibited from possessing firearms could not be compelled to incriminate themselves through registration.[3][4] *The National Firearms Act was amended after Haynes to make it apply only to those who could lawfully possess a firearm.*


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 31, 2019)

cnm said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > New Zealand has more guns than Australia and a lower gun murder rate than Australia......culture, not guns.....the real issue, not the "I hate guns" issue.
> ...




It isn't the difference......they had those guns and still have a lower gun murder rate than Australia under their ban and confiscation......

And as more Americans over the last 26 years owned and carried guns, our gun murder rate went down 49% our gun crime rate went down 75%, our violent crime rate went down 72%.

Guns aren't the issue.  It is culture and how you handle actual gun offenders when you arrest them.   Democrats in this country keep letting repeat, violent gun felons out of jail over and over again, especially in our major cities...that is our problem, not John and Jane citizen who own a gun for self defense and other legal purposes.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 31, 2019)

cnm said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > I actually rarely carry.
> ...




I'm not a cop...... 

And yes...when normal people have guns and are in the middle of a mass shooting they are 94% effective against the shooter....

Armed Citizens Are Successful 94% Of The Time At Active Shooter Events [FBI]

*Of all the active shooter events there were 33 at which an armed citizen was present. Of those, Armed Citizens were successful at stopping the Active shooter 75.8% of the time (25 incidents) and were successful in reducing the loss of life in an additional 18.2% (6) of incidents. In only 2 of the 33 incidents (6.1%) was the Armed Citizen(s) not helpful in any way in stopping the active shooter or reducing the loss of life.

Thus the headline of our report that Armed Citizens Are Successful 94% Of The Time At Active Shooter Events.*


In the 2 incidents at which the armed citizen “failed” to stop or slow the active shooter, one is the previously mentioned incident with hunters. The other is an incident in which the CCWer was shot in the back in a Las Vegas Walmart when he failed to identify that there were 2 Active Shooters involved in the attack. He neglected to identify the one that shot him in the back while he was trying to ambush the other perpetrator.

We also decided to look at the breakdown of events that took place in gun free zones and the relative death toll from events in gun free zones vs non-gun-free zones.

Of the 283 incidents in our data pool, we were unable to identify if the event took place in a gun-free zone in a large number (41%) of the events. Most of the events took place at a business, church, home, or other places at which as a rule of law it is not a gun free zone but potentially could have been declared one by the property owner. Without any information in the FBI study or any indication one way or the other from the news reports, we have indicated that event with a question mark.

If you look at all of the Active Shooter events (pie chart on the top) you see that for those which we have the information, almost twice as many took place in gun free zones than not; but realistically the vast majority of those for which we have no information (indicated as ?) are probably NOT gun free zones.

If you isolate just the events at which 8 or more people were killed the data paints a different picture (pie chart on the bottom). In these incidents, 77.8% took place in a gun-free zone suggesting that gun free zones lead to a higher death rate vs active shooter events in general

=====

One of the final metrics we thought was important to consider is the potential tendency for armed citizens to injure or kill innocent people in their attempt to “save the day.” A common point in political discussions is to point out the lack of training of most armed citizens and the decrease in safety inherent in their presence during violent encounters.

As you can see below, however, at the 33 incidents at which Armed Citizens were present, there were zero situations at which the Armed Citizen injured or killed an innocent person. It never happened.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 31, 2019)

cnm said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > then in this case i'm speaking to the liberals i have seen that when you try to tell them functionally there is no difference between the AR-15 and a browning longtrac semi-automatic, they refuse to go "wow, i misunderstood that weapon" and instead say "then semi-automatics needs to go also".
> ...




Magazine capacity has no bearing on the number of people killed....31 people were killed at Virginia Tech with 2 pistols.......24 were killed at Luby's cafe with 2 pistols...

Magazine capacity has nothing to do with it.......the amount of time a shooter has before someone with a gun stops them determines how many people are killed.  Shooters surrender, commit suicide or run away when they are confronted...so the faster someone points a gun at them, the more lives saved......as in Parkland, Colorado,  Sandy Hook and other mass shootings where the shooter surrendered, killed themselves or ran away...

On Magazines and mass shootings..

SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class research journals

Large-Capacity Magazines and the Casualty Counts in Mass Shootings: The Plausibility of Linkages by Gary  Kleck :: SSRN

*I.*

Do bans on large-capacity magazines (LCMs) for semiautomatic firearms have significant potential for reducing the number of deaths and injuries in mass shootings? 
========

*In sum, in nearly all LCM-involved mass shootings, the time it takes to reload a detachable magazine is no greater than the average time between shots that the shooter takes anyway when not reloading. *

*Consequently, there is no affirmative evidence that reloading detachable magazines slows mass shooters’ rates of fire, and thus no affirmative evidence that the number of victims who could escape the killers due to additional pauses in the shooting is increased by the shooter’s need to change magazines.*
*==========*

The most common rationale for an effect of LCM use is that they allow mass killers to fire many rounds without reloading. 
*LCMs are used is less than 1/3 of 1% of mass shootings. *
News accounts of 23 shootings in which more than six people were killed or wounded and LCMs were used, occurring in the U.S. in 1994-2013, were examined.
 There was only one incident in which the shooter may have been stopped by bystander intervention when he tried to reload. 
*In all of these 23 incidents the shooter possessed either multiple guns or multiple magazines, meaning that the shooter, even if denied LCMs, could have continued firing without significant interruption by either switching loaded guns or by changing smaller loaded magazines with only a 2-4 second delay for each magazine change. *
*Finally, the data indicate that mass shooters maintain slow enough rates of fire such that the time needed to reload would not increase the time between shots and thus the time available for prospective victims to escape.*

*--------*

We did not employ the oft-used definition of “mass murder” as a homicide in which four or more victims were killed, because most of these involve just four to six victims (Duwe 2007), which could therefore have involved as few as six rounds fired, a number that shooters using even ordinary revolvers are capable of firing without reloading.

 LCMs obviously cannot help shooters who fire no more rounds than could be fired without LCMs, so the inclusion of “nonaffectable” cases with only four to six victims would dilute the sample, reducing the percent of sample incidents in which an LCM might have affected the number of casualties.

 Further, had we studied only homicides with four or more dead victims, drawn from the FBI’s Supplementary Homicide Reports, we would have missed cases in which huge numbers of people were shot, and huge numbers of rounds were fired, but three or fewer of the victims died.


 For example, in one widely publicized shooting carried out in Los Angeles on February 28, 1997, two bank robbers shot a total of 18 people - surely a mass shooting by any reasonable standard (Table 1). 

Yet, because none of the people they shot died, this incident would not qualify as a mass murder (or even murder of any kind).

 Exclusion of such incidents would bias the sample against the proposition that LCM use increases the number of victims by excluding incidents with large numbers of victims. We also excluded shootings in which more than six persons were shot over the entire course of the incident but shootings occurred in multiple locations with no more than six people shot in any one of the locations, and substantial periods of time intervened between episodes of shooting. An example is the series of killings committed by Rodrick Dantzler on July 7, 2011. 

Once eligible incidents were identified, we searched through news accounts for details related to whether the use of LCMs could have influenced the casualty counts.

 Specifically, we searched for 

(1) the number of magazines in the shooter’s immediate possession, 

(2) the capacity of the largest magazine, 

(3) the number of guns in the shooter’s immediate possession during the incident, 

(4) the types of guns possessed, 

(5) whether the shooter reloaded during the incident, 

(6) the number of rounds fired,

 (7) the duration of the shooting from the first shot fired to the last, and (8) whether anyone intervened to stop the shooter. 

Findings How Many Mass Shootings were Committed Using LCMs?

 We identified 23 total incidents in which more than six people were shot at a single time and place in the U.S. from 1994 through 2013 and that were known to involve use of any magazines with capacities over ten rounds.


 Table 1 summarizes key details of the LCMinvolved mass shootings relevant to the issues addressed in this paper. 

(Table 1 about here) What fraction of all mass shootings involve LCMs?

There is no comprehensive listing of all mass shootings available for the entire 1994-2013 period, but the most extensive one currently available is at the Shootingtracker.com website, which only began its coverage in 2013. 

-----


-----
The offenders in LCM-involved mass shootings were also known to have reloaded during 14 of the 23 (61%) incidents with magazine holding over 10 rounds. 

The shooters were known to have not reloaded in another two of these 20 incidents and it could not be determined if they reloaded in the remaining seven incidents. 

Thus, even if the shooters had been denied LCMs, we know that most of them definitely would have been able to reload smaller detachable magazines without interference from bystanders since they in fact did change magazines. 

The fact that this percentage is less than 100% should not, however, be interpreted to mean that the shooters were unable to reload in the other nine incidents. 

It is possible that the shooters could also have reloaded in many of these nine shootings, but chose not to do so, or did not need to do so in order to fire all the rounds they wanted to fire. This is consistent with the fact that there has been at most only one mass shootings in twenty years in which reloading a semiautomatic firearm might have been blocked by bystanders intervening and thereby stopping the shooter from doing all the shooting he wanted to do. All we know is that in two incidents the shooter did not reload, and news accounts of seven other incidents did not mention whether the offender reloaded.

----

For example, a story in the Hartford Courant about the Sandy Hook elementary school killings in 2012 was headlined “Shooter Paused, and Six Escaped,” the text asserting that as many as six children may have survived because the shooter paused to reload (December 23, 2012). ''

The author of the story, however, went on to concede that this was just a speculation by an unnamed source, and that it was also possible that some children simply escaped when the killer was shooting other children. 

There was no reliable evidence that the pauses were due to the shooter reloading, rather than his guns jamming or the shooter simply choosing to pause his shooting while his gun was still loaded. 

The plausibility of the “victims escape” rationale depends on the average rates of fire that shooters in mass shootings typically maintain.

 If they fire very fast, the 2-4 seconds it takes to change box-type detachable magazines could produce a slowing of the rate of fire that the shooters otherwise would have maintained without the magazine changes, increasing the average time between rounds fired and potentially allowing more victims to escape during the betweenshot intervals.

 On the other hand, if mass shooters fire their guns with the average interval between shots lasting more than 2-4 seconds, the pauses due to additional magazine changes would be no longer than the pauses the shooter typically took between shots even when not reloading. 

In that case, there would be no more opportunity for potential victims to escape than there would have been without the additional magazine changes

-----


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 31, 2019)

cnm said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > then in this case i'm speaking to the liberals i have seen that when you try to tell them functionally there is no difference between the AR-15 and a browning longtrac semi-automatic, they refuse to go "wow, i misunderstood that weapon" and instead say "then semi-automatics needs to go also".
> ...




Wrong.....magazine capacity doesn't matter.......what matters is how much time the shooter has before someone points a gun at them.......in Russia, a 5 shot pump action shotgun was used to kill 20 people in a mass public shooting....

And Russia has extreme gun control.....

Kerch Polytechnic College massacre - Wikipedia

The *Kerch Polytechnic College massacre* was a school shooting and bomb attack that occurred in Kerch, Crimea, on 17 October 2018.[2][3] Twenty victims were shot to death and 70 others wounded;


----------



## pismoe (Jul 31, 2019)

cnm said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > I actually rarely carry.
> ...


--------------------------------------------  police are employees simply doing their jobs for a paycheck .     They are the Police / public servants job or they wouldn't be paid .    When an American carries a gun it is for their protection and convenience and LEGALLY that's it CNM .


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 31, 2019)

OldLady said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...



And someone violated that right but it wasn't me or any of more than 100 million other people who legally possess and use firearms

Why is it you want to take the rights away from people who have done nothing wrong?


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 31, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...



guns alone do not drive the murder rate


----------



## iceberg (Jul 31, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...


i saw my 1 post of idiot357 for the year. i just can't handle the terminally stupid in much quantity anymore.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 31, 2019)

OldLady said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



There are violent animals in this country and they don't need guns to do a lot of damage.
A gun is the single best tool to defend yourself or your loved ones from the violent pieces of shit we let roam the streets


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 31, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


Our laws are weak only because they are not enforced

When they are enforced they actually work


----------



## pismoe (Jul 31, 2019)

its my thinking that a lots of the YOUNG random scum [foreign and domestic] and 'dems' really  would like it if Americans didn't have access to guns for self protection .        ------------   just an obvious observation !!


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 31, 2019)

cnm said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > Why do you want to make law abiding people out to be the bad guys here?
> ...



Here we go again with the everyone is just a criminal waiting to commit a crime.  How many times do you have to be told that we don't hold innocent people responsible for the crimes other people commit?



Tell me what crimes can I convict you of that you haven't committed yet?


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 31, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...




This is exactly true.   A handgun is an equalizer.     If all guns were somehow confiscated and destroyed magically, there are numerous bad ass characters that don't knead a gun to cause damage.   The number of knife attacks in England is rising at an exponential rate.  A guy I know went to prison for 8 years for damage to someone's face with a hammer.

A firearm can defend a law abider in a knife fight as well as a hammer fight.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 31, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...



People here never seem to have a reply when i tell them that I was the victim of a violent crime that landed me in the hospital for a week with cracked ribs, a lacerated spleen , a fractured eye orbital and a severe concussion.

Just because they have been lucky enough not to be a victim of a violent crime they don't think violence exists


----------



## pismoe (Jul 31, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> cnm said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


-------------------------------------    I'm thinking that sooner or later the USA will be moving from the  'innocent till proven guilty standard' to the standard of 'guilty till proven innocent standard ' .


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 31, 2019)

pismoe said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > cnm said:
> ...


That does seem to be the goal


----------



## iceberg (Jul 31, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Defiant1 said:
> ...


and that's the point. we have a ton of laws and the problem continues to grow. you'd think that if passing laws was the answer, all the laws we have passed to date would have slowed this down. it hasn't really, has it? violent gun crime rises and falls through the decades without the laws having much of an impact at all.

this is why i don't understand why the anti-gun crowd screams MOAR LAWS!!!!

Why even gun laws that exist don't always get enforced - CNNPolitics

just one example and it says we have a lot of toothless laws put on the books for political reasons. a dog and pony show. they don't address the problem and to date i've yet to hear the gun control crowd suggest laws or actions that would have stopped any known shooting we've had in the last decade. instead we get colorado gov officials banning high capacity mags saying when used they get thrown away and soon all will be gone.

the level of ignorance in the people making these laws, while painful, doesn't hurt near as much as the damage they do shouting out their ignorance to people looking for something to hear that will make the pain go away. that's all the left, and the right, want and share. make the pain and shootings go away.

then we need to correlate laws to impact on what we've seen happen and stop pushing for laws that are again, that dog and pony show designed to help that person with their ears covered screaming MAKE THE PAIN GO AWAY feel better. til the next shooting and we rinse and repeat.

i'm open to change. but i'm not open to wholesale changes of our constitution nor removal of gun rights for the law abiding. we don't take alcohol away from everyone cause drunk drivers kill people. but that's what the anti-gun crowd wants in essence. but those changes must be logical, not emotional. removing things like the gun show loophole won't stop a thing except private sales at gun shows, which is very uncommon anyway. they will still sell privately and move on with their lives.

but the underlying question is WHY? why are people so angry? well have you watched TV lately? that's what we're told to be by our leadership. angry at trump. angry at obama. angry at the clintons. angry at sarah sanders and we must kick her kind out of our business. the anti-fa is out there beating people up and the left cheers it on and rushes to blame nameless "white supremacists" as violent. i've yet to see ANYONE who pulls this out of their ass name a specific group other than the KKK who no one supports anyway. 

we give kids drugs cause they're energetic little shits and we have lazy parenting. no idea if that played a role in gilroy so we'll wait and see. but it has played a role in most major mass shootings in the last decade or more. that can't be ignored.

we need to address our anger issues and stop focusing on the tools people use to express that anger. take away one tool they'll move to another. 

we got a lot of work to do here but will get nowhere with the leadership we have today. we'll get pyrrhic victories each side will hold up as a triumph and continue to drift apart with our useless, divisive "victories".

while we do need to stop screaming MAKE THE PAIN GO AWAY, the only way to do that is stop hating everything. from there we have a fighting chance. but as long as you "hate" you'll never see things from another point of view but rather in visions that support your hate. we don't need to pass more gun laws.

we need to grow up.


----------



## cnm (Jul 31, 2019)

Olde Europe said:


> You do understand that "population size" and "per capita" are quite different metrics, no?


Yes. He's rejecting the relevance of both from what I could comprehend of his point, after introducing population into the argument. Denying everything but exceptionalism.



EvilEyeFleegle said:


> the US is unique in its tolerance and even its approval, of violent solutions.


Perhaps among developed nations, after all, Somalia seems reasonably tolerant of violent solutions.


----------



## pismoe (Jul 31, 2019)

yep , and Judge Kavanaugh would be in prison and 'balsey ford' would be giving lectures at femi Nazi law schools .


----------



## cnm (Jul 31, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> Here we go again with the everyone is just a criminal waiting to commit a crime. How many times do you have to be told that we don't hold innocent people responsible for the crimes other people commit?


Are you saying he was a criminal before he committed a crime? That seems to be the gist of your remarks. Otherwise he was a law abiding gun owner until he wasn't.


----------



## Defiant1 (Jul 31, 2019)

This is why we cannot allow the dems into power.
With all that is being exposed, we see this is exactly what the Obama cabal had planned.


The leftists laugh at us when we state the number one reason for the 2nd amendment is so the people can take back their power from a corrupt government.
They just don't see how close it is.


----------



## cnm (Jul 31, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> guns alone do not drive the murder rate


They certainly drive the firearms homicide rate.


----------



## cnm (Jul 31, 2019)

Defiant1 said:


> This is why we cannot allow the dems into power.
> With all that is being exposed, we see this is exactly what the Obama cabal had planned.
> 
> 
> ...


Well, that and they think you're a raving loony thinking an AR15 is going to take back power from a militarised government.


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 31, 2019)

cnm said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > guns alone do not drive the murder rate
> ...




An irrelevant number.

If someone is murdered in a big city subway, they really don't give a shit if they are mowed down with an AR15 or decapitated with a scimitar.


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 31, 2019)

pismoe said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > cnm said:
> ...


That ship has sailed...in the media..and on this forum. In fact, other than the courts, guilty until proven innocent is the standard the police use, as well. To most, Suspect means Guilty.


----------



## cnm (Jul 31, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> An irrelevant number.


Around half of US homicides are committed with handguns. An interesting point that only the other half of US homicides are relevant.


----------



## pismoe (Jul 31, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> pismoe said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


------------------------------------------    what I find interesting is the acceptance of the change that seems to be in progress .   This acceptance seems to be acceptance mostly by younger people as I guess ages and going by some of the threads and comments that I see on this board    EEF.


----------



## iceberg (Jul 31, 2019)

cnm said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > An irrelevant number.
> ...


great. so before we go changing things, how about some research instead of emo-grandstanding.

how many laws do we have?
why are they not working?
what laws would you suggest that would have stopped any known mass shooting in the last decade?

here is where the anti-gunners get all emo and scream YOU HATE KIDS or shit. up your game if you want to fix this. we got more than enough useless bitching out there.


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 31, 2019)

cnm said:


> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> > You do understand that "population size" and "per capita" are quite different metrics, no?
> ...


I'm sorry for your lack of comprehension. To put is simply..I was rejecting Swiss laws as a solution to American problems...as I feel that our large population and diverse culture argue against it. 8m is not 300+m. Yes, the American culture is unique among developed nations..you used the term 'exceptional'... in its tolerance of gun violence as the 'go to' solution.I don't believe that this is going to change any time soon.
I also reject a per capita rubric as a valid basis of comparison between the two cultures...for many of the same reasons listed above.

To conclude..just because the Swiss have a large per capita rate of gun ownership with a low rate of per capita gun violence does not mean that the same is possible here.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 31, 2019)

RealDave said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...


Do the words in common use mean anything to you?


----------



## pismoe (Jul 31, 2019)

cnm said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > This is why we cannot allow the dems into power.
> ...


--------------------------------------   YEP , see the goatherders all over the middle east keeping things tied up for 17 - 18 years .     As they use various obsolete and modern firearms  .     Just an observation CNM .


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 31, 2019)

pismoe said:


> EvilEyeFleegle said:
> 
> 
> > pismoe said:
> ...


Oh i dunno about that..it is the geezers who are quickest to take an allegation..no matter which political side..and run with it. They demonize at the drop of a hat..and are willing to drop the hat themselves if required.  How many are willing to grant Hillary 'innocent until proven guilty in a court of law'? How many are willing to grant Trump 'innocent until proven guilty in a court of law'?


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 31, 2019)

NotYourBody said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > NotYourBody said:
> ...


You are a threat because you and your leftist buddies have the same thought process. You are part of the problem


----------



## cnm (Jul 31, 2019)

iceberg said:


> great. so before we go changing things, how about some research instead of emo-grandstanding.


Did you know around half of US homicides were committed with handguns? I found that out by researching it.


iceberg said:


> how many laws do we have?
> why are they not working?
> what laws would you suggest that would have stopped any known mass shooting in the last decade?


The way you frame the question is par for the course. If an action won't stop shootings it's to be ridiculed. The idea that actions can reduce shootings is dismissed as nonsensical. When the experience of other countries is put forward the exceptional USA excuse is trotted out immediately. Fair enough, it's not my country, I just giggle at the loons.

The way to reduce the US firearm homicide and mass shooting rates is to severely limit the numbers of handguns and military style semi automatic rifles in circulation.

I understand you don't want to do that, rather you happily accept the current consequences. No worries.


----------



## cnm (Jul 31, 2019)

Oh, as to a specific question you posed, a law that prevented the sale of an assault style weapon in Nevada may well have reduced the number of casualties in the latest mass shooting


----------



## Polishprince (Jul 31, 2019)

cnm said:


> Oh, as to a specific question you posed, a law that prevented the sale of an assault style weapon in Nevada may well have reduced the number of casualties in the latest mass shooting




Current law prevented Mr. Legan from transporting this firearm across state lines.  But he did it anyhow.

Establishing a law is different that seeing to it that everyone obeys it.

Theoretically, if your theory was true, Simple Prohibition would eliminate alcoholism and DUI's.   Not true at all


----------



## pismoe (Jul 31, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> pismoe said:
> 
> 
> > EvilEyeFleegle said:
> ...


--------------------------------   'hilary' is innocent as far as I am aware and no amount of 'lock her up' impresses me'  .     DEMONIZE though is no problem in my opinion because it carries no weight  EEF .


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 31, 2019)

cnm said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > Here we go again with the everyone is just a criminal waiting to commit a crime. How many times do you have to be told that we don't hold innocent people responsible for the crimes other people commit?
> ...



No you said he wasn't a criminal before he was

No Shit Sherlock

But we cannot deny people any of their rights because they MIGHT commit a crime.  We do not hols innocent people responsible for the crimes of others

For all I know you are just another criminal in waiting so what rights are you willing to give up?


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 31, 2019)

cnm said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > This is why we cannot allow the dems into power.
> ...



not one but how about 10 million?


----------



## NotYourBody (Jul 31, 2019)

Leo123 said:


> NotYourBody said:
> 
> 
> > You are mistaking me for one of your snowflake MAGA females. I'm safe here on the border. I don't need a gun to make me feel less afraid because I am not afraid.
> ...


I live 7 miles north of the border. There are no houses ON the actual border. I didn't see any border patrol yesterday. 

I don't know if I would call my area insulated. It is an incredibly busy place. Our safety is handled by our local cops, not the Feds.

In any case none of them can cross the border and help me in Tijuana. I've never felt in danger in Tijuana because I know how to keep myself safe. 

Many people here don't limit ourselves to one side of the border. I live in one country and take advantage of the best parts of the other country located down the street.

I was born in deep red (in so many different ways) Oklahoma.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 31, 2019)

cnm said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > An irrelevant number.
> ...



SO what?

You have no proof that those murders would not have been committed if a gun was not available.

70% of all murders take place in poor urban areas and are committed by people who cannot legally possess firearms

less than 1% of all murders are committed in mass shootings

a fraction of a percent of all murders are committed with an AR 15

the problem isn't law abiding people with guns


----------



## cnm (Jul 31, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> Current law prevented Mr. Legan from transporting this firearm across state lines. But he did it anyhow.


Yet if there was a law preventing sales of military style semi automatic rifles in Nevada the vendor could be punished, reducing the likelihood of further such sales.


----------



## cnm (Jul 31, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> But we cannot deny people any of their rights because they MIGHT commit a crime.


True, you can make it so handguns and military style semi automatic rifles are not a right. Just like other weapons which citizens have no right to. After all, RPGs are commonly carried by the military and would be damned useful to a militia.


----------



## cnm (Jul 31, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> the problem isn't law abiding people with guns


The latest shooter was law abiding until he wasn't. If he wasn't a problem you have no worries.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 31, 2019)

cnm said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > But we cannot deny people any of their rights because they MIGHT commit a crime.
> ...



Any other wishes you want to share?

Everyone knows how to change the Constitution and if there was any chance in hell of repealing the Second Amendment it would have already been tried.

The Second will never be repealed in our lifetime.  But in the meantime we should enforce the laws we already have because when they are enforced they work.

There is absolutely no reason to deny law abiding people the right to own firearms


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 31, 2019)

cnm said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > the problem isn't law abiding people with guns
> ...



So what?

That is absolutely meaningless.

You're not a rapist until you are so should I treat you like a rapist?


----------



## cnm (Jul 31, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> 70% of all murders take place in poor urban areas and are committed by people who cannot legally possess firearms


So take the firearms out of circulation to reduce the firearms homicide rate. But I understand gun nuts are too selfish to do that as their paranoia will be aggravated.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 31, 2019)

cnm said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > 70% of all murders take place in poor urban areas and are committed by people who cannot legally possess firearms
> ...



It wouldn't reduce the murder rate because people would just kill with some other weapon

And people who want to keep their rights are not selfish.

People who want to take away rights are selfish


----------



## cnm (Jul 31, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> So what?


So being a law abiding gun owner is a temporary circumstance. They are law abiding until they aren't. Just like people who haven't raped are not rapists until they are.


----------



## cnm (Jul 31, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> It wouldn't reduce the murder rate because people would just kill with some other weapon


Swimming pools, I bet.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 31, 2019)

cnm said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > So what?
> ...



So you're not a drunk driver until you are

Maybe we should revoke your drivers license


----------



## cnm (Jul 31, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> And people who want to keep their rights are not selfish.


It's generous to be a mass murderer.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 31, 2019)

cnm said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > It wouldn't reduce the murder rate because people would just kill with some other weapon
> ...



Bats, knives, clubs, bare hands.... the list is literally endless


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 31, 2019)

cnm said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > And people who want to keep their rights are not selfish.
> ...



99.999% of gun owners will never be mass murderers.


----------



## bodecea (Jul 31, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> cnm said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


Because the murder rate is just as extreme in all those other countries that have gun control laws.


----------



## cnm (Jul 31, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> There is absolutely no reason to deny law abiding people the right to own firearms


Nor RPGs. I mean, they'll obey the law, they're law abiding. 

Until they aren't.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 31, 2019)

bodecea said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > cnm said:
> ...



Guns do not cause murder.

And I don't want to live in another country where people don't have the right to protect themselves with the best tool for the job.

Those countries also will throw you in jail for saying the wrong thing so if you want to live in a country like that feel free to move


----------



## iceberg (Jul 31, 2019)

cnm said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > great. so before we go changing things, how about some research instead of emo-grandstanding.
> ...


the way you refuse to answer it is why we're not getting anything done. i'm asking for base information on where we are today and you act like that's a crime.

that's how shit gets fixed in the real world. your over-emo-drama-shit won't do a thing.


----------



## iceberg (Jul 31, 2019)

cnm said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > But we cannot deny people any of their rights because they MIGHT commit a crime.
> ...


you keep saying "military style" as if that means shit or can really be defined.

which military? NO MILITARY uses the AR15. so it can't really be "military style" if the military doesn't use it.

the military uses handguns too. do we outlaw the 1911 now cause it's "military" in style?

the browning longtrac is also a "military style" if you want it to be.

this is the issue here - you can't DEFINE what you want to ban. as soon as you try, it's pointed out why that doesn't work across the board and instead of going "oh, i learned something today" you just want to ban MOAR guns and widen your definition.

"assault rifle" was never applied to a semi-automatic weapon until liberals got scared of them and demanded something be done about them. but hell, even then the same group scared of them thought they were fully automatic for the longest time.

stop being a dumbass and then you can speak intelligently about topics. til then, fuck off.


----------



## pismoe (Jul 31, 2019)

cnm said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > There is absolutely no reason to deny law abiding people the right to own firearms
> ...


------------------------------------------------------   'rpg' are area weapons and not the individual arms generally issued to American combat troops .   Course , if you have enough money and can jump through the hoops you can probably own 'rpg'    CNM .


----------



## RealDave (Jul 31, 2019)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...




Don't run around claiming the Second Amendment means no regulation.


----------



## RealDave (Jul 31, 2019)

iceberg said:


> cnm said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


  People ase so fucking tired of this stupid argument you assfucks make.

We all know what is being discussed.

What I find proof that you assdfucl\ks are too mentally sick to own any gun is this fetish you have to carry a weapon that looks like a military style assault rifle.  Do you play soldier?  Does the design make you puff out your chest & feel important?  What is it?


----------



## RealDave (Jul 31, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> cnm said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


 I think the problem is that people think the ight to own firearms means any firearm of any style.

If you had a single shot .22 rifle, you would bear arms.


----------



## OldLady (Jul 31, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> cnm said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


I have the right not to be shot for no reason.


----------



## cnm (Jul 31, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> Bats, knives, clubs, bare hands.... the list is literally endless


But swimming pools were quoted so often as being so dangerous in gun control debates. Someone must have attacked someone with a swimming pool, Shirley?


----------



## cnm (Jul 31, 2019)

iceberg said:


> the way you refuse to answer it is why we're not getting anything done.


I gave you a specific law in response to your specific question. Like gun nuts everywhere you've ignored it because you don't like it as it will interfere with your paranoia.


----------



## pismoe (Jul 31, 2019)

don't get wobbly Trump , get re elected and don't go wobbly .   Go TRUMP !!


----------



## cnm (Jul 31, 2019)

iceberg said:


> you keep saying "military style" as if that means shit or can really be defined.


They've had the shit defined out of them. What it boils down to is a semi automatic rifle that will take large capacity removable magazines. It's not rocket science except to gun nuts at their most obtuse.


----------



## cnm (Jul 31, 2019)

iceberg said:


> the browning longtrac is also a "military style" if you want it to be.


Will it take large capacity removable magazines? Because if it will I agree with you.


----------



## cnm (Jul 31, 2019)

Oh, here's one.







You're as full of shit as I expected.


----------



## cnm (Jul 31, 2019)

OldLady said:


> I have the right not to be shot for no reason.


According to the gun nuts, your reason free shooting is an acceptable price to pay for easy access to handguns and military style semi automatic rifles.


----------



## pismoe (Jul 31, 2019)

Its you lefties that show paranoia as you work and try to remove Americas RIGHTS   .    Its youse guys that are skeered of Americans having firearms and weapons CNM .


----------



## cnm (Jul 31, 2019)

RealDave said:


> People ase so fucking tired of this stupid argument you assfucks make.
> 
> We all know what is being discussed.


It's endless, isn't it? Every time.


----------



## Hugo Furst (Jul 31, 2019)

RealDave said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > cnm said:
> ...





RealDave said:


> I think the problem is that people think the ight to own firearms means any firearm of any style.



pretty much



RealDave said:


> If you had a single shot .22 rifle, you would bear arms.



yup

and if you rode a 125cc motorbike instead of a Harley, you'd still be considered a biker.


----------



## RealDave (Jul 31, 2019)

pismoe said:


> Its you lefties that show paranoia as you work and try to remove Americas RIGHTS   .    Its youse guys that are skeered of Americans having firearms and weapons CNM .


Not sane Americans.


----------



## RealDave (Jul 31, 2019)

cnm said:


> Oh, here's one.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Not the mini argument.  So why isn't it the most popular semi automatic?


----------



## cnm (Jul 31, 2019)

WillHaftawaite said:


> and if you rode a 125cc motorbike instead of a Harley, you'd still be considered a biker.


Nah, you'd be considered a motorcycle rider.


----------



## pismoe (Jul 31, 2019)

I think that its obvious that there are deaths because of Swimming Pools where people , little kids especially drown in swimming pools .  I think that its mentioned in this thread the numbers of deaths caused by people drowning in swimming pools and its a lot of dead people .   Checkout the dangers and death  by drowning caused by widdle kids falling headfirst into partially filled 5 gallon buckets CNM .


----------



## cnm (Jul 31, 2019)

RealDave said:


> Not the mini argument.


I understand the Minis have 20 round removable magazines available. They're out.


----------



## Hugo Furst (Jul 31, 2019)

cnm said:


> WillHaftawaite said:
> 
> 
> > and if you rode a 125cc motorbike instead of a Harley, you'd still be considered a biker.
> ...




yup

whether you're riding pushbike, or a 750cc.

you want to get fid of so called 'assault' rifles?

get one of these.






and make a wish


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 31, 2019)

RealDave said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > cnm said:
> ...



And a single shot .22 is useless as tits on a bull when it comes to self defense


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 31, 2019)

cnm said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > Not the mini argument.
> ...



And you don't even live here so you have absolutely no say on what is in or out in this country


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 31, 2019)

cnm said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > Bats, knives, clubs, bare hands.... the list is literally endless
> ...



They are dangerous if the owners are negligent.

Just like millions of other things


----------



## danielpalos (Jul 31, 2019)

Flash said:


> Now those Libtard Loony Tunes in Commie California are advocating exporting their filthy anti Constitutional anti right to keep and bear arms oppressive laws to other states.
> 
> Then they wonder why we ridicule them so much.


why is the right wing so useless?

We have a Second Amendment and should have no security problems in our free States.


----------



## Olde Europe (Jul 31, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> I'm sorry for your lack of comprehension. To put is simply..I was rejecting Swiss laws as a solution to American problems...as I feel that our large population and diverse culture argue against it. 8m is not 300+m. Yes, the American culture is unique among developed nations..you used the term 'exceptional'... in its tolerance of gun violence as the 'go to' solution.I don't believe that this is going to change any time soon.
> I also reject a per capita rubric as a valid basis of comparison between the two cultures...for many of the same reasons listed above.
> 
> To conclude..just because the Swiss have a large per capita rate of gun ownership with a low rate of per capita gun violence does not mean that the same is possible here.



CNM's comprehension is okay, the occasional lapse notwithstanding.  Happens to all of us.

This - "8m is not 300+m" - just doesn't make sense, unless you are willing to say that a duly enacted law cannot be enforced once the population grows beyond a certain number.  This is obviously nonsensical in face of the fact that laws, even unpopular laws such as the tax code, are routinely being enforced.  It isn't easy, and folks find ways to counter act and violate that law, but it is in force.  The same would happen with strict, Swiss-style gun regulations, just as it happens with the tax code, and against a "culture" that in essence maintains, "tax is theft", or at the least, "taxes are too high".

Gun regulations are fare more a case of political will (or rather the lack thereof), and even that appears to be changing, and rapidly, as urbanization and modernization see to it that tolerance for guns and gun violence is dwindling, and Democrats are more and more willing to pick up the cause.  The question, "Are scores of dead kids really a price worth paying for lax gun laws and hundreds of millions of guns in private hands?", is going to demand an answer with increased urgency, and the trend is toward answering in the negative.  It's just a matter of time, fighting spirit, and, devastatingly enough, a case of the costs of the current non-regulation piling up.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 31, 2019)

RealDave said:


> cnm said:
> 
> 
> > Oh, here's one.
> ...


Ban AR 15s and it will be then you'll want to ban the mini as well


----------



## pismoe (Jul 31, 2019)

RealDave said:


> cnm said:
> 
> 
> > Oh, here's one.
> ...


----------------------------   it is the most popular for Some , but mostly among older 'FUD' people who like the looks of nice wood and Blued metal  .    Course I Guess that an AR is cheaper and a number of different calibers can be shot from a custom AR customized by the owner or other source .     So an AR is more versatile .    Also , there is less concern about keeping an AR Clean and shiny as it has a Parkerized finish and easily replaced plastic furniture or gun parts like Stocks and Handguards .   AR is simply a nice gun and is superior in many peoples opinion   RDave .


----------



## pismoe (Jul 31, 2019)

cnm said:


> WillHaftawaite said:
> 
> 
> > and if you rode a 125cc motorbike instead of a Harley, you'd still be considered a biker.
> ...


-----------------------------------------   a little tiny 'piddler' motorcycle until the foreign brit or similar government said you could get a bigger motorcycle or a Harley .


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 31, 2019)

pismoe said:


> cnm said:
> 
> 
> > WillHaftawaite said:
> ...


Shit I must have been a bad ass biker when I was 8 years old because I had a 125


----------



## pismoe (Jul 31, 2019)

RealDave said:


> pismoe said:
> 
> 
> > Its you lefties that show paranoia as you work and try to remove Americas RIGHTS   .    Its youse guys that are skeered of Americans having firearms and weapons CNM .
> ...


-------------------------------------------   and its  YOU and you ilk that gets to decide who is sane and who is not sane eh RDave .


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 31, 2019)

Olde Europe said:


> EvilEyeFleegle said:
> 
> 
> > I'm sorry for your lack of comprehension. To put is simply..I was rejecting Swiss laws as a solution to American problems...as I feel that our large population and diverse culture argue against it. 8m is not 300+m. Yes, the American culture is unique among developed nations..you used the term 'exceptional'... in its tolerance of gun violence as the 'go to' solution.I don't believe that this is going to change any time soon.
> ...



Indeed the laws are 'in force'...but they don't appear to be 'enforced', with any degree of consistency or regularity.
As for population..well yes..it is easier to enforce a law in a smaller population...just as a matter of logistics and expense. Most people obey the law..not for fear of consequence..but because they believe in the rule of law and that it is their duty to abide by statute. I'm not at all sure that this would be the case in this country as regards gun regulation..in fact, I'm pretty sure that the gun laws are violated every day with no consequence..either social or criminal.
We come to the crux of it..as tens of millions still answer your question with a resounding 'yes'..that the deaths of innocents are worth what they perceive of as their gun rights.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 31, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> > EvilEyeFleegle said:
> ...



When our gun laws are enforced they work

Virginia Project Exile

*Study 1*
*Firearm Homicide Rates, Project Exile*
Rosenfeld and colleagues (2005) found a statistically significant intervention effect for Project Exile. Firearm homicides in Richmond exhibited a 22 percent yearly decline, compared with the average reduction of about 10 percent per year for other large U.S. cities. The difference is statistically significant.


----------



## pismoe (Jul 31, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


----------------------------------   that's why they would let you have a .22 .  But keep it locked up in approved storage along with the ammo in seperate gov approved storage and be ready for 'cop' banging on your door to make sure that you are following THEIR rules .    And don't dare think that you can use it for Self Defense .  [I refer to 'england' ]


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 31, 2019)

pismoe said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...


And don't expect that cop to come to your aid when you need it


----------



## Olde Europe (Jul 31, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> As for population..well yes..it is easier to enforce a law in a smaller population...just as a matter of logistics and expense.



Shaking my head here.  Police departments need to coordinate here as there, and the expense per capita is not substantially different.  Have the same number of law enforcement officers per 100,000 of the population, and you're pretty much there.  Really, that argument doesn't hold water at all.  

I'd rather accept your "culture" argument (at least with respect to a substantial number of gun nuts), along with an unwarranted (and often hypocritical) subservience to the Founders and their 18th century concept of a well-regulated society.


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 31, 2019)

Olde Europe said:


> EvilEyeFleegle said:
> 
> 
> > As for population..well yes..it is easier to enforce a law in a smaller population...just as a matter of logistics and expense.
> ...


Hmmm...maybe it's my failure to couple population with geography that's at fault here. It is far harder to police the area that the US encompasses--than it is the relatively smaller area of Switzerland...juxtapose that with our far greater population...and i think I might communicate what i mean better.

Then add the notably fractious nature of our citizenry.....

As for culture..it is not just the gun nuts I'm referring to..but our society as a whole and its tolerance for gun violence. We admire it in our entertainment...we celebrate despicable criminals as cultural heroes--we often applaud vigilante justice. All this is the systemic root of our gun culture. As a culture that often celebrates lawlessness...would we obey an unpopular gun law?

I believe that cultural inertia..the tendency for us to go on as we have been going on.....will doom any real changes..for quite some time.

I'd love to be wrong.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jul 31, 2019)

cnm said:


> The way to reduce the US firearm homicide and mass shooting rates is to severely limit the numbers of handguns and military style semi automatic rifles in circulation.


Based on...  what?

You do understand the enshrinement of constitutional rights necessarily takes certain policy choices off the table - right?


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jul 31, 2019)

cnm said:


> True, you can make it so handguns and military style semi automatic rifles are not a right.


True - by amending the Constitution.


----------



## danielpalos (Jul 31, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


Only the unorganized militia complains about gun control.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 31, 2019)

M14 Shooter said:


> cnm said:
> 
> 
> > The way to reduce the US firearm homicide and mass shooting rates is to severely limit the numbers of handguns and military style semi automatic rifles in circulation.
> ...


No CNM lives in a country where they don't have a Bill of Rights and they can get locked up for saying the "wrong" thing


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jul 31, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > cnm said:
> ...


Ah.   A -free- country.


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 31, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > cnm said:
> ...


Russian, eh?


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 31, 2019)

iceberg said:


> cnm said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...




Why would cnm do that.....he wants guns banned, all the rest is just noise....


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 31, 2019)

cnm said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > great. so before we go changing things, how about some research instead of emo-grandstanding.
> ...



If an action won't stop shootings it's to be ridiculed.

Wrong....the actions you want won't stop criminals from getting guns, or mass shooters, AND they target normal gun owners who commit no crimes with their gun, and yet increase the fees, penalties on those gun owners, as well as increasing their legal jeopardy if they fail to dot the "i"s....so it is worse than those gun laws not stopping criminals and mass shooters.

The idea that actions can reduce shootings is dismissed as nonsensical. 

Wrong....the actions you suggest won't reduce mass shootings....the actions we suggest....keeping actual gun using criminals in jail, and not letting democrat politicians and judges reduce their sentences for repeat gun crimes would actually reduce gun crime.  I even gave the example of Japan where they do exactly that....use a gun in a crime, and you get life in prison.  Japan has a 99% conviction rate vs. our about 30% conviction rate.

That is how you get criminals to stop using guns.  Not by banning them, or punishing normal gun owners.


----------



## Olde Europe (Jul 31, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> Hmmm...maybe it's my failure to couple population with geography that's at fault here. It is far harder to police the area that the US encompasses--than it is the relatively smaller area of Switzerland...



So, now you're saying that in less densely populated areas - where there is almost nothing other than dirt and cattle, those most infamous of crime hot-spots - the police need to drive greater distances, and that's why it is next to impossible to enforce laws in the U.S.?

Darn!


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 31, 2019)

cnm said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > great. so before we go changing things, how about some research instead of emo-grandstanding.
> ...




Your theory.....to reduce gun crime we reduce the number of guns...

You just posted that, that is your theory.....

26 years, the opposite happened....More Americans went out, bought guns, own them and carry them....according to your theory, gun crime goes up.

That is your theory, not mine....

The actual result...

over that 26 years....

*Gun Crime down 75%.

Gun murder down 49%

Violent Crime down 72%

So, again, your theory....more guns = more gun crime

actual experience....more guns .....gun murder, gun crime, violent crime went down 50%, 75%, 72%.

In science....when you propose a theory...you implement the theory, and the exact opposite of that theory happens. .......in Science that means your theory is wrong.

*


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 31, 2019)

cnm said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > great. so before we go changing things, how about some research instead of emo-grandstanding.
> ...




Your theory....More Guns = More Gun Crime...

We will look at other 1st World Countries that did what you want.....they banned and confiscated guns....

Britain...banned guns in 1996.....gun crime spiked for 10 years, then returned to the same level it was at before they banned guns.

Your theory, More Guns = Less Gun Crime.

Result in experience in Britain.....Guns Banned, no change in gun murder.

In science....when you have a theory and do an experiment....and nothing changes that you said would change with your theory....in Science, that means your theory is wrong.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 31, 2019)

cnm said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > great. so before we go changing things, how about some research instead of emo-grandstanding.
> ...




Australia.....1st world country.

Your Theory....  More Guns = More Gun crime...

Australia banned guns.....

Result.....their gun crime rates did not change, their public shootings did not change.....

Again, your theory is wrong.....

Australia’s 1996 Gun Confiscation Didn’t Work | National Review

University of Melbourne researchers Wang-Sheng Lee and Sandy Suardi concluded their 2008 report on the matter with the statement, “There is little evidence to suggest that [the Australian mandatory gun-buyback program] had any significant effects on firearm homicides.”

“Although gun buybacks appear to be a logical and sensible policy that helps to placate the public’s fears,” the reported continued, “the evidence so far suggests that in the Australian context, the high expenditure incurred to fund the 1996 gun buyback has not translated into any tangible reductions in terms of firearm deaths.”

A 2007 report, “Gun Laws and Sudden Death: Did the Australian Firearms Legislation of 1996 Make a Difference?” by Jeanine Baker and Samara McPhedran similarly concluded that the buyback program did not have a significant long-term effect on the Australian homicide rate.

*The Australian gun-homicide rate had already been quite low and had been steadily falling in the 15 years prior to the Port Arthur massacre. And while the mandatory buyback program did appear to reduce the rate of accidental firearm deaths, Baker and McPhedran found that “the gun buy-back and restrictive legislative changes had no influence on firearm homicide in Australia.”*

*=======*

*2007 report..

http://c3.nrostatic.com/sites/default/files/Baker and McPhedran 2007.pdf

Conclusions Examination of the long-term trends indicated that the only category of sudden death that may have been influenced by the introduction of the NFA was firearm suicide
------

However, this effect must be considered in light of the findings for suicide (non-firearm). Homicide patterns (firearm and non-firearm) were not influenced by the NFA, the conclusion being that the gun buy-back and restrictive legislative changes had no influence on firearm homicide in Australia. The introduction of the NFA appeared to have a negative effect on accidental firearm death. However, over the time period investigated, there was a relatively small number of accidental deaths per annum, with substantial variability. Any conclusions regarding the effect of the NFA on accidental firearm death should be approached with caution
=========*

*2008 report...*

*
http://c8.nrostatic.com/sites/default/files/Lee and Suardi 2008.pdf

In this paper, we re-analyze the same data on firearm deaths used in previous research, using tests for unknown structural breaks as a means to identifying impacts of the NFA. The results of these tests suggest that the NFA did not have any large effects on reducing firearm homicide or suicide rates. 
-------

6. Conclusion 

This paper takes a closer look at the effects of the National Firearms Agreement on gun deaths. Using a battery of structural break tests, there is little evidence to suggest that it had any significant effects on firearm homicides and suicides. In addition, there also does not appear to be any substitution effects – that reduced access to firearms may have led those bent on committing homicide or suicide to use alternative methods.*


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 31, 2019)

cnm said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > great. so before we go changing things, how about some research instead of emo-grandstanding.
> ...




And Australia, 1st world country that banned guns....Melbourne is now called the "City of the Gun." over 20 years later.......and public shootings still happen......

Nothing you believe about gun control here or around the world is remotely true, factual or based in reality.

Gun city: Young, dumb and armed

*The notion that a military-grade weapon could be in the hands of local criminals is shocking, but police have already seized at least five machine guns and assault rifles in the past 18 months. The AK-47 was not among them.*

Only a fortnight ago, law enforcement authorities announced they were hunting another seven assault rifles recently smuggled into the country. Weapons from the shipment have been used in armed robberies and drive-by shootings.

*These are just a handful of the thousands of illicit guns fuelling a wave of violent crime in the world’s most liveable city.*

*----*

Despite Australia’s strict gun control regime, criminals are now better armed than at any time since then-Prime Minister John Howard introduced a nationwide firearm buyback scheme in response to the 1996 Port Arthur massacre.

Shootings have become almost a weekly occurrence, with more than 125 people, mostly young men, wounded in the past five year

-----------

While the body count was higher during Melbourne’s ‘Underbelly War’ (1999-2005), more people have been seriously maimed in the recent spate of shootings and reprisals.

*Crimes associated with firearm possession have also more than doubled, driven by the easy availability of handguns, semi-automatic rifles, shotguns and, increasingly, machine guns, that are smuggled into the country or stolen from licensed owners.*

*-------------*

These weapons have been used in dozens of recent drive-by shootings of homes and businesses, as well as targeted and random attacks in parks, shopping centres and roads.

“They’re young, dumb and armed,” said one former underworld associate, who survived a shooting attempt in the western suburbs several years ago.

“It used to be that if you were involved in something bad you might have to worry about [being shot]. Now people get shot over nothing - unprovoked.”

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

*Gun crime soars*
In this series, Fairfax Media looks at Melbourne’s gun problem and the new breed of criminals behind the escalating violence.

The investigation has found:


There have been at least 99 shootings in the past 20 months - more than one incident a week since January 2015
Known criminals were caught with firearms 755 times last year, compared to 143 times in 2011
The epicentre of the problem is a triangle between Coolaroo, Campbellfield and Glenroy in the north-west, with Cranbourne, Narre Warren and Dandenong in the south-east close behind
Criminals are using gunshot wounds to the arms and legs as warnings to pay debts
*Assault rifles and handguns are being smuggled into Australia via shipments of electronics and metal parts*
In response to the violence, it can be revealed the state government is planning to introduce new criminal offences for drive-by shootings, manufacturing of firearms with new technologies such as 3D printers, and more police powers to keep weapons out of the hands of known criminals.
============
The second part of the series....
Gun city: Gunslingers of the North West


========================
'Thousands' of illegal guns tipped to be handed over in firearms amnesty

Asked roughly how many he expected to be handed in, Mr Keenan said: "Look I certainly think the number will be in the thousands."

The Australian Crime Commission estimated in 2012 there were at least 250,000 illegal guns in Australia. But a Senate report noted last year it was impossible to estimate how many illicit weapons are out there.


*And despite Australia's strict border controls, the smuggling of high-powered military-style firearms is also a growing problem.*


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 31, 2019)

cnm said:


> Oh, as to a specific question you posed, a law that prevented the sale of an assault style weapon in Nevada may well have reduced the number of casualties in the latest mass shooting




Wrong.....

Number killed in Gilroy using Russian semi-auto rifle...3.

Number Killed in Russia using 5 shot shotgun...20.

What you don't care about, because all you want to do is ban guns, you don't want to reduce gun crime......

It isn't the weapon in a mass public shooting.....it is the time a shooter has in the gun free zone before a defender points a gun at them.......we know this from actual real world experience and research....real research, not emotional, feelings about the issue...

Kerch Polytechnic College massacre - Wikipedia


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 31, 2019)

cnm said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > Current law prevented Mr. Legan from transporting this firearm across state lines. But he did it anyhow.
> ...




Wrong....

First...you keep saying Military style....the AR-15 has never been in the military, the SKS that the guy used is not a military version of the weapon...it is semi-auto....

Semi-auto rifles are constitutionally protected weapons......they were named by Justice Scalia in Heller and later in his opinion in Friedrich v Highland Park....

And again, in Russia, 20 killed with a 5 shot pump action shotgun....this guy with that rifle....3.

It isn't the weapon....it is the gun free zone, that allowed him the time to kill.


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 31, 2019)

Olde Europe said:


> EvilEyeFleegle said:
> 
> 
> > Hmmm...maybe it's my failure to couple population with geography that's at fault here. It is far harder to police the area that the US encompasses--than it is the relatively smaller area of Switzerland...
> ...


Hold on Kiddo..did not say 'next to impossible'. now did I?  I said difficult...and not to correct your erroneous impression of rural America...but there are a lot of small towns and cities out there..with a lot of people..if fact..some might contend that these are the folks that picked our current president. And..they are the people most likely to ignore any gun laws they don't like. This I know..they are my neighbors..LOL!

I also did not say 'laws' ...I said gun laws. The issue is quite a bit more nuanced than that...don't you think? Not sure why you are so very hung up on 'population'...but you  seem to be convinced that it isn't a factor in this issue..while I disagree..won't be the first time..nor the last, this happens.

European solutions for American problems are almost always doomed...IMO.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 31, 2019)

cnm said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > 70% of all murders take place in poor urban areas and are committed by people who cannot legally possess firearms
> ...




Your theory Less Guns = Less Gun Crime....

26 years in the U.S......more people bought, own and carry guns.....

Gun crime went down 75%

Gun murder down 49%

Violent crime down 72%

The exact opposite of your theory...

In science, when you have a theory and you do an experiment...and the exact opposite happens from what your theory predicts.....

Your theory is wrong.......according to actual science.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 31, 2019)

RealDave said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...




As Heller states, the dangerously mentally ill can't have guns, felons can't have guns, and some places like courtrooms can ban them...

That is the regulations stated in Heller......all the rest is unConstitutional.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 31, 2019)

RealDave said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > cnm said:
> ...




No...only Bearable Arms are protected....that would mean all rifles and pistols...according to the Supreme Court.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 31, 2019)

OldLady said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > cnm said:
> ...




Yes you do....and is someone shoots you, we can arrest them and lock them up.....we can't just walk around and arrest someone because we think, with no other evidence, that they might shoot you.  Do you understand that?


----------



## ph3iron (Jul 31, 2019)

Marion Morrison said:


> EvilEyeFleegle said:
> 
> 
> > Marion Morrison said:
> ...





Marion Morrison said:


> EvilEyeFleegle said:
> 
> 
> > Marion Morrison said:
> ...


Why bother reading a lady with a WWII deferment guy as her pic?
"Roberts and Olson's *John Wayne*, American states that in 1943, Duke was given a “3A” *deferment* for dependency reasons. The *deferment* was later changed to “A” status for National Service. Another *deferment* was given in late 1945 because he was too old for the draft.Apr 1, 2007"
And apparently is too dumb to know what the meaning of snowflake.
"19 c pro slavery white boys "
Iguess you are  in favor of our fat boys 5 deferments?


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 31, 2019)

cnm said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > Bats, knives, clubs, bare hands.... the list is literally endless
> ...




No.....they pools kill more people every single year than rifles do....

Rifles in 2017....403

Pools...3,536 died in non-boating related drownings...

You want to ban these rifles for 403 deaths...pools kill over 1,500 every single year....

Knives are used to kill over 1,500 people every single year...

According to your logic, if we have to ban 18 million rifles, a low count, for 403 murders...then we also have to ban Pools for the 3,536 deaths every year, and knives for the over 1,500 deaths every year...

That is your logic, not ours.

Expanded Homicide Data Table 8


Rifles... 403

Knives.....1,591

Hands and feet......696

Clubs.....467


----------



## ph3iron (Jul 31, 2019)

skye said:


> California has banned guns, right? but...this sort of tragedy still happens over there!
> 
> Perhaps a good guy  should have carried a gun  to defend himself and others,and the outcome would have been different.


Nah, we needed 10000 rubes all blasting away


----------



## Olde Europe (Jul 31, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> European solutions for American problems are almost always doomed...IMO.



Yeah, testing all other options before finally ending up doing the right thing is time consuming - it's also "consuming" kids, see Sandy Hook, Gilroy Garlic Festival, etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc.  

BTW, you are the one hung up on population and geography - China (population) and Russia (geography) prove you wrong.

It's been fun - as always.  Let's agree to disagree, shall we?


----------



## ph3iron (Jul 31, 2019)

2aguy said:


> cnm said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


I think the gov should give every citizen 100 guns.
My neighbors a pain, think I'll shoot up his house


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 31, 2019)

cnm said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > you keep saying "military style" as if that means shit or can really be defined.
> ...




Yes...it is science.....magazine capacity has no bearing on deaths and injuries in mass public shootings....

*Gilroy, rifle.....3.

From Mother Jones list of mass public shootings......

US mass shootings, 1982-2019: Data from Mother Jones’ investigation
*

*Shotgun

Russian Polyteknic shooting....20
#13.......5 dead
#25.......3
#47.......12
#113...8

#103...revolver....8

These are shotguns and revolver mass public shootings.....it isn't the magazine...it is the gun free zone that allows a shooter to be unmolested when he is killing people, who isn't stopped until someone else points a gun at him.
*


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 31, 2019)

RealDave said:


> cnm said:
> 
> 
> > Oh, here's one.
> ...




Because...moron....

The AR-15 is customizable for different sized people, you can attach different sights, scopes, lazers and lights to it.....

If you have several members of a family, not all of them will fit that rifle above comfortably, you can't attach a light, laser or any other pieces of equipment for self defense or sport.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 31, 2019)

cnm said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > Not the mini argument.
> ...




They are protected by the Constitution.......as explained in the Heller decision and by Scalia in his opinion in Friedman v Highland Park...


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 31, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> EvilEyeFleegle said:
> 
> 
> > Olde Europe said:
> ...



See....the anti-gunners couldn't give a rats ass if a law actually reduces actual gun crime committed by actual criminals......all they care about is taking guns away from normal people...because those people obey the law.


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Jul 31, 2019)

Olde Europe said:


> EvilEyeFleegle said:
> 
> 
> > European solutions for American problems are almost always doomed...IMO.
> ...


Of course...I'll concede you China..although the degree of freedom lost might not be worth the safety gained..and there is that pesky transplant market that ethnic minorities keep ending up on.. Russia/ Well..a kleptocracy ruled by oligarchs and fronted by a faux Democracy....might not be the best of examples.


----------



## RealDave (Jul 31, 2019)

2aguy said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > cnm said:
> ...


 So, I was right.  If you can't make it look scary, you don't want it.

& fuck your size comment.

How many here got measured so their Remington Model 760 would fit properly?  Seems to me, I asked & I got a gin in a box?


----------



## RealDave (Jul 31, 2019)

2aguy said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...



Actually, if they were in a gun free zone, you could.  Or if they were carrying a banned weapon or a banned magazine.


----------



## RealDave (Jul 31, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > cnm said:
> ...


 Yep


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 31, 2019)

RealDave said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...




No...moron, you didn't understand......

The wooden stock will not adjust to accomodate different body sized shooters.....you can with an AR-15.....moron......second, you can't put any knew scopes or sights on that rifle....it has all to do with actually hitting what you shoot at....second, in self defense, you may choose to have a flashlight on the end of your weapon so you can see at night and still handle the rifle with two hands....and a laser site can help you shoot as well....you are a moron....

If anyone is shaking in their boots it is you.....the odds of being murdered by a gun are so small they are almost as small as your brain......as long as you aren't a criminal, the friends, family or associates of a criminal, and you don't live in a democrat crap hole voting district....guns are not a problem...

But you fear them so much that even though there are close to 600 million guns in private hands, and over 17.25 million people can legally carry them in public for self defense.....you want to ban them...even as gun murder has gone down 49%, gun crime down 75%, and violent crime down 72%

You are the irrational one, not us.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 31, 2019)

RealDave said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...




Funny how the gun free zone doesn't stop criminals from using guns in them.......

And we can already arrest any criminal who has any gun ..........  any gun...you nitwit...they can't touch any  gun at all....

And as I have shown, magazine capacity has nothing to do with deaths and injuries in a mass public shooting....as the 5 shot shotgun in Russia showed when it was used to kill 20 people....

You twit.


----------



## RealDave (Jul 31, 2019)

2aguy said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...




So, the shooter at the Garlic festival was a felon?  Are you such a fucking moron that you think these mass shooters were all felons.

Jesus fuck.

Then, if high capacity magazine prove no advantage, why do you assfucks want them?


----------



## RealDave (Jul 31, 2019)

2aguy said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


 So deer hunters cant hit shit because their guns don't fit.  Who knew?


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 31, 2019)

2aguy said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > Defiant1 said:
> ...


The question is whether the government should be able to place regulations on our rights. You justify regulations on the first amendment for things that effect the public space. Others justify regulating the second amendment because they feel it helps safety and the general welfare of our citizens.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jul 31, 2019)

RealDave said:


> So, the shooter at the Garlic festival was a felon?


As soon as he stepped across the CA border with a rifles that is banned under CA law - yes.


> Then, if high capacity magazine prove no advantage, why do you assfucks want them?


Magazines are an integral port of the modern firearm; as such the 2nd protects our right to own and use them.
Thus, the onus is on those who seek to restrict the size of said magazines to demonstrate the necessity for same.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 31, 2019)

RealDave said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...




Look, dipstick....I have posted research that shows 90% of those who commit murder have long histories of crime and violence, often going back to their teen years...

So....moron, that means another 10% are not criminals before they commit their first murder......

You are the moron.......you are the guy who hates guns to the point it has made you deranged.


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 31, 2019)

2aguy said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...


I don’t think registration directly targets criminals.  But I think if joe citizen gets a gun and then 5 years later gets arrested for beating his wife or raping his niece it would be nice to know that he’s got a gun in the safe and probably a good idea to take it away. Dontchyathink?


----------



## Defiant1 (Jul 31, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...




You want to take my gun away without a court intervening?
Just because I beat my wife doesn't mean I want to shoot her.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 31, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...




The public space is just that...public...we all have a Right to it but it can't be all at the same time...so we have to have some minor rules to deal with it.

Guns are not like that, I can carry my gun all day long and as long as I don't use it to commit a crime, you are not effected by it......

And just like the First Amendment....you can't be touched until you use it to violate the Rights of someone else....you can write anything you want, but if you commit libel, then you broke the law...up to that point...as the anti-gunners keep saying, you weren't a criminal till you broke that law..

What they and you want is to prevent people from writing, speaking and saying anything because you are afraid they will break the law with their speech.....that is what you are doing to the 2nd Amendment.

Others justify regulating the second amendment because they feel it helps safety and the general welfare of our citizens

We have those regulations......it is against the law...already, to use any gun to commit a crime......it is against the law to use a gun to threaten someone unlawfully....it is against the law for any felon to buy, own or carry any gun, at anytime.....if you do any of these things you can already be arrested

Those above cover everything we need to regulate guns.   Anything else is simply your phobia about guns. 

The problem you don't want to see because you simply hate guns, and want them banned, is that the problem isn't that we don't have regulations on guns....I just showed you a few of the 20,000 local, state, and federal regulations pertaining to guns.....

Our problem is that democrat politicians, judges and prosecutors keep letting out violent gun criminals after they have been arrested over and over again with illegal guns.....of the 10,982 gun murders committed in 2017 for example.....using the most recent mass public shooting number for 2018.....93 were killed by mass shooters........of the rest, the majority of those shooters were criminals shooting other criminals, most often when they were already on parole for other gun offenses......and often the first time offenders are 15,16, year old gang members using guns for crime....

So we don't have a gun problem, we don't have a gun regulation problem, we have a democrats letting known, repeat, violent gun offenders out of jail on bond, where they then shoot people, and out of prison on reduced sentences...often bargaining away the gun charge as if it is just inconsequential...

Japan has kept their criminals from using guns by having a life sentence for anyone who uses a gun in an actual crime......this is how you stop gun crime....not by targeting people who don't use their legal guns for crime...

But because you just want to attack guns.....you won't understand that actual criminals with guns are the issue....and if you make the actual punishment steep...like Japan does, then gun crime will go down, and you don't have to do anything else......

Now that I have explained the actual problem and the actual solution...you can proceed to ignore the actual problem, the actual solution and just tell us we need to ban guns... 

http://www.atimes.com/article/japans-gun-control-laws-strict-yakuza-turn-toy-pistols/



Ryo Fujiwara, long-time writer on yakuza affairs and author of the book, The Three Yamaguchi-Gumi, says that the punishment for using a gun in a gang war or in a crime is now so heavy that most yakuza avoid their use at all – unless it is for an assassination.

“In a hit, whoever fires the gun, or is made to take responsibility for firing the gun, has to pretty much be willing to go to jail for the rest of their life. That’s a big decision. The repercussions are big, too. No one wants to claim responsibility for such acts – the gang office might actually get shut-down.”

The gang typically also has to support the family of the hit-man while he is in prison, which is also a financial burden for the organization.

Japan’s Firearms and Swords Control Laws make it a crime to illegally possess a gun, with a punishment of jail time of up to 10 years.

Illegal possession more than one gun, the penalty goes up to 15 years in prison. If you own a gun and matching ammunition, that’s another charge and a heavier penalty. The most severe penalty is for the act of discharging a gun in a train, on a bus, or most public spaces, which can result in a life sentence.

---

*A low-ranking member of the Kobe-Yamaguchi-gumi put it this way: “All of the smart guys got rid of their guns a long-time ago. The penalties are way too high. You get life in prison if you just fire a gun. That’s not fun.”*


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 31, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...




The police will already do that without registering the gun.....the wife he beat, the daughter he raped can tell them he has guns....we can get this done without any new laws..........in fact, in states that require that people arrested give up their guns.....they get other guns and use them to murder that wife and daughter.....

As I showed in the post on Canada...registration doesn't do anything, costs a fortune in time, money and manpower and doesn't help to solve crimes....

Canada Tried Registering Long Guns -- And Gave Up

15 million guns.....1 billion dollars...and it didn't work....



The law passed and starting in 1998 Canadians were required to have a license to own firearms and register their weapons with the government. According to Canadian researcher (and gun enthusiast) Gary Mauser, the Canada Firearms Center quickly rose to 600 employees and the cost of the effort climbed past $600 million. In 2002 Canada’s auditor general released a report saying initial cost estimates of $2 million (Canadian) had increased to $1 billion as the government tried to register the estimated 15 million guns owned by Canada’s 34 million residents.

The registry was plagued with complications like duplicate serial numbers and millions of incomplete records, Mauser reports. One person managed to register a soldering gun, demonstrating the lack of precise standards. And overshadowing the effort was the suspicion of misplaced effort: Pistols were used in 66% of gun homicides in 2011, yet they represent about 6% of the guns in Canada. Legal long guns were used in 11% of killings that year, according to Statistics Canada, while illegal weapons like sawed-off shotguns and machine guns, which by definition cannot be registered, were used in another 12%.

So the government was spending the bulk of its money — about $17 million of the Firearms Center’s $82 million annual budget — trying to register long guns when the statistics showed they weren’t the problem.

There was also the question of how registering guns was supposed to reduce crime and suicide in the first place. From 1997 to 2005, only 13% of the guns used in homicides were registered. Police studies in Canada estimated that 2-16% of guns used in crimes were stolen from legal owners and thus potentially in the registry. The bulk of the guns, Canadian officials concluded, were unregistered weapons imported illegally from the U.S. by criminal gangs.

Finally in 2011, conservatives led by Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper voted to abolish the long-gun registry and destroy all its records. Liberals argued the law  had contributed to the decline in gun homicides since it was passed. But Mauser notes that gun homicides have actually been rising in recent years, from 151 in 1999 to 173 in 2009, as violent criminal gangs use guns in their drug turf wars and other disputes. As in the U.S., most gun homicides in Canada are committed by young males, many of them with criminal records. In the majority of homicides involving young males, the victim and the killer are know each other.



----------

3/24/18



Ten Myths Of The Long Gun Registry | Canadian Shooting Sports Association


*Myth #4: Police investigations are aided by the registry.*
Doubtful. Information contained in the registry is incomplete and unreliable. Due to the inaccuracy of the information, it cannot be used as evidence in court and the government has yet to prove that it has been a contributing factor in any investigation. Another factor is the dismal compliance rate (estimated at only 50%) for licensing and registration which further renders the registry useless. Some senior police officers have stated as such: “The law registering firearms has neither deterred these crimes nor helped us solve any of them. None of the guns we know to have been used were registered ... the money could be more effectively used for security against terrorism as well as a host of other public safety initiatives.” Former Toronto Police Chief Julian Fantino, January 2003. 




3/24/18



https://www.quora.com/In-countries-...olved-at-least-in-part-by-use-of-the-registry



*Tracking physical objects that are easily transferred with a database is non-trivial problem. *Guns that are stolen, loaned, or lost disappear from the registry. The data is has to be manually entered and input mistakes will both leak guns and generate false positive results.

*Registries don’t solve straw-purchases. *If someone goes through all of the steps to register a gun and simply gives it to a criminal that gun becomes unregistered. Assuming the gun is ever recovered you could theoretically try and prosecute the person who transferred the gun to the criminal, but you aren’t solving the crime you were trying to. Remember that people will prostitute themselves or even their children for drugs, so how much deterrence is there in a maybe-get-a-few-years for straw purchasing?

*Registries are expensive*. Canada’s registry was pitched as costing the taxpayer $2 million and the rest of the costs were to be payed for with registration fees. It was subject to massive cost overruns that were not being met by registrations fees. When the program was audited in 2002 the program was expected to cost over $1 billion and that the fee revenue was only expected to be $140 million.

*No gun recovered. *If no gun was recovered at the scene of the crime then your registry isn’t even _theoretically_ helping, let alone providing a practical tool. You need a world where criminals meticulously register their guns and leave them at the crime scene for a registry to start to become useful.

Say I have a registered gun, and a known associate of mine was shot and killed. Ballistics is able to determine that my known associate was killed with the same make and model as the gun I registered. A registry doesn’t prove that my gun was used, or that I was the one doing the shooting. I was a suspect as soon as we said “known associate” and the police will then being looking for motive and checking for my alibi.


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 31, 2019)

Defiant1 said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


I didn’t say “without a court intervening” don’t put words in my mouth


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 31, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...




it would be nice to know that he’s got a gun in the safe and probably a good idea to take it away.

And this does nothing....we have had cases where they simply go out and get an illegal gun...and again, the majority of those killing their wives are not John Citizen angry over burnt dinner.....they are also individuals with long histories of crime and violence, drug and alcohol abuse, with lots of contact with the police......who know who these people are...


----------



## bodecea (Jul 31, 2019)

Defiant1 said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


Interesting confession.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 31, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...




I am curious....let's say someone gets their guns taken away.....an allegation from a wife, for example.....and then that guy proves he didn't do anything wrong, the wife lied.

Who do you think should pay his lawyers fees and court costs and for the storage and return of his guns?   If he didn't do anything wrong, then the public should reimburse him for lost time from work for court, consulting with lawyers, the lawyers fees, court costs....Right?


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 31, 2019)

2aguy said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


I had to stop after I got to this part...

“The problem you don't want to see because you simply hate guns, and want them banned, is that the problem isn't that we don't have regulations on guns....I just showed you a few of the 20,000 local, state, and federal regulations pertaining to guns.....”

I own 11 guns and don’t want them banned. Know who you are talking to before you make false presumptions. 

You point out all the regulations and say they are enough but then you say regulating guns is unconstitutional? Well which is it? Do you support the regulations we have in place on guns. Do some of the regulations make sense to you and do you see them as constitutionally legal?


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 31, 2019)

2aguy said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


You’re talking about long guns, mainly hunting riffles. Canada still has registration rules for restricted and prohibited firearms.


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 31, 2019)

2aguy said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


I’m sure some do go out and get black market guns. Are you saying that happens in every case?

Fact is many people agree that only responsible citizens should own firearms. Mentally disturbed and violent people should not as they post a greater risk. When people are found to be a risk then it should be known so that we don’t sell them guns and we can confiscate the guns they might already have. That’s the responsible thing to do. Now could these people still get guns on the black market and commit crimes, yes of course and this will happen in some cases. It won’t happen in other cases and lives will be saved. Agree with it or not, you do understand the argument don’t you?


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 31, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...




We regulate criminals.....we don't regulate guns.....felons and criminals in prison have had their Rights removed through due process of law...

The regulations I support......I'll name some, if you have some list them and I will respond.

--if someone is adjudicated dangerously mentally ill by medical professionals and a court, we can take their guns, if they are proven to not be dangerously medically ill, the court reimburses the individual for all fees.

--criminals caught committing crimes with guns should not be allowed to have their gun crime bargained away...and it should carry a 30 year penalty for simply using the gun in an actual crime....rape, robbery, murder, on top of the sentence for the crime...this alone will dry up gun crime in this country, like it did in Japan....

I don't think guns should be registered....there should be no permits to carry a gun for self defense, since taxing a Right is unconstitutional....Murdock v Pennsylvania........ no training requirements....since that too would be like having a Literacy test for voting........

No magazine bans, no rifle or pistol bans......increase the penalty for using those in a crime is the way you handle that.....if you get 30 years for using a gun, another for using a magazine in a crime.....that would actually reduce gun violence.....anything else is just theater or a baby step in banning guns.


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 31, 2019)

2aguy said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > Defiant1 said:
> ...


The wife should pay if she lied.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 31, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...




And it hasn't helped......gun crime is increasing in Canada.

Again.....if you care about gun crime....increase the sentence for gun crime...leave normal gun owners alone...


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 31, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...




and if she can't?


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 31, 2019)

2aguy said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


Thanks for sharing... how do you feel about background checks?


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 31, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...




We have a background check system already.......criminals are in the system...when the government puts them in it...as are dangerously mentally ill....we already have that....

There were 10,982 gun murders in 2017.......the majority of criminals who used guns got them through friends and family or stole the guns...which means the Background check system didn't stop them...

And yet....when they are caught, they can already be arrested and put in prison....the problem is that democrat judges, prosecutors and politicians keep reducing gun sentences and letting them out on bail...


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 31, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...




To show I am willing to compromise....

I can live with the current background check system, no universal background check.....and the system should simply be a pass/fail, with no permanent record kept....and we can already to this.....you simply submit your name, if it comes back as a criminal or on the nutcase list...fail.....no registration of every single gun owner to do that...we register actual criminals instead.  We can already do it.....


----------



## Defiant1 (Jul 31, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...




That's why you never tell anyone, including your wife how many and what weapons you have.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 31, 2019)

RealDave said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...


U.S.v Miller 1939
In order for a firearm to be protected by the second amendment, it must have some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well-regulated militia, in common use of the time, and supplied by the citizen.

Shall Not be infringed 

Hitler heavily regulated guns how did that work out for the Jew?

Do you trust a trump administration while you want to disarm people from the best weapon to fight against his so called tyranny?


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 31, 2019)

RealDave said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > cnm said:
> ...


What is your qualitative experience on the use of deadly force? What gives you the ability to have an opinion on what an individual needs to prevail in a fight for their life?
What if you have multiple attackers armed with semiautomatics?


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 31, 2019)




----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 31, 2019)

2aguy said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


Why has gun crime been increasing?


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 31, 2019)

2aguy said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


Why do you oppose universal? Wouldn’t that be more efficient and effective?


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 31, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...




Because they likely have brought in immigrants from 3rd world countries who are now beginning to run their drug gangs.....they have a culture of violence from war torn countries that the native Canadians did not have.  Much like in Britain and Australia where you have immigrants running their drug gangs too...In Britain, you have violent gangs from Albania and other former soviet bloc countries, and they are more violent than the native British criminals.....and then for Canada you have the Mexican drug cartels setting up shop in the country too...

It isn't about guns it is about the culture of the criminal class in a country.

100s of drug cartel members have entered Canada since Liberals waived Mexican visa: Report

Hundreds of criminals connected to the illegal drug trade are freely plying their trades as importers, go-betweens and hitmen in Canada — according to Quebec news outlet TVA Nouvelles — largely because Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s Liberal government dropped the visa requirement for Mexican travelers.

TVA investigative journalist Felix Seguin spoke to several in-the-know sources who revealed there are 400 criminals who have recently entered Canada to traffic drugs — half of them living in Quebec while the other half are presumed to be mainly operating in the Toronto area.


----------



## Slade3200 (Jul 31, 2019)

2aguy said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


There’s a good crime drama about Canadian monsters on Netflix called Bad Blood. Check it out... lots of gun violence


----------



## Hugo Furst (Jul 31, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...





Slade3200 said:


> Why do you oppose universal?



useless.

Keeps honest people honest, keeps criminals laughing



Slade3200 said:


> Wouldn’t that be more efficient and effective?



How would it be either?

Gangbangers don't worry about background checks


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 31, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


black ground checks only work when all party's participating are doing their job. a guy gets discharged from the airforce but Airforce does not give reason guy goes and buys an AR and shoots up a church his ex-wife family attends and then gets taken down with a good guy with an AR.


----------



## Slade3200 (Aug 1, 2019)

WillHaftawaite said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


I’m not talking about gang bangers


----------



## Slade3200 (Aug 1, 2019)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


Great, then let’s work on getting more people to do their job and make them more effective, right?!


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Aug 1, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


Works for me


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...




No.....criminals get past current, Federally mandated background checks by using straw buyers, people who have clean records who can pass the background check....usually relatives or friends, most likely girlfriends, baby mommas, grandmothers, mothers, and a lot of the time they are under threat of physical violence....and as actual research shows, criminals don't like private sales for guns because they don't know if the stranger they are buying the gun from is an undercover police officer.....

Mass shooter's first crime is the mass shooting, so they have clean records which is why they can pass any background check either current or universal.

The only reason to have universal background checks, since they wouldn't do anything to stop either criminals or mass shooters....is to come back later and demand universal gun registration....that is the real goal.   The anti-gunners demand universal background checks knowing they won't stop criminals or mass shooters.  Then, when criminals and mass shooters keep getting guns because of the reasons above, they come back and say....see, in order for UBCs to work, we need to register all the guns, otherwise we can't know who originally owned the guns in the first place.   

They want universal gun registration because that is the last thing they need to ban guns and confiscate them when they get the political power to enact those steps.  How do we know this?  Because of Germany, Britain, Australia, Canada, various states in the U.S. who first registered rifles and then banned them.....New York, and other cities......

Then, Universal Background checks are also aimed at normal gun owners...how?

Gun Control Won't Stop Crime

*“Universal” Background Checks* 
Part of the genius of the Bloomberg gun control system is how it creates prohibitions indirectly. Bloomberg’s so-called “universal” background check scheme is a prime example. These bills are never just about having background checks on the private sales of firearms. That aspect is the part that the public is told about. Yet when you read the Bloomberg laws, you find that checks on private sales are the tip of a very large iceberg of gun prohibition.

First, the bills criminalize a vast amount of innocent activity. Suppose you are an nra Certified Instructor teaching an introductory safety class. Under your supervision, students will handle a variety of unloaded firearms. They will learn how different guns have different safeties, and they will learn the safe way to hand a firearm to another person. But thanks to Bloomberg, these classroom firearm lessons are now illegal in Washington state, unless the class takes place at a shooting range.

It’s now also illegal to lend a gun to your friend, so that you can shoot together at a range on your own property. Or to lend a firearm for a week to your neighbor who is being stalked.

*Under the Bloomberg system, gun loans are generally forbidden, unless the gun owner and the borrower both go to a gun store first. The store must process the loan as if the store were selling the gun out of its inventory.*

*Then, when your friend wants to return your gun to you, both of you must go to the gun store again. This time, the store will process that transaction as if you were buying the gun from the store’s inventory. For both the loan and the return of the gun, you will have to pay whatever fees the store charges, and whatever fees the government might charge. *

The gun store will have to keep a permanent record of you, your friend and the gun, including the gun’s serial number. Depending on the state or city, the government might also keep a permanent record.

*In other words, the “background check” law is really a law to expand gun registration—and registration lists are used for confiscation.*

Consider New York City. In 1967, violent crime in the city was out of control. So the City Council and Mayor John Lindsay required registration of all long guns. The criminals, obviously, did not comply. Thanks to the 1911 Sullivan Act, New York City already had established registration lists for handgun owners.

Then, in 1991, the City Council decided that many lawfully registered firearms were now illegal “assault weapons.” The New York Police Department used the registration lists to ensure that the guns were either surrendered to the government or moved out of the city. When he was mayor of New York City, Bloomberg did the same, after the “assault weapon” law was expanded to cover any rifle or shotgun with an ammunition capacity greater than five rounds.

*In Australia and Great Britain—which are often cited as models for the U.S. to follow—registration lists were used for gun confiscation. In Great Britain, this included all handguns; in Australia, handguns over .38 caliber. Both countries banned all semi-automatic or pump-action long guns.*

Most American jurisdictions don’t have a comprehensive gun registration system. But even if your state legislature has outlawed gun registration, firearm stores must keep records. Those records could be harvested for future confiscations.

*Under the Bloomberg system, the store’s list would include not just the guns that the store actually sold, but all the guns (and their owners) that the store processed, for friends or relatives borrowing guns.*

So if those people ca


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...




Yep....... we already have a background check system........anti-gunners wanted it, and now they are back for more in the Universal Background Checks since the first background check system doesn't keep guns out of the hands of criminals and mass shooters......

Also....we could start actually prosecuting straw buyers...people who knowingly buy guns to supply them to criminals....we can already catch these people without registering guns, the problem is the baby mommas and grandmothers are not good subjects for prosecutors....

We already have all the laws we need to stop gun crime and gun murder.....the problem is that too many in the justice system are not implementing them....they are allowing repeat gun offenders out on bail, and out of prison on reduced sentences and plea bargaining away the gun charge.......

If we enforced existing laws, the repeat gun offenders who are commiting 90% of the 10,982 gun murders would stop.....just like the criminals in Japan did when they faced life in prison for using a gun in any crime....that means point a gun at a store clerk for a robbery, and not even fire the gun.....life sentence....you do that, and gun crime will dry up over night.....and the gangs will start using even more 15 year olds to be their killers.

Straw Purchasing Guns: US Needs to Take It Seriously | [site:name] | National Review

Wisconsin isn’t alone in its nonchalance. California normally treats straw purchases as misdemeanors or minor infractions. Even as the people of Baltimore suffer horrific levels of violence, Maryland classifies the crime as a misdemeanor, too. Straw buying is a felony in progressive Connecticut, albeit one in the second-least-serious order of felonies.

* It is classified as a serious crime in Illinois (Class 2 felony), but police rarely (meaning “almost never”) go after the nephews and girlfriends with clean records who provide Chicago’s diverse and sundry gangsters with their weapons.* In Delaware, it’s a Class F felony, like forging a check. In Oregon, it’s a misdemeanor.

--------

*I visited Chicago a few years back to write about the city’s gang-driven murder problem, and a retired police official told me that the nature of the people making straw purchases — young relatives, girlfriends who may or may not have been facing the threat of physical violence, grandmothers, etc. — made prosecuting those cases unattractive. *

In most of those cases, the authorities emphatically should put the straw purchasers in prison for as long as possible. Throw a few gangsters’ grandmothers behind bars for 20 years and see if that gets anybody’s attention. In the case of the young women suborned into breaking the law, that should be just another charge to put on the main offender.


----------



## Slade3200 (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


Wow, that whole straw buyer process sounds pretty intense. Surely you wouldn’t assume that every criminal who wanted a gun would have the will and the resources to do all that. Right? Some, yes, I’m sure they would, but that process alone sounds like it would detour a good percentage of criminals from getting guns. Also, what about the mentally ill who you agree shouldn’t be carrying. Wouldn’t universal
Background checks and an improved system help identify more of those individuals?


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...




Again...you register the individual who can't buy guns, not all gun owners, there is no need.   And if the straw buyer process was so difficult, the criminals wouldn't use it as one of their main sources for illegal guns....friends and family are a major source for illegal guns....and again, the baby mommas and grandmothers buying the guns for their boyfriend and grandson criminals often do it under threats........

Mass shooters rarely use straw buyers because they can already pass current background checks, which means they can use regular gun stores.  They have no criminal records...for example...the Pulse Night Club shooter passed a criminal background check for his job as a security guard....he passed a current, federally mandated background check for each gun he bought, he was under covert FBI surveillance for a year, he was given a complete FBI criminal investigation as well, and he was interviewed by the FBI 2 times.....he passed all of it even though someone reported him as a possible terrorist....then he went on to attack the night club.

Criminals use straw buyers or steal their guns.....bypassing both current Federal background checks, and if they wanted to buy a gun from a private individual, their straw buyer could buy the gun from those sources too...since they can pass background checks.

Besides...from actual research, criminals do not like to use unknown, private sellers......they are too afraid the sellers might be police.

Besides....it is already against the law to use a gun in a crime...if you do we can already arrest you.  It is already against the law for a felon to buy, own or carry a gun.....if they are caught they can already be arrested.  

We have all the laws we need to reduce gun crime...the problem isn't that we don't have enough laws, the problem is that judges give bail to repeat gun offenders, prosecutors plea bargain away the gun charge, and politicians reduce sentences for gun offenders because they think the criminal justice system is unfair..

That is where the gun violence problem comes from...not John and Jane citizen having a gun for self defense.

The focus on banning guns is a waste of time.  The focus needs to be on keeping the known, repeat gun offenders in prison. 

Japan keeps their criminals from using guns with a life sentence for any crime involving a gun....that is how you actually dry up gun crime.  Here?  You have felons, with repeat arrests for illegal gun possession getting personal recognizance bonds, walking out of the court room in a matter of days, going out and shooting people.....that is our problem...

Here are the reasons we have a gun problem in our big cities...if any of these criminals were refused bond for repeat gun violations, and then, when convicted were sentenced to 30 years to life for using a gun, even for armed robbery where they didn't fire the weapon.....criminals would stop using guns for crime.   The gangs would start using gullible 15 year olds to commit their murders, but the majority of gun crime would dry up....

Look at the following stories...the facts and reality of lax enforcement.......if you kept these guys in jail, you wouldn't have gun violence....

Top cop laments violence as 66 shot, 5 fatally, over long Fourth of July weekend


*Between last Wednesday and Friday, 42 people were charged with felony gun-related offenses, he said, but only 15 remain in custody.*


That lack of accountability for gun offenders has damaged the Police Department’s relationship with the communities most beset by violence, Johnson said, making victims of crimes less likely to cooperate with officers.
-----
“It’s not about mass incarceration. It’s not about having quotas. But when somebody has a demonstrated track record of being a violent gun offender, that should say something to the judges who are making decisions about bail. They shouldn’t be out on the street,” Lightfoot said. *“We can’t keep our communities safe if people just keep cycling through the system because what that says to them is, I can do whatever I want, I can carry whatever I want, I can shoot up a crowd and I’m going to be back on the street. How does that make sense? It doesn’t.”*
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/07/criminal_justice_reform_comes_home_to_roost.html
=======

CWB Chicago: You Be The Judge: We give you the case details. You try to guess their bail amount.

*McKay was sentenced to four years for robbery in 2008; two years for aggravated unlawful use of a weapon (firearm) in 2010; seven years for being a felon in possession of a weapon (firearm) in 2012; and three years for possession of fentanyl in 2016.*
-----
For McKay, who has two gun convictions and a robbery conviction, Willis set bail at….$5,000. McKay will need to put down a 10% deposit of $500 to go free.  Willis also ordered him to go on electronic monitoring if he is released.

Some details that Willis did not know:
• McKay’s 2008 robbery conviction involved an armed carjacking. Prosecutors reduced the charge to “ordinary” robbery as part of a plea deal.• In 2012, McKay’s second gun case also included allegations that he fired the weapon. Prosecutors dropped the weapon discharge count and seven other weapons charges in a plea deal.• The 2016 drug possession charge started as allegations of manufacture-delivery of fentanyl, but, again, prosecutors pleaded that down to possession.

========


Under DA Krasner, more gun-possession cases get court diversionary program

*In June 2018, Maalik Jackson-Wallace was arrested on a Frankford street and charged with carrying a concealed gun without a license and a gram of marijuana. It was his first arrest.*

*The Philadelphia District Attorney’s Office recommended the Frankford man for a court diversionary program called Accelerated Rehabilitative Disposition (ARD) that put him on two years’ probation. His record could have been expunged if he had successfully completed the program.*

*But Jackson-Wallace, 24, was arrested again on gun-possession charges in March in Bridesburg. He was released from jail after a judge granted a defense motion for unsecured bail. And on June 13, he was arrested a third time — charged with murder in a shooting two days earlier in Frankford that killed a 26-year-old man.*

Jackson-Wallace’s case has been cited by some on social media as an example of how they say District Attorney Larry Krasner’s policies are too lenient and lead to gun violence.



In fact, statistics obtained from the DA’s Office show that in 2018, Krasner’s first year in office, 78 gun-possession cases were placed in the ARD program — compared with just 12 such diversions in gun-possession cases the previous year, 11 in 2016, 14 in 2015. and 10 in 2014.

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

Officials Address 'Vicious Cycle' Of I-Bond Violations After Violent Weekend

*Many of the gun offenders arrested by Chicago police over the weekend walked out of jail on bond, without having to pay a dime.*

As of Monday morning, 19 people had been arrested on gun-related charges. By Monday afternoon, 11 were back on the street, some with prior gun offenses.

“We know who a lot of these people are,” Chicago Police Supt. Eddie Johnson said. “And how do we know that? Because we keep arresting them over and over and over and over and over again. And it’s just a vicious cycle.”

In a tweet Sunday night, a Chicago police spokesperson criticized the practice of letting gun offenders out on Individual Recognizance Bonds or “I-Bonds.”
-----

The tweet said, in part, “Letting gun offenders out on I-Bonds shows there is absolutely no repercussion for carrying illegal guns In Chicago.”
-----
In a statement, an office representative said since the beginning of this year, 72% of gun related cases received monetary bail or no bond.
==================
http://www.cwbchicago.com/2019/05/man-connected-to-whitney-young-high.html

*The man who is charged with driving the carjacked SUV of a Whitney Young High School teacher this week is on probation for possessing a handgun—a probation term that was cut in half just three weeks ago by a Cook County judge.*

The CPD arrest report that documents the capture of Nicholas Williams on Tuesday says cops and federal agents found Williams “in possession” of a loaded 9-millimeter handgun with a defaced serial number. But, a source with knowledge of the case told CWBChicago tonight that the gun was “ditched” and weapons charges could not be approved.

The Cook County State’s Attorney’s Office did not immediately respond to an after-hours email seeking comment.

Court records show that in Aug. 2017 Williams was charged with felony unlawful use of a weapon for allegedly carrying a handgun in the front of his waistband during a traffic stop on the West Side. Police said in a report that the gun had been reported stolen one month earlier.

A grand jury returned a 12 felony count true bill against Williams. But the Cook County State’s Attorney dropped all charges on May 3, 2018.

Five months after that case was dropped, Williams was charged with a new set of eight weapons felonies for allegedly carrying a handgun in the front of his waistband while riding his bike on the West Side.

----

Last month, Judge Maria Kuriakos-Ciesil sentenced Williams to two year’s probation, 30 hours of community service and 175 days time served in the case.

His attorneys asked for a reduced sentence and, on April 29th, Kuriakos-Ciesil granted the motion by reducing Williams’ punishment to one year of TASC probation and 30 hours of community service.

-------------------------
14 year old shot two men, released without bond or home confinement...


Cook County, IL: 14-Year-Old Charged With Shooting Two, Freed Without Supervision - The Truth About Guns

Welcome to Cook County, Illinois, where crime often has no meaningful consequences. Between a State’s Attorney’s Office reluctant to file charges and judges who mollycoddles defendants, Chicagoland has become the modern Wild West.

*Case in point: a 14-year-old who (reportedly) shot and tried to kill two in a nice uptown neighborhood was released by a judge Friday to his parent with no bond – not even electronic home monitoring.*


The Cook County judge claims the police failed to bring this suspected would-be gang killer (pictured above, right) in front of a judge quickly enough. So the judge, in order to penalize _the police_, released the kid without conditions other than to report to court next week.

Of course, the judge is really only penalizing the community as the accused certainly missed his calling as a choir boy.

The police, on the other hand, said they had concerns about the young man’s safety. Police released images of the suspects to the media in an effort to identify them and the media published them.

*The Chicago mainstream media refer to the accused as a “boy.” Even though this “boy”reportedly shot one man in the back, abdomen, buttocks and groin and the other in the head.*
===========

16 year old shooter released on 10,000 bond.....Cuomo's Raise the age bill for family court let this shooter go free on bail...

Case Of 16-Year-Old Accused Of Shooting Up Bronx Street Prompts Criticism Of NY's Raise The Age Law
https://www.dailywire.com/news/44304/case-16-year-old-accused-shooting-bronx-street-hank-berrien
*Bronx Supreme Court Justice John Collins made Garcia’s release contingent on either $10,000 bail or $25,000 bond, he made bail and he was freed. *

As The New York Post explains, “The law already guarantees that he can’t be held in a jail that also houses adults — and if convicted, his sentencing judge would have to take his age into account.”
--------
On Monday, prosecutor Daniel Defilippi indicated he would try to stop the case from being transferred to Family Court. Assemblywoman Nicole Malliotakis, referring to the case as a “prime example” of the problems with the Raise the Age bill, said, “One of the things we brought up during debate was how this encourages gang recruitment. Gangs can recruit young people to do dirty work because they won’t be treated the same when caught.
------
Residents of the neighborhood acknowledged that the neighborhood has become a frightening place to live; one said, “We don’t go out. We don’t go to the park. I keep my kids in the house. We’re scared.” Another commented, “People don’t feel safe. People shooting in the street like that? No one is safe.” A third commented of the young girl, “She is lucky. Like an angel is watching over her because she was really close.”


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> cnm said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...



I've seen you mention this point a few times now.  The variable that this doesn't account for is time.  As time has passed in those 26 years, I assume the norms have changed or law enforcement has improved, or something culturally has happened to reduce those homicides.  Now I'm sure you'll credit that to more guns = less crime, to which we'll just disagree.

But how about we try looking at something different?  Let's try removing that time variable just to see what happens.  I looked at gun ownership rates by state and gun-related homicides by state.  There was a positive correlation of approximately 0.7, which would be considered a moderate to strong correlation.  That is, generally speaking the more armed citizens there are, the more gun homicides there are.

I'm curious what your take on this is, because it goes directly against what you have been claiming.  More guns = more death.  

Here are the links that I used.  I just did a little spreadsheet with the values.

Gun ownership by state
Firearm death rates in the United States by state - Wikipedia


----------



## Blues Man (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> cnm said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...



When Richmond, VA had Operation Exile in force their murder rate dropped twice as much as comparable urban areas


----------



## Blues Man (Aug 1, 2019)

RealDave said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...


So why not just be honest and say you want to ban all semiautomatic rifles?


----------



## irosie91 (Aug 1, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...




no----if a person really wants to kill ------he will find a way------that's why they are called "criminals"


----------



## iceberg (Aug 1, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> WillHaftawaite said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


SHE BANGS - SHE BANGS!!!

sorry - you made that pop into my head this am.


----------



## iceberg (Aug 1, 2019)

cnm said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > you keep saying "military style" as if that means shit or can really be defined.
> ...


a ruger 10/22 is a low power .22 rifle. it's semi-automatic and you can put large capacity mags in them.

thank you for making my point, dipshit.

now - limit AR15s to 15 round mags and we're cool, right? gun now equals good? something tells me you're about change up the definition AGAIN and AGAIN proving my point.


----------



## iceberg (Aug 1, 2019)

cnm said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > I have the right not to be shot for no reason.
> ...


OH - now MILITARY style comes into play OF WHICH isn't that easy to define since the MILITARY uses ALL styles of guns.

god damn you're a circle-jerk in motion.


----------



## OldLady (Aug 1, 2019)

Olde Europe said:


> EvilEyeFleegle said:
> 
> 
> > As for population..well yes..it is easier to enforce a law in a smaller population...just as a matter of logistics and expense.
> ...





2aguy said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


_They want universal gun registration because that is the last thing they need to ban guns and confiscate them when they get the political power to enact those steps_

This is where your arguments go total fruitcake.  This is not why guns should be registered.  The government has no intention of taking lawfully owned guns from lawful owners.  This argument is complete and total fear mongering and 100% totally untrue, unfounded and deeply Dale-ish.


----------



## cnm (Aug 1, 2019)

M14 Shooter said:


> Based on... what?
> 
> You do understand the enshrinement of constitutional rights necessarily takes certain policy choices off the table - right?


Based on the experience of developed nations.

The Constitution has been amended before and can be again. There is not the will to do so as a sky high firearms homicide rate and regular mass shootings are considered to be an acceptable price to pay for easy access to handguns and assault style rifles.

The mechanism to do so is perfectly accessible as soon as the will is there.


----------



## cnm (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> Australia.....1st world country.


With a very low rate of firearms homicides and mass shootings. A fraction of that of the US.


----------



## cnm (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> cnm said:
> 
> 
> > Oh, as to a specific question you posed, a law that prevented the sale of an assault style weapon in Nevada may well have reduced the number of casualties in the latest mass shooting
> ...


You leave out the wounded. Be that as it may, those 3 dead may well have survived if it had not been legal to sell the weapon to a law abiding owner.


----------



## cnm (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> First...you keep saying Military style..



Military style you invincibly obtuse gun nut.


----------



## cnm (Aug 1, 2019)

iceberg said:


> OH - now MILITARY style comes into play OF WHICH isn't that easy to define since the MILITARY uses ALL styles of guns.


You're an invincibly obtuse gun nut who, because you can't argue ideas argue pointless semantics. I've already defined military style, you ignore it, else you have nothing to say.


----------



## cnm (Aug 1, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> European solutions for American problems are almost always doomed...IMO.


That's because you don't think it's a problem.


----------



## Hugo Furst (Aug 1, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> WillHaftawaite said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...





Slade3200 said:


> I’m not talking about gang bangers



oh....

you want universal checks, except for gangbangers?

When are you people going to get in into your little minds, universal isn't going to work?


----------



## cnm (Aug 1, 2019)

irosie91 said:


> no----if a person really wants to kill ------he will find a way------that's why they are called "criminals"


Absolutely. They'll attack you with a swimming pool. Imagine the drownings if the garlic shooter had used a swimming pool instead. Titanic!


----------



## cnm (Aug 1, 2019)

iceberg said:


> now - limit AR15s to 15 round mags and we're cool, right? gun now equals good? something tells me you're about change up the definition AGAIN and AGAIN proving my point.


Because the AR15 can take large capacity removable mags it should be severely restricted, as should all the other military style semi auto rifles that can similarly take large capacity removable mags. And yes, mags greater than 10 rounds for the Ruger should be banned.


----------



## Blues Man (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> > EvilEyeFleegle said:
> ...


Lawful owners do not have to register guns so the police can take them away from criminals


----------



## Blues Man (Aug 1, 2019)

cnm said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > now - limit AR15s to 15 round mags and we're cool, right? gun now equals good? something tells me you're about change up the definition AGAIN and AGAIN proving my point.
> ...


We don't care what you think about the USA and its laws because you don't live here

tend to your own yard and we'll tend to ours


----------



## Blues Man (Aug 1, 2019)

cnm said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> > no----if a person really wants to kill ------he will find a way------that's why they are called "criminals"
> ...



Knives, clubs, axes, hammers baseball bats, cars, rocks, bricks, bare hands etc etc etc etc

The list of things that can be used to kill is literally endless


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > cnm said:
> ...




Your point has been brought up before.  The theory by anti-gun activists is that regardless of those other factors......More Guns = More Gun crime.   That is where they hang their hat.

So.....the point they miss, and I think you miss....is that over those 26 years.....whether or not normal people owning guns was a factor in reducing gun crime.....

More Guns in the hands of law abiding people did not increase the gun crime rates...

So over that 26 years.....more Americans own and actually carry guns....17.25 million Americans from about 4 million actually being able to legally carry guns.....and the gun crime rates went still went down.

So the core theory is wrong....More Guns did not = More gun crime.

Now, it is true that various factors made the murder rate go down, more police, smarter police tactics and so on.......but that isn't their argument or their point.......

Also, for one thing........if you are being attacked, and you use a gun to stop the attack....that crime didn't happen to you....

Then, I have actual research from various researchers who state that there is a correlation to decreases in interpersonal crime when more people own and carry guns...for example, there are more home invasions in Britain than here in the U.S....why?  When researchers ask criminals in prison, they state they go into empty houses in the U.S. because they don't want to get shot.  In Britain, the criminals don't care about people being home, because they don't have guns...and since they don't have guns, they can be tied up and questioned about where their belongings are...


----------



## iceberg (Aug 1, 2019)

cnm said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > now - limit AR15s to 15 round mags and we're cool, right? gun now equals good? something tells me you're about change up the definition AGAIN and AGAIN proving my point.
> ...


but that's banning the mag, not the gun. 

like i said, when you are confronted with how illogical your statements are, you get all emo and change it up a bit and keep pushing that pile of shit around. i showed you where your definition didn't fit and what do you do? change it up.

this is why i said it can't be easily defined. you went out and tried and got shot out pretty damn quick. now you went from capacity to "military style" to targeting the AR cause it looks mean. yet you can't cite a single trait it has that other guns NOT the AR also share.

so keep replying to me. with every reply you prove me right and yourself wrong.

you can't define this to just a few weapons w/o taking out a vast majority of them.  proven. next up you'll start getting more emo and telling me i want kids to die.


----------



## iceberg (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> XponentialChaos said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



Disarming Realities: As Gun Sales Soar, Gun Crimes Plummet

oops on that argument.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > cnm said:
> ...




Other researchers have done the same thing and found the opposite....and then you get into the chicken and egg problem.....

Are more people getting legal guns, which are different from criminals getting guns, because of the violent crime...or is gun ownership driving up the gun crime rate....

You have to think, that coming from your thought, that normal people having guns, means they are then using those guns for crime....which doesn't make any sense.   Criminals drive the gun crime rate, not normal people.

Here are papers that show that concealed carry permits actually help reduce crime.....not by huge amounts, but they do lower the crime rate....interpersonal crimes...

http://crimeresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Bartley-Cohen-Economic-Inquiry-1998.pdf


_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)

.....we find strong support for the hypothesis that the right-to-carry laws are associated with a decrease in the trend in violent crime rates.....

 Paper........CCW does not increase police deaths...

http://crimeresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Mustard-JLE-Polic-Deaths-Gun-Control.pdf

This paper uses state-level data from 1984–96 to examine how right-to-carry laws and waiting periods affect the felonious deaths of police. Some people oppose concealed weapons carry laws because they believe these laws jeopardize law enforcement officials, who risk their lives to protect the citizenry. This paper strongly rejects this contention. States that allowed law-abiding citizens to carry concealed weapons had a slightly higher likelihood of having a felonious police death and slightly higher police death rates prior to the law. After enactment of the right-to-carry laws, states exhibit a reduced likelihood of having a felonious police death rate and slightly lower rates of police deaths. States that implement waiting periods have slightly lower felonious police death rates both before and after the law. Allowing law-abiding citizens to carry concealed weapons does not endanger the lives of officers and may help reduce their risk of being killed

========

http://johnrlott.tripod.com/tideman.pdf


_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_

However, for all three crime categories the levels in years 2 and 3 after adoption of a right-to-carry law are significantly below the levels in the years before the adoption of the law, which suggests that there is generally a deterrent effect and that it takes about 1 year for this effect to emerge.

=======

http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/323313

*Testing for the Effects of Concealed Weapons Laws: Specification Errors and Robustness**




Carlisle E. Moody
College of William and Mary
 Overall, right‐to‐carry concealed weapons laws tend to reduce violent crime. The effect on property crime is more uncertain. I find evidence that these laws also reduce burglary.
====
http://crimeresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Helland-Tabarrok-Placebo-Laws.pdf
*Using Placebo Laws to Test “More Guns, Less Crime”∗ Eric Helland and Alexander Tabarrok*

We also find, however, that the cross equation restrictions implied by the Lott-Mustard theory are supported.
-----
Surprisingly, therefore, we conclude that there is considerable support for the hypothesis that shall-issue laws cause criminals to substitute away from crimes against persons and towards crimes against property. 
===========
http://johnrlott.tripod.com/Maltz.pdf

_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_

Our results indicated that the direction of effect of the shall-issue law on total SHR homicide rates was similar to that obtained by Lott and Mustard, although the magnitude of the effect was somewhat smaller and was statistically significant at the 7 percent level. In our analysis, which included only counties with a 1977 population of 100,000 or more, laws allowing for concealed weapons were associated with a 6.52 percent reduction in total homicides (Table 2). By comparison, Lott and Mustard found the concealed weapon dummy variable to be associated with a 7.65 percent reduction in total homicides across all counties and a 9 percent reduction in homicides when only large counties (populations of 100,000 or more) were included.43

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

This one shows the benefits, in the billions of CCW laws...

http://johnrlott.tripod.com/Plassmann_Whitley.pdf

*COMMENTS Confirming ìMore Guns, Less Crimeî Florenz Plassmann* & John Whitley** *

CONCLUSION Analyzing county-level data for the entire United States from 1977 to 2000, we find annual reductions in murder rates between 1.5% and 2.3% for each additional year that a right-to-carry law is in effect. For the first five years that such a law is in effect, the total benefit from reduced crimes usually ranges between about $2 and $3 billion per year. The results are very similar to earlier estimates using county-level data from 1977 to 1996. We appreciate the continuing effort that Ayres and Donohue have made in discussing the impact of right-to-carry laws on crime rates. Yet we believe that both the new evidence provided by them as well as our new results show consistently that right-to-carry laws reduce crime and save lives. Unfortunately, a few simple mistakes lead Ayres and Donohue to incorrectly claim that crime rates significantly increase after right-to-carry laws are initially adopted and to misinterpret the significance of their own estimates that examined the year-to-year impact of the law. 

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

http://crimeresearch.org/wp-content...An-Exercise-in-Replication.proof_.revised.pdf

 ~ The Impact of Right-to-Carry Laws on Crime: An Exercise in Replication1

 Carlisle E. Moody College of William and Mary - Department of Economics, Virginia 23187, U.S.A. E-mail: cemood@wm.edu Thomas B. Marvell Justec Research, Virginia 23185, U.S.A. Paul R. Zimmerman U.S. Federal Trade Commission - Bureau of Economics, Washington, D.C., U.S.A. Fasil Alemante College of William and Mary, Virginia 23187, U.S.A.


 Abstract: In an article published in 2011, Aneja, Donohue and Zhang found that shall-issue or right-to-carry (RTC) concealed weapons laws have no effect on any crime except for a positive effect on assault. This paper reports a replication of their basic findings and some corresponding robustness checks, which reveal a serious omitted variable problem. Once corrected for omitted variables, the most robust result, confirmed using both county and state data, is that RTC laws significantly reduce murder. There is no robust, consistent evidence that RTC laws have any significant effect on other violent crimes, including assault. There is some weak evidence that RTC laws increase robbery and assault while decreasing rape. Given that the victim costs of murder and rape are much higher than the costs of robbery and assault, the evidence shows that RTC laws are socially beneficial.

=======

States with lower guns = higher murder....and assault weapon ban pointless..

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13504851.2013.854294

*An examination of the effects of concealed weapons laws and assault weapons bans on state-level murder rates*
Mark Gius

Abstract
The purpose of the present study is to determine the effects of state-level assault weapons bans and concealed weapons laws on state-level murder rates. Using data for the period 1980 to 2009 and controlling for state and year fixed effects, the results of the present study suggest that states with restrictions on the carrying of concealed weapons had higher gun-related murder rates than other states. It was also found that assault weapons bans did not significantly affect murder rates at the state level. These results suggest that restrictive concealed weapons laws may cause an increase in gun-related murders at the state level. The results of this study are consistent with some prior research in this area, most notably Lott and Mustard (1997).





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._


----------



## pismoe (Aug 1, 2019)

cnm said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> > no----if a person really wants to kill ------he will find a way------that's why they are called "criminals"
> ...


----------------------------------------   the swimming pool is just an example and you know it .  Death by cars , vehicles , swimming pools , guns , knives are just the way things sometimes go      ME , i'm not crying about the vehicle deaths and drownings in swimming pool that will happen today .    Some death just happens  and I don't want to restrict FREEDOM in the USA to Stop those deaths CNM .


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

iceberg said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > XponentialChaos said:
> ...




I am grabbing that link...thanks...


----------



## Defiant1 (Aug 1, 2019)

cnm said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > now - limit AR15s to 15 round mags and we're cool, right? gun now equals good? something tells me you're about change up the definition AGAIN and AGAIN proving my point.
> ...




You want to ban boxes with springs in them?


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> > EvilEyeFleegle said:
> ...




And yet history and experience shows the exact opposite....the Germans registered guns in the 1920s.....for safety purposes....they had no intention of confiscating guns.....then the national socialists took over and used those registration lists to confiscate guns......that was in  a period of about 15 years.....

Britain...registered guns and decades later, banned and confiscated them using the lists created by the registration.

Australia, dittos....

New York....registered long guns stating they were only doing it to know how had them....then they banned them, used the lists to know who had them .......

Canada...dittos....France, dittos....

Actual real world experience shows you are wrong...... and anti-gun extremists in the democrat party have made it clear they will ban whatever they want when they get the power to do it......


----------



## pismoe (Aug 1, 2019)

yep , FREEDOM is much more important than SAFETY   CNM !!


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> > EvilEyeFleegle said:
> ...



They don't take them.......New York, Washington State, Colorado simply state it is now illegal to own them......you then have to sell them, hand them over, or you will be a felon.....they know who has the guns from the registration...

Then....whenever you have an interaction with the police...."your neighbor called about your loud music....and, by the way, you are in our records as having a rifle that is banned that you didn't turn in....we are placing you under arrest for felony possession of a banned rifle."   You are stopped for running a red light..."License and registration please.....Ma'am, step out of the car, we are placing you under arrest because you are in our records as having a gun that is banned, that you haven't turned in..." 

That is how they will do it.....


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

cnm said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > Based on... what?
> ...



You have no idea what you are talking about in any way shape or form.   The countries you look at have a different cultural history than the U.S....they were devestated by 2 World Wars which set back their societal development for decades......While the Great Society was destroying minority families here, creating young males without fathers for decades....Europe was recovering from World War 2.....they are now catching up and their welfare states are creating the same violent environment we had going into the 1960s when violent crime spiked here in the U.S.....

You blame guns...it isn't guns...it is the culture of single teenage girls raising young children without fathers....you are now seeing this in Britain where there children are knifing each other all over the place.....that will turn into gun violence in the future...as the British police state they can't stop the flood of illegal guns into the country.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

cnm said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Australia.....1st world country.
> ...




They are behind us in the destruction of the family.....we had high gun ownership and low violence rates going into the 1960s....then the democrat party "Great Society" happened, and single teenage girls began to raise children without fathers.....which led to the spike in crime and violence that didn't end until the mid 1990s......Europe is now entering that phase...their welfare states have now created the same climate we had going into the 1960s.....as seen by their growing rates of violence among their young men.

You don't know what you are talking about.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

cnm said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > First...you keep saying Military style..
> ...




It isn't ....those rifles are not military weapons...and, by the way, military weapons are protected by the U.S. Constitution as explained in the Heller and Miller Decisions as well as the Caetano decisions at the Supreme Court.

What you are saying is that taking the engine out of a Honda Leaf....putting it in an army Humvee body , makes it a military engine......and that is just fucking stupid.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

cnm said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > now - limit AR15s to 15 round mags and we're cool, right? gun now equals good? something tells me you're about change up the definition AGAIN and AGAIN proving my point.
> ...



Magazines have no bearing on the deaths and injuries in a mass shooting....as you have been shown by the actual research....

Russian Polytenic Shooting....20 killed with a 5 shot shotgun.

The reason a mass shooter can kill a lot of people isn't the gun, it is the freedom to kill that they have in a gun free zone where no one can shoot back...you twit.   As soon as someone can point a gun at them....they run away, surrender, or kill themselves.......the time difference allows the killing, not the magazine...you doofus.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

iceberg said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > XponentialChaos said:
> ...




That's my source too.......thanks......


----------



## OldLady (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > Olde Europe said:
> ...



I said "lawfully."  Sounds like the people you used as an examples did not follow the law, did they?
And NO state will completely outlaw guns.  If it is done properly, gun laws will be on a national, not state, level so that people can't "state shop" for the set of rules that allows them to buy a gun outlawed for good reason by their state.


----------



## cnm (Aug 1, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> The list of things that can be used to kill is literally endless


*Swimming pools!*


----------



## Blues Man (Aug 1, 2019)

cnm said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > The list of things that can be used to kill is literally endless
> ...



No wonder sheep outnumber people where you're from.  They are obviously the most intelligent creature there


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...




And you are being silly.

I showed you actual expierence in gun banning and confiscation and they all began with registration....where people like you said, " we aren't going to confiscate your guns...we just want to know who has them...."  Years or decades later.....turn in your guns or you will be a felon...

Sorry, seen that, done that......we will fight it here.


----------



## cnm (Aug 1, 2019)

Defiant1 said:


> You want to ban boxes with springs in them?


No, you guys can keep killing each other off in mass murders for all I care, but effectively banning the rifles to which the boxes with springs attach will reduce mass shooting fatalities where rifles are used.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

cnm said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > The list of things that can be used to kill is literally endless
> ...




Vegas shooter, 2 AR-15  rifles firing from a concealed, fortified, elevated position into a tightly packed crowd of over 22,000 people....58 murdered.

A muslim terrorist in Nice, France using a rental truck murdered 86 and injured 435.

Trucks are deadler than rifles, even when the rifle is fired into a crowd of 22,000 people...


----------



## cnm (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> If it is done properly, gun laws will be on a national, not state, level


Exactly. Pointless otherwise.


----------



## iceberg (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...


what would you propose to put at a national level vs state?

you'd be hard pressed to tell someone from CA they now have the same gun laws as Texas or Montana or something. i don't see it as a possibility for states to give up the control of guns or things of that nature. in the end, that also just puts more power to the national gov and they have far too much of it as it is today.


----------



## cnm (Aug 1, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> The list of things that can be used to kill is literally endless


*Swimming pools!

Trucks!*


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

cnm said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > You want to ban boxes with springs in them?
> ...




I see you are ignoring me....

Listen...dumb shit....

5 shot, pump action shotgun....no magazine....you twit...gun free zone with the police station across the street.....

20 killed, 70 injured......

Kerch Polytechnic College massacre - Wikipedia

The *Kerch Polytechnic College massacre* was a school shooting and bomb attack that occurred in Kerch, Crimea, on 17 October 2018.[2][3] Twenty victims were shot to death and 70 others wounded;


----------



## Defiant1 (Aug 1, 2019)

cnm said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > You want to ban boxes with springs in them?
> ...



But you said you were ok with a 10rd mag.


----------



## cnm (Aug 1, 2019)

*Concrete mixers!*


----------



## iceberg (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


the other day i was asked by Slade3200  why we can't talk over this in a civil fashion. this was why. once rules are set, the left (generalization i know and i welcome examples of the right doing this as well) will go for "1 statue" and if given that, will not stop at that 1 thing and push for more.

we've seen that with the "we just want this one statue gone" that spread to city street names, every south-style statue and even a religious cross memorial that was once on private land came under fire from this "we just want 1 statue taken down" crowd.

given the history of "give us what we want and we're happy" turning into so much more, you'll be hard pressed to get people into a room to hammer this out in a "civilized" fashion.


----------



## cnm (Aug 1, 2019)

Defiant1 said:


> But you said you were ok with a 10rd mag.


Where?


----------



## iceberg (Aug 1, 2019)

Defiant1 said:


> cnm said:
> 
> 
> > Defiant1 said:
> ...


now did he go change the rules again?

god damn i hate being right so often this early in the morning.


----------



## OldLady (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


So you admit you'll be a criminal if things don't go your way.


----------



## OldLady (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> cnm said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


Trucks can be stopped with cement curbs.  Bullets can't.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...




Yes.....if you don't hand over your Constitutionally protected gun you will now be a felon.....never having used it for a crime....you will now be a criminal.   That is as fascist as it gets.......which is why we don't trust people like you....


----------



## cnm (Aug 1, 2019)

cnm said:


> And yes, mags greater than 10 rounds for the Ruger should be banned.


Yeah, I'll let 10 round removable mags for the Ruger pass. That's where my line is drawn.


----------



## iceberg (Aug 1, 2019)

pismoe said:


> yep , FREEDOM is much more important than SAFETY   CNM !!


you'd be pretty safe in a 10x10 solidarity cell.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > cnm said:
> ...



No, trucks can't, you can't put cement curbs every 10 feet in a road way......

Trucks are deadlier than rifles as Nice and Vegas show.  According to you, we now must ban all trucks....exept, of course for the government and military...they get to keep their trucks...hard to transport people to the mass grave sights in Smart Cars...


----------



## iceberg (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...


this can be easily flipped - "so you'll admit these lists can be used to take away the very guns you said you're not coming after"?


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

cnm said:


> cnm said:
> 
> 
> > And yes, mags greater than 10 rounds for the Ruger should be banned.
> ...




The guy in Parkland used 10 round magazines to murder 18 people you doofus....you asshats will not stop at 10 round magazines....

The Russian shooter used a 5 shot shotgun to murder 20 people....you won't stop with pump action shotguns either....or any gun.


----------



## iceberg (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > cnm said:
> ...


not any truck worth a shit. i've got an 01 dodge. i previously had an 01 dodge 4x4. i promise you i proved time and again curbs were pointless. NOT to run over people but just in general to get where i wanted to go.


----------



## OldLady (Aug 1, 2019)

iceberg said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


All laws regarding sale and background checks and registration of guns should apply to every purchase in the country.  The database that is checked needs much improvement before it will be accurate and comprehensive.  That also needs to be a nation-wide effort because not all states are contributing, and not all Courts are, either.
Obviously, what guns are allowed and which are not MUST be nationwide.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

iceberg said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...




Yeah...but still....to run over people....maybe left wingers?


----------



## iceberg (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> cnm said:
> 
> 
> > cnm said:
> ...


they say they only want small changes. trouble is, each change builds off the last til in the end, their "changes" are nothing short of total control


----------



## cnm (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> Trucks can be stopped with cement curbs.


Nothing will stop a swimming pool. Oh, well, a desert, maybe.


----------



## cnm (Aug 1, 2019)

The gun nuts keep going on about 'stopping'. The idea of 'reducing' is dismissed as not worthy of consideration.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...




You have been shown over and over again that background checks, and registration do nothing to stop criminals or mass shooters....

Do you understand that criminals cannot be prosecuted for not registering their illegal guns?  Do you understand that?   Haynes v United States....Supreme Court ruling...

Registration does nothing to stop criminals or mass shooters, and only sets up future confiscation....

do you understand that?

Criminals use straw buyers who can pass any background check, or they steal the gun.

Mass shooters can pass any background check, the Pulse Night Club shooter passed a background check for his job, one for each gun he purchased, he had a year long detailed FBI investigation, and FBI undercover approach and was interviewed by the FBI 2 times.....and passed all of that with flying colors...


----------



## cnm (Aug 1, 2019)

iceberg said:


> they say they only want small changes. trouble is, each change builds off the last til in the end, their "changes" are nothing short of total control


Paranoid raving loonies who want to take on the might of the US defence forces with an AR15 and a Glock will put a stop to that.


----------



## iceberg (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...


now - here is where we agree. at the federal level we *do* need to ensure that the background checks are in fact comprehensive. today they're not really. after you buy a couple of guns you know to answer all questions YES | NO and i think only 1 is a "yes" (are you a citizen" and the rest, if you answer YES it's a flag. so just don't answer it.

DO YOU DO DRUGS???    YES | NO  - who in their right mind will check yes to that?

we have seen instances where people got by a background check. several times. the orlando dude who went nuts in the gay club, he got past a background check and never should have. if i remember correctly there was a military flag on there that didn't show up.

so fixing this WOULD help stop the violence. stopping things like the gun show loophole and less capacity mags - well they've not shown to stop a thing so those are pointless to me.


----------



## Blues Man (Aug 1, 2019)

cnm said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > The list of things that can be used to kill is literally endless
> ...


yup the sheep are definitively smarter than you


----------



## cnm (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> You have been shown over and over again that background checks, and registration do nothing to stop criminals or mass shooters....


That's why handguns and assault style rifles need to be taken out of circulation in order to reduce the firearms homicide and mass shooting rates.


----------



## iceberg (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...


not going to run over anyone regardless of their beliefs. unless of course their belief is i need to die and i'm simply defending myself. 

besides, doing the body work and paint on my rebuilt dodge would be pretty expensive.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

cnm said:


> The gun nuts keep going on about 'stopping'. The idea of 'reducing' is dismissed as not worthy of consideration.




No.....your ideas about "reducing" are not worthy of consideration.

Actual ideas that work.....a 30 year sentence for using a gun in the commission of an actual crime on top of whatever sentence you get for the crime...that works.....how do we know?

Japan has a life sentence for using a gun in a crime....their criminals stopped using guns except in the most important killings...and the shooter knows they are going to prison for life....

That is how you "reduce" gun crime....you lock up violent gun criminals....

Our problem isn't guns....it is people like you supporting democrats who keep letting repeat gun offenders out of prison over and over again.


----------



## iceberg (Aug 1, 2019)

cnm said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > they say they only want small changes. trouble is, each change builds off the last til in the end, their "changes" are nothing short of total control
> ...


great. show me those specific people. i got no use for your flaming strawmen.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

iceberg said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...




But......is it tempting even a teeny, tiny little bit?


----------



## iceberg (Aug 1, 2019)

cnm said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > You have been shown over and over again that background checks, and registration do nothing to stop criminals or mass shooters....
> ...


and again - you've yet to define "assault style" that doesn't bleed into the simple 22 rifle every teen in the country has owned at least a few of in their lives to shoot squirrels with.

your circle jerk is old dude.


----------



## iceberg (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


nope. now if some asshole cuts me off in traffic i may rage on them but no idea bout their politics.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

cnm said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > You have been shown over and over again that background checks, and registration do nothing to stop criminals or mass shooters....
> ...




5 shot, pump action shotgun.....20 killed 70 wounded..

Kerch Polytechnic College massacre - Wikipedia
==================
SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class research journals

Large-Capacity Magazines and the Casualty Counts in Mass Shootings: The Plausibility of Linkages by Gary  Kleck :: SSRN

*I.*

Do bans on large-capacity magazines (LCMs) for semiautomatic firearms have significant potential for reducing the number of deaths and injuries in mass shootings? 
========
*In sum, in nearly all LCM-involved mass shootings, the time it takes to reload a detachable magazine is no greater than the average time between shots that the shooter takes anyway when not reloading. *

*Consequently, there is no affirmative evidence that reloading detachable magazines slows mass shooters’ rates of fire, and thus no affirmative evidence that the number of victims who could escape the killers due to additional pauses in the shooting is increased by the shooter’s need to change magazines.*
*==========*
The most common rationale for an effect of LCM use is that they allow mass killers to fire many rounds without reloading. 
*LCMs are used is less than 1/3 of 1% of mass shootings. *
News accounts of 23 shootings in which more than six people were killed or wounded and LCMs were used, occurring in the U.S. in 1994-2013, were examined.
 There was only one incident in which the shooter may have been stopped by bystander intervention when he tried to reload. 
*In all of these 23 incidents the shooter possessed either multiple guns or multiple magazines, meaning that the shooter, even if denied LCMs, could have continued firing without significant interruption by either switching loaded guns or by changing smaller loaded magazines with only a 2-4 second delay for each magazine change. *
*Finally, the data indicate that mass shooters maintain slow enough rates of fire such that the time needed to reload would not increase the time between shots and thus the time available for prospective victims to escape.*

*--------*

We did not employ the oft-used definition of “mass murder” as a homicide in which four or more victims were killed, because most of these involve just four to six victims (Duwe 2007), which could therefore have involved as few as six rounds fired, a number that shooters using even ordinary revolvers are capable of firing without reloading.

 LCMs obviously cannot help shooters who fire no more rounds than could be fired without LCMs, so the inclusion of “nonaffectable” cases with only four to six victims would dilute the sample, reducing the percent of sample incidents in which an LCM might have affected the number of casualties.

 Further, had we studied only homicides with four or more dead victims, drawn from the FBI’s Supplementary Homicide Reports, we would have missed cases in which huge numbers of people were shot, and huge numbers of rounds were fired, but three or fewer of the victims died.


 For example, in one widely publicized shooting carried out in Los Angeles on February 28, 1997, two bank robbers shot a total of 18 people - surely a mass shooting by any reasonable standard (Table 1). 

Yet, because none of the people they shot died, this incident would not qualify as a mass murder (or even murder of any kind).

 Exclusion of such incidents would bias the sample against the proposition that LCM use increases the number of victims by excluding incidents with large numbers of victims. We also excluded shootings in which more than six persons were shot over the entire course of the incident but shootings occurred in multiple locations with no more than six people shot in any one of the locations, and substantial periods of time intervened between episodes of shooting. An example is the series of killings committed by Rodrick Dantzler on July 7, 2011. 

Once eligible incidents were identified, we searched through news accounts for details related to whether the use of LCMs could have influenced the casualty counts.

 Specifically, we searched for 

(1) the number of magazines in the shooter’s immediate possession, 

(2) the capacity of the largest magazine, 

(3) the number of guns in the shooter’s immediate possession during the incident, 

(4) the types of guns possessed, 

(5) whether the shooter reloaded during the incident, 

(6) the number of rounds fired,

 (7) the duration of the shooting from the first shot fired to the last, and (8) whether anyone intervened to stop the shooter. 

Findings How Many Mass Shootings were Committed Using LCMs?

 We identified 23 total incidents in which more than six people were shot at a single time and place in the U.S. from 1994 through 2013 and that were known to involve use of any magazines with capacities over ten rounds.


 Table 1 summarizes key details of the LCMinvolved mass shootings relevant to the issues addressed in this paper. 

(Table 1 about here) What fraction of all mass shootings involve LCMs?

There is no comprehensive listing of all mass shootings available for the entire 1994-2013 period, but the most extensive one currently available is at the Shootingtracker.com website, which only began its coverage in 2013. 

-----


-----
The offenders in LCM-involved mass shootings were also known to have reloaded during 14 of the 23 (61%) incidents with magazine holding over 10 rounds. 

The shooters were known to have not reloaded in another two of these 20 incidents and it could not be determined if they reloaded in the remaining seven incidents. 

Thus, even if the shooters had been denied LCMs, we know that most of them definitely would have been able to reload smaller detachable magazines without interference from bystanders since they in fact did change magazines. 

The fact that this percentage is less than 100% should not, however, be interpreted to mean that the shooters were unable to reload in the other nine incidents. 

It is possible that the shooters could also have reloaded in many of these nine shootings, but chose not to do so, or did not need to do so in order to fire all the rounds they wanted to fire. This is consistent with the fact that there has been at most only one mass shootings in twenty years in which reloading a semiautomatic firearm might have been blocked by bystanders intervening and thereby stopping the shooter from doing all the shooting he wanted to do. All we know is that in two incidents the shooter did not reload, and news accounts of seven other incidents did not mention whether the offender reloaded.

----

For example, a story in the Hartford Courant about the Sandy Hook elementary school killings in 2012 was headlined “Shooter Paused, and Six Escaped,” the text asserting that as many as six children may have survived because the shooter paused to reload (December 23, 2012). ''

The author of the story, however, went on to concede that this was just a speculation by an unnamed source, and that it was also possible that some children simply escaped when the killer was shooting other children. 

There was no reliable evidence that the pauses were due to the shooter reloading, rather than his guns jamming or the shooter simply choosing to pause his shooting while his gun was still loaded. 

The plausibility of the “victims escape” rationale depends on the average rates of fire that shooters in mass shootings typically maintain.

 If they fire very fast, the 2-4 seconds it takes to change box-type detachable magazines could produce a slowing of the rate of fire that the shooters otherwise would have maintained without the magazine changes, increasing the average time between rounds fired and potentially allowing more victims to escape during the betweenshot intervals.

 On the other hand, if mass shooters fire their guns with the average interval between shots lasting more than 2-4 seconds, the pauses due to additional magazine changes would be no longer than the pauses the shooter typically took between shots even when not reloading. 

In that case, there would be no more opportunity for potential victims to escape than there would have been without the additional magazine changes

---


----------



## Blues Man (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...



Even the illegal purchases?

LAw abiding people do not have to register guns so the police can take illegally possessed guns from criminals


----------



## iceberg (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...


criminals will always find a way to get a gun. that is a given. but since we have seen people pass a background check who should not have, i would think looking here would be something of value much moreso than attacking guns you can't define and demanding people register them.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

iceberg said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...




See...that is what makes us different from them....... their way always ends in mass graves.......it may take a while...but mass graves are always the end point...


----------



## Blues Man (Aug 1, 2019)

cnm said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > You have been shown over and over again that background checks, and registration do nothing to stop criminals or mass shooters....
> ...



yes because getting killed by a gun is so much worse than getting beaten to death with a wrench


----------



## iceberg (Aug 1, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...


and a criminal isn't going to register their gun. hence that argument is a feel good do nothing argument to me.

improving the background checks i would be for.


----------



## Blues Man (Aug 1, 2019)

iceberg said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...



And even those can be gotten around.


----------



## iceberg (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


i think we have a lot more in common with "the other side" than we want to admit.

i also don't think OldLady  wants mass graves - just gun violence to stop. since stopping the violence is a huge varied topic, i don't think it's fair to go from wanting the violence and killings to stop = wanting mass graves.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

iceberg said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...



And if the criminal is caught with an unregistered gun, they can't be prosecuted for non registration.......violation of their 5th Amendment protection....

Meanwhile, John, Jane Citizen......caught with an unregistered gun.....felons....lose their job, future decent employment, lawyers fees, likely their homes....


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

iceberg said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...




Yes....she just wants gun violence to stop.....but she gives power to the other kind of left winger....Friedrich Hayek discussed this in his book "Road to Serfdom" where he talked about why socialist countries alway end up with totalitarians in power.....


----------



## iceberg (Aug 1, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


so can walls but people still want them enough to "go to war" so to speak.

again the orlando shooter should not have passed his background check. we found that out later about a few of the mass shooters. it won't stop all but it would do a better job at flagging those who go that route. i find this something to be more useful than banning weapons you can't define.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

iceberg said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...




Registering criminals.....and keeping actual gun criminals locked up..... we already register criminals but the democrats keep letting the repeat gun offenders out of prison...that is the real problem...not guns.


----------



## OldLady (Aug 1, 2019)

iceberg said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


Curb was the wrong word.






I guess they call them "bollards," and don't waste your breath trying to convince me that your truck will run over that.


----------



## iceberg (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


well i won't speak for her but i don't think she is one who will take one step in order to get another later. so i see this as taking a generalization and applying it to her. but as a starting point, you'll start with people after what you are after and go from there. but that doesn't mean you can or would take the entire trip with that person. 

we all find our stopping points along the way.


----------



## Blues Man (Aug 1, 2019)

iceberg said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...



Background checks will never be a predictive tool.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...




I wouldn't have to....you run the bike guy over in the street....


----------



## Defiant1 (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...




And if you could ban the guns you wanted, how about the millions that we already have?
And the millions upon millions of magazines we already have?


----------



## iceberg (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...


HUGE LEGOS!!! 

ok - that would have jacked up my truck.    but those are not something you can put everywhere and in this pic you can see a truck would be able to go to either side of them. these are used for huge events where the barrier is necessary and removed when done. killer would just need to wait a few days or choose a crowded street that can't afford street legos.


----------



## Blues Man (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...


so are you going to pay for putting those things everywhere?


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...




The actual predictive tool is the first, second, third arrest when the criminal is caught over and over again with an illegal gun.......that guy will end up killing someone......and they keep being released by the democrats over and over again...


----------



## OldLady (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


Tell me how the 5th Amendment stops us from being prosecuted for driving an unregistered vehicle, please.
And it sounds to me as if John and Jane should have followed the law enacted by duly elected legislators.


----------



## iceberg (Aug 1, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


didn't say it would predict a thing. just saying that if we could flag someone who should not have a gun at the time of purchase, it forces them to another method at least.


----------



## Blues Man (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...


You don't have the right to operate a vehicle on public roads.

It is a privilege granted by the states that can be subject to any requirement the state demands and it can also be revoked at any time for any reason

see the difference?


----------



## OldLady (Aug 1, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...


That wasn't my point.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...




I cited the Supreme Court decision.....a criminal cannot be prosecuted for not registering their illegal gun...since doing so is self incrimination...which is a violation of the 5th Amendment protection against self incrimination.....

Haynes v. United States - Wikipedia

As with many other 5th amendment cases, felons and others prohibited from possessing firearms could not be compelled to incriminate themselves through registration.[3][4]


----------



## iceberg (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...


and another part is enforcing the laws we have vs. using excuses to let people go. less the non violent criminals out or find another way to deal with non-violent crime and let's figure out how to prosecute and punish those who do these actions.

there *are* things we can do but we have to stop being 100% on the defense when ideas are suggested. i get why people are. i agree with a lot of it. but now what? throw hands up and say "lost cause" or find a way through a bad problem?

i'll go with #2 and try.


----------



## Blues Man (Aug 1, 2019)

iceberg said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...



So how much privacy does one have to give up to exercise his second amendment rights?  And shouldn't that standard be applied to all rights?


----------



## iceberg (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...


his point is more how practical this would be to implement. while i agree it would stop a guy with a truck RIGHT THERE - you won't find too many cities putting these up as a general rule to in effect stop idiots in trucks.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

iceberg said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...




Didn't say don't try, that is why I vote against every democrat....their policies are the ones keeping criminals on the streets.


----------



## iceberg (Aug 1, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


what privacy are you giving up when you buy a gun now?

i don't believe everything that should be on a background check is there.

Disarming Realities: As Gun Sales Soar, Gun Crimes Plummet

_And then there are the people who slip through the cracks and obtain guns they should have been barred from possessing — sometimes with deadly consequences. The gunmen in the Sutherland Springs, Texas, church shooting, Charleston, South Carolina, church massacre, and Virginia Tech rampage each had a history that banned them from owning firearms. Yet none were stopped, because of omissions and loopholes in the system._

what i am saying is - we have something we *can* do that would potentially stop events that took place otherwise. while yes they could have gotten their guns from other places, this flag would be raised and depending on why they are banned from buying guns, watch them for a bit and see if they're doing anything to flag. 

so again - if this info was supposed to be a part of their background, what is wrong with fixing what we have so it works vs letting it sit proven to be broken? i'll need a link from a valid background check to the loss of privacy cause i don't see it from here.


----------



## Blues Man (Aug 1, 2019)

iceberg said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...



None my criminal record is public info

The Orlando shooter passed his background check so you must think his criminal record isn't enough information.  WHat other information would you want to be used besides what is public information?


----------



## OldLady (Aug 1, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


Which brings me back to my initial point.  Eliminate the Second Amendment and the same can be said of owning guns.


----------



## Blues Man (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...



Yeah you can ride your unicorn to the party after the second is repealed.

If repealing the second was even remotely viable it would have been tried by now


----------



## iceberg (Aug 1, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


then why did this history on their background checks get missed? i'm not asking for more to be added, i'm asking for what should be there to simply be there.


----------



## Blues Man (Aug 1, 2019)

iceberg said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...


What history?

What exactly was not on his background check that you want to be?


----------



## iceberg (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...



not slamming you here oldlady, but you just went from - as i read it - working on background check improvement to getting rid of the 2nd amendment.

that is a perfect illustration of my point - people go from reasonable to impossible very quickly. we'll never get anywhere if the most extreme thing you can do is your 2nd move, right after "can we all just get along" is found to be a "no".


----------



## iceberg (Aug 1, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


the link i provided goes into a lot of that. i'll need to go into the history forbes is referring to that was left out to know for sure.  the article says that each had a history that should have been on there but it wasn't for XYZ reason. i agree we'd next need to find out what should have been there and why it wasn't and determine if a corrective action needs to be taken.

if you read the entire article, it also talks about lower gun violence in a time gun sales are soaring - that also contradicts the arguments of many anti-gunners in here.

ok - followed one and found this:

In 2012 Assault, Texas Gunman Broke Skull of Infant Stepson
After his confinement, Mr. Kelley was forced out of the military with a bad conduct discharge. The Air Force said the conviction should have barred Mr. Kelley from owning any guns. Instead, law enforcement officials say, he bought several.
-----

there's more that was on his criminal record - but why was none of this enough to raise a flag that selling this guy a gun was a bad idea? how did his discharge NOT get onto his public record?


----------



## OldLady (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


It is not "fascist."  It is sane.


----------



## RealDave (Aug 1, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


All that accept a magazine.

I have a semi-automatic shotgun.  Plugged to 3 but could hold 5.


----------



## OldLady (Aug 1, 2019)

iceberg said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...


There is a lot of work that needs to be done to that database.  Hopefully, the military is now reporting domestic cases, after that fiasco, but I'm not sure they are.


----------



## Blues Man (Aug 1, 2019)

RealDave said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...



No reason to ban magazine fed weapons whatsoever because 99.9999% of them are never used to commit any crime


----------



## Blues Man (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...



So now it's sane to take rights away from people who have never and will never commit a crime?


----------



## iceberg (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


yea, i'm not advocating we add stuff at this point. but what should be there NEEDS to be there. unsure why anyone would disagree but open to thoughts and their experiences behind it to better understand the view.


----------



## iceberg (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...


again - you went from simply wanting the violence to stop to now calling it "sane" we get rid of the 2nd amendment.

this is why we can't have nice things.


----------



## Blues Man (Aug 1, 2019)

iceberg said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...


so you won't advocate adding stuff but the stuff that you think isn't there should be there?


----------



## RealDave (Aug 1, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


What are they used for that requires a detachable magazine that could not be accomplished without a built in, limited size magazine.


----------



## iceberg (Aug 1, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...


i don't know enough about it to say. conversations like this is where i try and learn from people talking factually, not emotionally. but we have seen as illustrated by this case that people do get by a background check that should not and gave specific examples of what was left off the check.

i would like to understand why it was left off? at this point no - i'm not advocating adding more to it, but enforcing what is there or should be there as a first step. however, is this and the other stories i'm reading are correct, why is this information not on their background for just such a purpose?

if there are valid reasons to leave off their violent criminal record and/or dishonorable discharge, let me know so i can understand and learn. i have no "final position" on this just yet cause i don't know enough to say. from what i do know, it would seem we can simply ensure the db is correct and that alone would have prevented people from buying guns initially. whether or not that would have stopped the crime or just sent them elsewhere is another matter.


----------



## Blues Man (Aug 1, 2019)

RealDave said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...



Doesn't matter.  What matters is how they are actually used now and 99.999% magazine fed firearms will never be used to commit any crimes.

The fact that a minuscule fraction of people will use a gun for violence is not reason enough to put restrictions on everyone


----------



## Old Yeller (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...






OldLady said:


> And NO state will completely outlaw guns. If it is done properly, gun laws will be on a national, not state, level so that people can't "state shop" for the set of rules that allows them to buy a gun outlawed for good reason by their state.



Heroin is banned Nationally yet Tons pour over the open Border. Guns would do the same if there was Peso to be made?


----------



## M14 Shooter (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> But how about we try looking at something different?  Let's try removing that time variable just to see what happens.  I looked at gun ownership rates by state and gun-related homicides by state.  There was a positive correlation of approximately 0.7, which would be considered a moderate to strong correlation.  That is, generally speaking the more armed citizens there are, the more gun homicides there are.


Interesting. 
Explain the 50% drop in US gun-related homicides 1993-2014, while the number of guns increased 22% over the same period.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> This is where your arguments go total fruitcake.  This is not why guns should be registered.


Ok...  why should guns be registered?


> The government has no intention of taking lawfully owned guns from lawful owners


"The government" may not.
The anti-gun left CERTAINLY does.
Why should we think otherwise?


----------



## pismoe (Aug 1, 2019)

Old Yeller said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


-------------------------------------  yeah Old Yellar , yep !!


----------



## M14 Shooter (Aug 1, 2019)

cnm said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > Based on... what?
> ...


An excellent post hoc fallacy - and thus, a ineffective answer.


> > You do understand the enshrinement of constitutional rights necessarily takes certain policy choices off the table - right?
> 
> 
> The Constitution has been amended before and can be again.


Until it is, your suggestions - insipid as they are - are off the table,
You understand the 2nd was put in place because those who created it knew there's be people  like you  - right?


----------



## M14 Shooter (Aug 1, 2019)

cnm said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > First...you keep saying Military style..
> ...


So...  You'd ban this.....






But not this.







What would that accomplish/
How?


----------



## M14 Shooter (Aug 1, 2019)

cnm said:


> Because the AR15 can take large capacity removable mags it should be severely restricted, as should all the other military style semi auto rifles that can similarly take large capacity removable mags. And yes, mags greater than 10 rounds for the Ruger should be banned.


You cannot demonstrate a factual, rational basis for any of this.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Aug 1, 2019)

cnm said:


> No, you guys can keep killing each other off in mass murders for all I care, but effectively banning the rifles to which the boxes with springs attach will reduce mass shooting fatalities where rifles are used.


Absent the use of  _post-hoc_ fallacies, you cannot support this statement .


----------



## M14 Shooter (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> Trucks can be stopped with cement curbs.  Bullets can't.


   
Why do they make pillboxes and bunkers out of concrete?


----------



## M14 Shooter (Aug 1, 2019)

cnm said:


> cnm said:
> 
> 
> > And yes, mags greater than 10 rounds for the Ruger should be banned.
> ...


You cannot demonstrate the necessity for, and the efficacy of, such a ban.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> [
> Which brings me back to my initial point.  Eliminate the Second Amendment and the same can be said of owning guns.


Good luck with that.


----------



## OldLady (Aug 1, 2019)

iceberg said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


Your comment makes no sense to me.  There is nothing crazy about deleting an amendment which is outdated and no longer applies to our society.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

iceberg said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...




I agree......we don't need more rules, we need to implement what we have....if that was the point....the actual point is getting guns banned and confiscated so the actual implementation against actual criminals isn't the focus.....

But, again, I agree......criminals need to be in that dumb data base for the background checks that won't catch them...I will give the other side that....if they leave us alone


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...




The First Amendment the same thing.....government should be able to control whatever we say, and for safety purposes, they should be able to search and seize any property they thing might be dangerous, and they should be able to bring you in for questioning, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, on the chance that at some point, you might commit a crime.....

I see where you are going with this, and I like it...


----------



## iceberg (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...


There is if you do it right after saying you are not coming for guns.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

RealDave said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...




Yes....and a 5 shot shotgun was used to murder 20 people in Russia, 12 people at the D.C Naval yard....so according to your logic it too needs to be banned.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...



No....it is fascist..... disarm people and they make less trouble for the government...easier to handle them....I see where you are coming from...sounds great.  Just ask the people in Venezuela...


----------



## iceberg (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...


That's the flip side. You won't get just what YOU want removed. You are opening up the table to change a LOT of shit and we simply are not mature enough today to tackle that issue.


----------



## RealDave (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...



How many if those people had a AR-15?


----------



## RealDave (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...


 Use your free speech to incite a riot & see what happens.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

RealDave said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...




In Gilroy?  3 SKS rifle shooter stopped by someone with a gun.

SKS rifle used by the Bernie Bro at the Republican baseball practice...0 killed...stopped by people at the scene with guns......

20 killed in Russia with a pump action shotgun.

12 killed at the Navy Yard with a pump action shotgun

32 killed at Virginia Tech with 2 pistols

24 killed in Luby's Cafe with 2 pistols.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

RealDave said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...




Exactly, which is why the 1st Amendment is also outdated......speech is far too dangerous to allow people to use it freely.....strict controls over speech, including public marches, private computers, email, tweets....all need to be prior approved by the government to make sure no one is using them for crimes or dangerous activities..

I see where you are going....I like it....


----------



## RealDave (Aug 1, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...



It does matter.

To ban something that leads to mass killings that  has no other use is a nobrainer.

So what can't to do with a built in smaller magazine that you can do with a detachable larger magazine?



.


----------



## RealDave (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


As usual you turn to the ridiculous.  This is what happens when you have no real argument.


----------



## RealDave (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


 
In Gilroy, in DC Not "someone" but a trained police officer.

What the fuck makes you think trained law enforcement carrying a gun is the same as one of you whackjobs carrying a gun?  You have little training on handing the weapon and no training of a shooter situation.

Yet another one opf yiour srtyupud asrgumebts.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> There is nothing crazy about deleting an amendment which is outdated and no longer applies to our society.


The need for the right to keep and bear arms applies today as it did in 1791; the protections provided for it by the 2nd are FAR more necessary now than ever in our history.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Aug 1, 2019)

RealDave said:


> It does matter.
> To ban something that leads to mass killings that  has no other use is a nobrainer.



Look how cute you are, thinking 'assault weapons' have no use other than mass killings.




.[/QUOTE]


----------



## M14 Shooter (Aug 1, 2019)

RealDave said:


> In Gilroy, in DC Not "someone" but a trained police officer.


Wait...
You REALLY think only a "trained police officer" could stop the Gilroy shooter?


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> Your point has been brought up before.  The theory by anti-gun activists is that regardless of those other factors......More Guns = More Gun crime.   That is where they hang their hat.
> 
> So.....the point they miss, and I think you miss....is that over those 26 years.....whether or not normal people owning guns was a factor in reducing gun crime.....
> 
> ...



I don't think I got a clear answer so I'll keep this one short and more direct.

I don't want to discuss the 26 year time period, which I consider an extraneous variable.

Removing that variable from the discussion, it's a fact that states with more gun ownership have more gun homicides.  Why is that?

It's not even a low correlation.  It's a moderate to high correlation.  Very distinct.


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> Other researchers have done the same thing and found the opposite....and then you get into the chicken and egg problem.....
> 
> Are more people getting legal guns, which are different from criminals getting guns, because of the violent crime...or is gun ownership driving up the gun crime rate....
> 
> ...



Whoa, that's a lot of text for something I didn't say.  I didn't say anything about gun crime rate.  I'm specifically linking *gun ownership rate* to* homicides*.  

It's a fact that these two measures have a moderate to high positive correlation.


----------



## OldLady (Aug 1, 2019)

iceberg said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...


?  I still don't understand what connection you're making that is so damning.  But okay.


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 1, 2019)

M14 Shooter said:


> XponentialChaos said:
> 
> 
> > But how about we try looking at something different?  Let's try removing that time variable just to see what happens.  I looked at gun ownership rates by state and gun-related homicides by state.  There was a positive correlation of approximately 0.7, which would be considered a moderate to strong correlation.  That is, generally speaking the more armed citizens there are, the more gun homicides there are.
> ...



I answered this in the part that you cut out.

_"The variable that this doesn't account for is time. As time has passed in those 26 years, I assume the norms have changed or law enforcement has improved, or something culturally has happened to reduce those homicides. Now I'm sure you'll credit that to more guns = less crime, to which we'll just disagree."
_
In short, I think it's an extraneous variable and I know we'll disagree on that.  But that's why I'm focusing on the data _without_ that variable, and in doing so, there is a distinct positive correlation between gun ownership and gun homicides.


----------



## OldLady (Aug 1, 2019)

M14 Shooter said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > There is nothing crazy about deleting an amendment which is outdated and no longer applies to our society.
> ...


No, you just want to keep your guns.  It's lucky for you that a powerful organization like the NRA comes up with all these snazzy arguments for you.


----------



## iceberg (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...


1. No we are not coming for your guns
2. Let's do away with the 2nd amendment. 

Nothing more I can say.


----------



## Slade3200 (Aug 1, 2019)

irosie91 said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


Agreed, but that doesn’t apply to everybody and every situation


----------



## M14 Shooter (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> I answered this in the part that you cut out.
> _"The variable that this doesn't account for is time. As time has passed in those 26 years, I assume the norms have changed or law enforcement has improved, or something culturally has happened to reduce those homicides._


I see.  You _assume _-something- explains how the dramatic decline of gun-related murders, concurrent with a wholesale in the number of guns does not negate your argument.
SOLID reasoning there_. 
_


> In short, I think it's an extraneous variable and I know we'll disagree on that.


You;re arguing more guns = more gun murders.
The wholesale increase in the number of guns is as far from extraneous to your argument as you can get.

So, again:
Explain the 50% drop in US gun-related homicides 1993-2014, while the number of guns increased 22% over the same period.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...


Of course - I know what happens to people like me when people like you take them away.
Thus:  the protections provided for it by the 2nd are FAR more necessary now than ever in our history

When you repeal the 2nd, let me know.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

RealDave said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...




There are 18 million of these rifles....12 were used to commit mass public shootings...if you want to ban 18 million rifles because 12 were used to commit a crime you are irrational...

93 people were killed in those 12 mass shootings....

Pools killed over 3,500

Cars over 38,000

knives kill over 1,500 every year...according to your logic, we need to ban all of them.


----------



## OldLady (Aug 1, 2019)

iceberg said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...


You are oversimplifying and you know it.  If the Second Amendment is going to be used as a roadblock toward effective regulation of guns in this country, then it needs to go.  If people were willing to accept restrictions on the types of guns and ammunition they could own, the Second wouldn't need to go.  But people are not willing to be reasonable in the name of public safety.


----------



## danielpalos (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> cnm said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...


These issues would be less common and less catastrophic, with more well regulated militia ensuring the security of our free State.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

RealDave said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...




In actual research on normal people with guns stopping mass shooters, they are 94% effective against them... Normal people, not cops or soldiers...

Armed Citizens Are Successful 94% Of The Time At Active Shooter Events [FBI]

*Of all the active shooter events there were 33 at which an armed citizen was present. Of those, Armed Citizens were successful at stopping the Active shooter 75.8% of the time (25 incidents) and were successful in reducing the loss of life in an additional 18.2% (6) of incidents. In only 2 of the 33 incidents (6.1%) was the Armed Citizen(s) not helpful in any way in stopping the active shooter or reducing the loss of life.

Thus the headline of our report that Armed Citizens Are Successful 94% Of The Time At Active Shooter Events.*


In the 2 incidents at which the armed citizen “failed” to stop or slow the active shooter, one is the previously mentioned incident with hunters. The other is an incident in which the CCWer was shot in the back in a Las Vegas Walmart when he failed to identify that there were 2 Active Shooters involved in the attack. He neglected to identify the one that shot him in the back while he was trying to ambush the other perpetrator.

We also decided to look at the breakdown of events that took place in gun free zones and the relative death toll from events in gun free zones vs non-gun-free zones.

Of the 283 incidents in our data pool, we were unable to identify if the event took place in a gun-free zone in a large number (41%) of the events. Most of the events took place at a business, church, home, or other places at which as a rule of law it is not a gun free zone but potentially could have been declared one by the property owner. Without any information in the FBI study or any indication one way or the other from the news reports, we have indicated that event with a question mark.

If you look at all of the Active Shooter events (pie chart on the top) you see that for those which we have the information, almost twice as many took place in gun free zones than not; but realistically the vast majority of those for which we have no information (indicated as ?) are probably NOT gun free zones.

If you isolate just the events at which 8 or more people were killed the data paints a different picture (pie chart on the bottom). In these incidents, 77.8% took place in a gun-free zone suggesting that gun free zones lead to a higher death rate vs active shooter events in general

=====

One of the final metrics we thought was important to consider is the potential tendency for armed citizens to injure or kill innocent people in their attempt to “save the day.” A common point in political discussions is to point out the lack of training of most armed citizens and the decrease in safety inherent in their presence during violent encounters.

As you can see below, however, at the 33 incidents at which Armed Citizens were present, there were zero situations at which the Armed Citizen injured or killed an innocent person. It never happened.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Your point has been brought up before.  The theory by anti-gun activists is that regardless of those other factors......More Guns = More Gun crime.   That is where they hang their hat.
> ...




That is not a fact....

The reason you want to ignore the 26 year period is because it shows that the claim that more guns = more gun crime did not come true...over 26 years of actual experience....gun murder down 49%, gun crime down 75%, violent crime down 72%....which wouldn't have happened if more guns = more gun crime......

You Know Less Than You Think About Guns

Do Gun Laws Stop Gun Crimes?

The same week Kristof's column came out, _National Journal_ attracted major media attention with a showy piece of research and analysis headlined "The States With The Most Gun Laws See The Fewest Gun-Related Deaths." The subhead lamented: "But there's still little appetite to talk about more restrictions."

*Critics quickly noted that the Journal's Libby Isenstein had included suicides among "gun-related deaths" and suicide-irrelevant policies such as stand-your-ground laws among its tally of "gun laws." That meant that high-suicide, low-homicide states such as Wyoming, Alaska, and Idaho were taken to task for their liberal carry-permit policies. Worse, several of the states with what the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence considers terribly lax gun laws were dropped from Isenstein's data set because their murder rates were too low!*

*Another of National Journal's mistakes is a common one in gun science: The paper didn't look at gun statistics in the context of overall violent crime, a much more relevant measure to the policy debate. After all, if less gun crime doesn't mean less crime overall—if criminals simply substitute other weapons or means when guns are less available—the benefit of the relevant gun laws is thrown into doubt. When Thomas Firey of the Cato Institute ran regressions of Isenstein's study with slightly different specifications and considering all violent crime, each of her effects either disappeared or reversed.*

Another recent well-publicized study trying to assert a positive connection between gun laws and public safety was a 2013 _JAMA_ _Internal Medicine_ article by the Harvard pediatrics professor Eric W. Fleegler and his colleagues, called "Firearm Legislation and Firearm-Related Fatalities in the United States." It offered a mostly static comparison of the toughness of state gun laws (as rated by the gun control lobbyists at the Brady Center) with gun deaths from 2007 to 2010.

"States with strictest firearm laws have lowest rates of gun deaths," a _Boston Globe_headline then announced.* But once again, if you take the simple, obvious step of separating out suicides from murders, the correlations that buttress the supposed causations disappear. As John Hinderaker headlined his reaction at the Power Line blog, "New Study Finds Firearm Laws Do Nothing to Prevent Homicides."*

Among other anomalies in Fleegler's research, Hinderaker pointed out that it didn't include Washington, D.C., with its strict gun laws and frequent homicides. If just one weak-gun-law state, Louisiana, were taken out of the equation, "the remaining nine lowest-regulation states have an average gun homicide rate of 2.8 per 100,000, which is 12.5% less than the average of the ten states with the strictest gun control laws," he found.

October interview with _Slate_ and found it wanting: "There have been studies that have essentially toted up the number of laws various states have on the books and examined the association between the number of laws and rates of firearm death," said Wintemute, who is a medical doctor and researcher at the University of California, Davis. "That's really bad science, and it shouldn't inform policymaking."

Wintemute thinks the factor such studies don't adequately consider is the number of people in a state who _have_ guns to begin with, which is generally not known or even well-estimated on levels smaller than national, though researchers have used proxies from subscribers to certain gun-related magazines and percentages of suicides committed with guns to make educated guesses. "Perhaps these laws decrease mortality by decreasing firearm ownership, in which case firearm ownership mediates the association," Wintemute wrote in a 2013 _JAMA_ _Internal Medicine_ paper. "But perhaps, and more plausibly, these laws are more readily enacted in states where the prevalence of firearm ownership is low—there will be less opposition to them—and firearm ownership confounds the association."

------

Would Cracking Down on Guns in the U.S. Really Reduce Violence? , by Robert VerBruggen, National Review

There is actually no simple correlation between states’ homicide rates and their gun-ownership rates or gun laws. 
This has been shown numerous times, by different people, using different data sets. 

*A year ago, I took state gun-ownership levels reported by the Washington Post (based on a Centers for Disease Control survey) and compared them with murder rates from the FBI: no correlation. *

*The legal scholar Eugene Volokh has compared states’ gun laws (as rated by the anti-gun Brady Campaign) with their murder rates: no correlation. *

*David Freddoso of the Washington Examiner, a former National Review reporter, failed to find a correlation even between gun ownership in a state and gun murders specifically, an approach that sets aside the issue of whether gun availability has an effect on non-gun crime. (Guns can deter unarmed criminals, for instance, and criminals without guns may simply switch to other weapons.) *


, I recently redid my analysis with a few tweaks. Instead of relying on a single year of survey data, I averaged three years. (The CDC survey, the best available for state-level numbers, included data on gun ownership only in 2001, 2002, and 2004. Those were the years I looked at.) 

*And instead of comparing CDC data with murder rates from a different agency, I relied on the CDC’s own estimates of death by assault in those years. Again: no correlation.*

*------*

Left-leaning media outlets, from Mother Jones to National Journal, get around this absence of correlation by reporting numbers on “gun deaths” rather than gun homicides or homicides in general. 
More than 60 percent of gun deaths nationally are suicides, and places with higher gun ownership typically see a higher percentage of their suicides committed with a gun. 
Focusing on the number of gun deaths practically guarantees a finding that guns and violence go together. While it may be true that public policy should also seek to reduce suicide, it is homicide — often a dramatic mass killing — that usually prompts the media and politicians to call for gun control, and it is homicide that most influences people as they consider supporting measures to take away their fellow citizens’ access to guns. 
There are large gaps among the states when it comes to homicide, with rates ranging all the way from about two to twelve per 100,000 in 2013, the most recent year of data available from the CDC. These disparities show that it’s not just guns that cause the United States to have, on average, a higher rate of homicide than other developed countries do. Not only is there no correlation between gun ownership and overall homicide within a state, but there is a strong correlation between gun homicide and non-gun homicide — suggesting that they spring from similar causes, and that some states are simply more violent than others. A closer look at demographic and geographic patterns provides some clues as to why this is.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> You are oversimplifying and you know it.  If the Second Amendment is going to be used as a roadblock toward effective regulation of guns in this country, then it needs to go.


Stop whining on USMB, get off your rump, and amend the Constitution.


> If people were willing to accept restrictions on the types of guns and ammunition they could own...


Why on God's green earth would we let anti-gun loons define how we're "allowed" to exercise our rights?


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 1, 2019)

M14 Shooter said:


> XponentialChaos said:
> 
> 
> > I answered this in the part that you cut out.
> ...



I already explained the drop.  I think it's due to the societal norms that have changed over time, either due to law enforcement or cultural changes.  We may be able to find data for that, but in general, I think that statement would be difficult to prove or disprove.  

So instead, I just removed that variable from the data to see what the link is.  And if you know anything about statistics, you would know that less variables removes the noise.  

Comparing gun owner percentage to gun-related homicides without the "noise" of societal changes over time, there is a distinct upward correlation.  More guns = more deaths.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> I already explained the drop.  I think it's due to the societal norms that have changed over time, either due to law enforcement or cultural changes.  We may be able to find data for that, but in general, I think that statement would be difficult to prove or disprove.


Yes.  You _assume _-something- explains how the dramatic decline of gun-related murders, concurrent with a wholesale in the number of guns does not negate your argument.
That is -you- cannot explain away something that negates your premise, and you know it.
Thus
Your premise, negated..


> Comparing gun owner percentage to gun-related homicides without the "noise" of societal changes over time, there is a distinct upward correlation.  More guns = more deaths.


You mean, when you take away the inconvenient fact the number of guns has increased while the number of homicides has decreased, more guns = more gun homicides.


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> XponentialChaos said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



It is a fact.  I ran the numbers myself.  Give me Pearson's correlation coefficient for the numbers and tell me what you come up with.  I'm getting 0.698.

Once again, you're giving me a block of text regarding gun crime.  I'm not talking about gun crime so I don't see the use in posting or reading those links.  

I'm specifically talking about the connection between *gun ownership rate* vs *gun homicides*.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Other researchers have done the same thing and found the opposite....and then you get into the chicken and egg problem.....
> ...




Then you have this.....

Notes on the Harvard Injury Control Research Center page on Homicide - Crime Prevention Research Center

The discussion below primarily focuses on a couple problems that are observed over and over again in many public health studies: either they use purely cross-section data or the studies with panel data, which follow many different places over time, fails to use the proper controls that are used in normal academic empirical research.



*Across states, more guns = more homicide*

*Rates of Household Firearm Ownership and Homicide Across US Regions and States, 1988–1997 *

American Journal of Public Health, December 2002, Vol 92, No. 12

Very basic control variables that they have used in other papers are not used here: No fixed effects for state and year. There is a big benefit to using so-called panel data, where you can more accurately account for differences in crime rates across states or over time.  This method is called “fixed effects.”  Ask any academic who deals with this type of data, and they will tell you that these are basic controls that all papers in this area account for.

A couple of simple examples show why other studies on crime take into account these factors

Take the differences across places.  Many people point out that the UK has both a lower gun ownership rate and a lower homicide rate than the US.  Some use this to claim that gun control causes crime rates to fall.  But the homicide rate actually went up by 50 percent in the eight years after the 1997 handgun ban went into effect.  The homicide rate was still lower than that in the US, but there were lots of reasons it was lower to begin with, not the handgun ban.

The same point applies over time.  Suppose a state passes a gun control law at the same time that crime rates are rising nationally.  It would be a mistake to attribute the overall increase in national crime rates to the law that got passed.  To account for that concern, researchers normally see whether the increase in crime rate for the state that had the change is greater or less than the overall national change.

There are many other strange things about these public health studies. For example, it isn’t obvious why one would want to use homicides, which includes justifiable homicides, and not murders. One expects that were people have guns they might be more likely to have defensive guns uses.
--------
*Across states, more guns = more homicide*

*State-level homicide victimization rates in the US in relation to survey measures of household firearm ownership, 2001–2003*

Matthew Miller, David Hemenway, Deborah Azrael

Social Science & Medicine 64 (2007) 656–664

Again purely cross-sectional estimates, not panel data, with all the problems just noted. Very difficult to account for differences across countries.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...



What blocking of regulations?

It is already against the law to use a gun in a crime, if you do you can be arrested.

It is already against the law to buy, own or carry a gun as a felon....you will be arrested.

It is already against the law to knowingly sell a gun to a felon...you will be arrested.

Nothing you propose would do anything you say it would do, so why would we want to do it?

And could you explain why you are so admiring of "Gun Registration?"  What is it about that word that tickles your fancy so much...since it doesn't do anything you say it does?


----------



## Slade3200 (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


I’m glad you like to add info to back up your statements but you really gotta work on being more concise. It will yield a much better conversation


----------



## OldLady (Aug 1, 2019)

Less than a third of Americans own a gun.  But that's still 100 million, and the average would be that each of them owns three or four.  Of course, many own more than that and many own only one, like a handgun for personal protection when out in the city or a shotgun in the closet for when varmints hit the yard.

The danger of so many guns is that when one of those 100 million people has a really bad nasty day or goes a little off the wall mentally, all that person has to do is grab the gun and start shooting. That doesn't even take into account pissed off teenagers who feel "dissed" by a FB post or who are challenged to kill a rival gang member to be a big "man."   It plays out every day in domestics, in the streets, and we haven't even mentioned criminals who shoot people for hire and use guns to hold up stores etc.
All those guns, for all those reasons, need to be much more strictly limited and handed out much more cautiously.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Your point has been brought up before.  The theory by anti-gun activists is that regardless of those other factors......More Guns = More Gun crime.   That is where they hang their hat.
> ...




See post #1464.....


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...




You want to know why we have gun crime....I gave you all the information you need to understand that it isn't gun owners....it is the constant releasing of violent gun offenders back into the public......


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 1, 2019)

M14 Shooter said:


> XponentialChaos said:
> 
> 
> > I already explained the drop.  I think it's due to the societal norms that have changed over time, either due to law enforcement or cultural changes.  We may be able to find data for that, but in general, I think that statement would be difficult to prove or disprove.
> ...



Correlation does not imply causation.  When dealing with multiple variables, one can come up with any ridiculous argument.

I can just as easily say that gun deaths have decreased by x percent since the movie Lion King came out.  Therefore, Lion King reduces deaths.  But just like the argument you're making, there is a high possibility of an extraneous variable here - in this case time.  To eliminate that possibility, we remove the extraneous variable to better compare the two things that we are truly comparing.

That's what I'm doing.  And in doing so, there is a moderate correlation.  I realize that you don't want to talk about this because it counters your argument.


----------



## Slade3200 (Aug 1, 2019)

WillHaftawaite said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > WillHaftawaite said:
> ...


Nothing is going to work to stop gun violence but a better background check system will help prevent some to get weapons which will result in some prevented gun violence. Some is better than none. Agreed?


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> XponentialChaos said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



Addressed in #1472.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> Less than a third of Americans own a gun.  But that's still 100 million, and the average would be that each of them owns three or four.  Of course, many own more than that and many own only one, like a handgun for personal protection when out in the city or a shotgun in the closet for when varmints hit the yard.


Damn - we gotta get those numbers up!!


> The danger of so many guns is that when one of those 100 million people has a really bad nasty day or goes a little off the wall mentally, all that person has to do is grab the gun and start shooting.


Assuming this is the case for -every- murder committed with a gun...
For every gun used to commit a murder yesterday, >13.6 million were not.

Explain how this justifies your nonsense about how all those guns, for all those reasons, need to be much more strictly limited and handed out much more cautiously


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> Less than a third of Americans own a gun.  But that's still 100 million, and the average would be that each of them owns three or four.  Of course, many own more than that and many own only one, like a handgun for personal protection when out in the city or a shotgun in the closet for when varmints hit the yard.
> 
> The danger of so many guns is that when one of those 100 million people has a really bad nasty day or goes a little off the wall mentally, all that person has to do is grab the gun and start shooting. That doesn't even take into account pissed off teenagers who feel "dissed" by a FB post or who are challenged to kill a rival gang member to be a big "man."   It plays out every day in domestics, in the streets, and we haven't even mentioned criminals who shoot people for hire and use guns to hold up stores etc.
> All those guns, for all those reasons, need to be much more strictly limited and handed out much more cautiously.




Except nothing you believe is actually true and did not happen....

Again....you believe that More Guns = More Gun Crime and Gun Murder.....that is what you just posted.

26 years...more Americans now own and actually carry guns.....the first part of your theory More Guns...has happened......

What was the result....

49% gun murder reduction.

75% gun crime reduction.

72% violent crime reduction...

All over the last 26 years....real world experience...

In actual science, when you have a theory, you implement an experiment to test the theory and then the exact opposite of what your theory states happens....in actual science that means you theory is wrong.....


----------



## OldLady (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...


You're WAY off base.  I said restrictions on the type of guns people could own.  That has nothing to do with what you listed.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> Less than a third of Americans own a gun.  But that's still 100 million, and the average would be that each of them owns three or four.  Of course, many own more than that and many own only one, like a handgun for personal protection when out in the city or a shotgun in the closet for when varmints hit the yard.
> 
> The danger of so many guns is that when one of those 100 million people has a really bad nasty day or goes a little off the wall mentally, all that person has to do is grab the gun and start shooting. That doesn't even take into account pissed off teenagers who feel "dissed" by a FB post or who are challenged to kill a rival gang member to be a big "man."   It plays out every day in domestics, in the streets, and we haven't even mentioned criminals who shoot people for hire and use guns to hold up stores etc.
> All those guns, for all those reasons, need to be much more strictly limited and handed out much more cautiously.




They aren't handed out and the people using them to commit murder are already banned from buying, owning and carrying them...and when they are caught with the gun they can already be arrested....

What about that is so hard for you to understand?

What about the fact that Americans use their legal guns to stop violent criminals 1.1 million times a year...according to the Centers for Disease Control.......


----------



## OldLady (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > Less than a third of Americans own a gun.  But that's still 100 million, and the average would be that each of them owns three or four.  Of course, many own more than that and many own only one, like a handgun for personal protection when out in the city or a shotgun in the closet for when varmints hit the yard.
> ...


Tell me what I said in the post above that is not true.
Tell me what I said in the post above does not happen.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > XponentialChaos said:
> ...




Sorry....your stats don't hold up.... again....26 years, more gun ownership.....gun murder down 49%........are you playing the game where you include suicide?


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> XponentialChaos said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



I'm not claiming that this is true in other countries.  I think I ran those numbers once and it was just scattered all over the place.  It adds yet another extraneous variable - basically that countries are vastly different in terms of gun-related homicides.

States with higher gun ownership rates tend to have a higher rate of homicides.  Why is this?


----------



## M14 Shooter (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> Correlation does not imply causation.  When dealing with multiple variables, one can come up with any ridiculous argument.


The only person arguing correlation of any kind here is you.
I have, several times, posted out a fact that -negates- your claimed correlation.
I realize that you don't want to talk about this because it counters your argument


> That's what I'm doing.  And in doing so, there is a moderate correlation.


Correlation does not imply causation.
So...?


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...




What you said isn't true.....I stated your theory, I stated the last 26 years of increasing gun ownership and carrying guns in public, and the exact opposite of what you said would happen happened.


----------



## OldLady (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > Less than a third of Americans own a gun.  But that's still 100 million, and the average would be that each of them owns three or four.  Of course, many own more than that and many own only one, like a handgun for personal protection when out in the city or a shotgun in the closet for when varmints hit the yard.
> ...


The Center for Disease Control has been effectively prohibited from conducting any meaningful research on guns in the country for decades.  Thanks to folks like you and your handler, the NRA.  I don't know what bullshit numbers you are going to quote me now, but I know that for a fact.  It doesn't surprise me though that you would tie the truth into a knot and hope to get away with it.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> States with higher gun ownership rates tend to have a higher rate of homicides.  Why is this?



Dunno.  Tell us.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > XponentialChaos said:
> ...




Sorry.....even if that was true, criminals use illegal guns to kill people, normal people do not use their guns to kill people...you can't get away from the other factors that you are trying to ignore.....  sentencing of gun offenders..... out of wedlock birth rates.....factors you are not considering because they explain murder more than normal people and their access to guns.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> The Center for Disease Control has been effectively prohibited from conducting any meaningful research on guns in the country for decades.


Someone lied to you - the CDC has -all kinds- of information and research regarding gun violence.


----------



## Hugo Furst (Aug 1, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> WillHaftawaite said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...





Slade3200 said:


> but a better background check system



Support the one in place, first.

Someone lies on the Form 4473, call the cops, 30 days minimum.

Catch a straw buyer?

a year in jail, minimum.

Enforce current laws on the books before making new ones.


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> XponentialChaos said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



If you don't think the numbers hold up, then run the number yourself and let me know what you get.  The numbers obtained are from the following links:

What Is Gun Ownership Like on a State by State Basis?
Firearm death rates in the United States by state - Wikipedia

Sorry, I was unclear with the measure I was using.  I'm looking at "overall firearm death rates", which includes suicide, self-defense, and accidents.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...



Wrong.....that is the lie anti-gunners tell you...it is not true...

Oh, yeah......you can't explain why your theory over the last 26 years is wrong....so now you toss out the "NRA" card.....and call research from the CDC bullshit because it contradicts what you believe....

No, The Government Is Not 'Banned' From Studying Gun Violence

Absolutely nothing in the amendment prohibits the CDC from studying “gun violence,” even if this narrowly focused topic tells us little. In response to this inconvenient fact, gun controllers will explain that while there isn’t an outright ban, the Dickey amendment has a “chilling” effect on the study of gun violence.


Does it? Pointing out that “research plummeted after the 1996 ban” could just as easily tell us that most research funded by the CDC had been politically motivated. Because the idea that the CDC, whose spectacular mission creep has taken it from its primary goal of preventing malaria and other dangerous communicable diseases, to spending hundreds of millions of dollars nagging you about how much salt you put on your steaks or how often you do calisthenics, is nervous about the repercussions of engaging in non-partisan research is hard to believe.

Also unlikely is the notion that a $2.6 million cut in funding so horrified the agency that it was rendered powerless to pay for or conduct studies on gun violence. The CDC funding _tripled _from 1996 to 2010. The CDC’s budget is over six billion dollars today.

And the idea that the CDC was paralyzed through two-years of full Democratic Party control, and then six years under a president who was more antagonistic towards the Second Amendment than any other in history, is difficult to believe, because it’s provably false.

In 2013, President Barack Obama not only signed an Executive Order directing the CDC to research “gun violence,” the administration also provided an additional $10 million to do it. Here is the study on gun violence that was supposedly banned and yet funded by the CDC. You might not have heard about the resulting research, because it contains numerous inconvenient facts about gun ownership that fails to propel the predetermined narrative. Trump’s HHS Secretary Alex Azar is also open to the idea of funding more gun violence research.

It’s not banned. It’s not chilled.

Meanwhile, numerous states and private entities fund peer-reviewed studies and other research on gun violence. I know this because gun control advocates are constantly sending me studies that distort and conflate issues to help them make their arguments. My inbox is bombarded with studies and conferences and “webinars” dissecting gun violence.

The real problem here is two-fold. One, researchers want the CDC involved so they can access government data about American gun owners. Considering the rhetoric coming from Democrats — gun ownership being tantamount to terrorism, and so on — there’s absolutely no reason Republicans should acquiesce to helping gun controllers circumvent the privacy of Americans citizens peacefully practicing their Constitutional rights.

Second, gun control advocates want to lift the ban on politically skewed research because _they’re interested in producing politically skewed research._ When the American Medical Association declares gun violence a “public health crisis,” it’s not interested in a balance look at the issue. When researchers advocate lifting the restrictions on advocacy at the CDC, they don’t even pretend they not to hold pre-conceived notions about the outcomes.

-------

There’s no reason to allow activists — then or now — to use the veneer of state-sanctioned science for their partisan purposes. For example, we now know that Rosenberg and others at the CDC turned out to be wrong about the correlation between guns and crime — a steep drop in gun crimes coincided with the explosions of gun ownership from 1996 to 2014.


----------



## OldLady (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


Well don't say I'm stating things that aren't true when I didn't say a single thing in that post that wasn't true.  If you knew what a "theory" was, you wouldn't say it wasn't true, since theories have not been proven.  I am thinking that much stricter regulation on guns would cut way back on gun homicides because it has worked in every other country in the world where it has been used.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> Sorry, I was unclear with the measure I was using.  I'm looking at "overall firearm death rates", which includes suicide, self-defense, and accidents.



For SEVERAL posts, it was "homicides"
NOW, its "overall firearms deaths"
How heavy -is- that goalpost?


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 1, 2019)

M14 Shooter said:


> XponentialChaos said:
> 
> 
> > Correlation does not imply causation.  When dealing with multiple variables, one can come up with any ridiculous argument.
> ...



A correlation does not necessarily imply a causation.  

Can you explain why there is a moderate to strong correlation between gun ownership rates and gun-related deaths?  Or do you think that's purely a coincidence?


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > XponentialChaos said:
> ...




Got it.....looked at your wikipedia link....

Suicides......that is how you do it......

Suicides do not count....Japan, China, have extreme gun control and suicide rates that dwarf ours...as do many countries in Europe and many years Canada.......

You pulled the gun murder, gun suicide trick......

Gun murder is down 49% over the last 26 years as more Americans own and carry guns...sorry.....you have no case.


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 1, 2019)

M14 Shooter said:


> XponentialChaos said:
> 
> 
> > States with higher gun ownership rates tend to have a higher rate of homicides.  Why is this?
> ...



Possibly both a correlation and a causation?


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 1, 2019)

M14 Shooter said:


> XponentialChaos said:
> 
> 
> > Sorry, I was unclear with the measure I was using.  I'm looking at "overall firearm death rates", which includes suicide, self-defense, and accidents.
> ...



My mistake.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> Can you explain why there is a moderate to strong correlation between gun ownership rates and *gun-related deaths*



What happened to "homicides"?
No.  Tell us.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

M14 Shooter said:


> XponentialChaos said:
> 
> 
> > Sorry, I was unclear with the measure I was using.  I'm looking at "overall firearm death rates", which includes suicide, self-defense, and accidents.
> ...




Yep....the oldest trick in the anti-gun play book....bait and switch....

We talk gun murder....they say the word "homicide" and then, when you aren't looking, they are tossing in suicides to pad their numbers because they can't explain how the gun murder rate actually dropped 49% as more Americans own and carry guns....

Their theory did not hold up over the last 26 years of actual experience.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > XponentialChaos said:
> ...


Dunno.  Tell us.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > XponentialChaos said:
> ...


Your mistake... repeated over and over and over...


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> Got it.....looked at your wikipedia link....
> 
> Suicides......that is how you do it......
> 
> ...



I agree that suicides are much different than murder.  

But it remains a fact that states with more gun ownership have more gun-related death.  More guns does not mean more murder, but more guns does in fact mean more death.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> [
> But it remains a fact that states with more gun ownership have more gun-related death.  More guns does not mean more murder, but more guns does in fact mean more death.


Except for the fact the number of guns has increased and the number of gun-related deaths has not.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> WillHaftawaite said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...




You can't show that.......we have current federally mandated background checks and criminals get around it easily, mass shooters pass it easily.

What you want is the government to do its job, and that doesn't take anything new....just pressing enter on the keyboard to submit the names of felons into the system.


----------



## ph3iron (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> cnm said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...


Boy, the limits our
 pantywaist will go for their guns.
Never been in an air raid shelter or hand to hand  in their lives


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Got it.....looked at your wikipedia link....
> ...




And again....suicides do not count.   You can count them all day, which is where your number comes from, but countries with extreme gun control have higher suicide rates than we do.....


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 1, 2019)

I wasn't trying to bait and switch here. 

More guns = more gun-related death when comparing the numbers for each of the states.  That's a fact.  Can you address that fact or not?


----------



## ph3iron (Aug 1, 2019)

M14 Shooter said:


> XponentialChaos said:
> 
> 
> > [
> ...


We choose what we want.
Know the state with the most gun deaths?
Montana 
Know the state with most guns?
Montana.
But omg it's going down???!!!
I feel better now.
Let's ignore NZ and Oz, bunch of pantywaists


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> I wasn't trying to bait and switch here.
> 
> More guns = more gun-related death when comparing the numbers for each of the states.  That's a fact.  Can you address that fact or not?




Yes.....in some states there is more suicide.....Alaska for one, and that has nothing to do with guns.......guns are just the tool used.....  if they didn't have guns, they would hang themselves...so guns are not relevant and suicide does not count to the gun murder number....the actual concern around guns and crime.


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> XponentialChaos said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



I don't think this correlation holds true for different countries.  Each country has a different culture and different societal norms.  

But there is a correlation here in the U.S, which does include suicide.  Why do you think that is?


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

ph3iron said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > XponentialChaos said:
> ...




Yes....suicide.....

New Zealand has more guns than Australia and less gun crime.....moron.

Australia banned guns, and now they have escalating gun crime...moron.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > XponentialChaos said:
> ...




Sorry, you are talking two different issues and trying to use the one to obscure the issue.

Gun murder...down 49%....that is the important number...if you want to talk mental health, that is a different issue.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > XponentialChaos said:
> ...




Here...the other issue...suicide...

Fact Check, Gun Control and Suicide



*There is no relation between suicide rate and gun ownership rates around the world.  According to the 2016 World Health Statistics report, (2) suicide rates in the four countries cited as having restrictive gun control laws have suicide rates that are comparable to that in the U. S.:  Australia, 11.6, Canada, 11.4, France, 15.8, UK, 7.0, and USA 13.7 suicides/100,000.  By comparison, Japan has among the highest suicide rates in the world, 23.1/100,000, but gun ownership is extremely rare, 0.6 guns/100 people.   *

Suicide is a mental health issue.  If guns are not available other means are used.  Poisoning, in fact, is the most common method of suicide for U. S. females according to the _Washington Post_ (34 % of suicides), and suffocation the second most common method for males (27%). 

Secondly, gun ownership rates in France and Canada are not low, as is implied in the _Post _article.  The rate of gun ownership in the U. S. is indeed high at 88.8 guns/100 residents, but gun ownership rates are also among the world’s highest in the other countries cited.  Gun ownership rates in these countries are are as follows:  Australia, 15, Canada, 30.8, France, 31.2, and UK 6.2 per 100 residents. (3,4) Gun ownership rates in Saudia Arabia are comparable to that in Canada and France, with 37.8 guns per 100 Saudi residents, yet the lowest suicide rate in the world is in Saudia Arabia (0.3 suicides per 100,000).

Third, recent statistics in the state of Florida show that nearly one third of the guns used in suicides are obtained illegally, putting these firearm deaths beyond control through gun laws.(5)

Fourth, the primary factors affecting suicide rates are personal stresses, cultural, economic, religious factors and demographics.  According to the WHO statistics, the highest rates of suicide in the world are in the Republic of Korea, with 36.8 suicides per 100,000, but India, Japan, Russia, and Hungary all have rates above 20 per 100,000; roughly twice as high as the U.S. and the four countries that are the basis for the _Post_’s calculation that gun control would reduce U.S. suicide rates by 20 to 38 percent.  Lebanon, Oman, and Iraq all have suicide rates below 1.1 per 100,000 people--less than 1/10 the suicide rate in the U. S., and Afghanistan, Algeria, Jamaica, Haiti, and Egypt have low suicide rates that are below 4 per 100,000 in contrast to 13.7 suicides/100,000 in the U. S.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> I wasn't trying to bait and switch here.
> More guns = more gun-related death when comparing the numbers for each of the states.  That's a fact.


Lets assume for the moment you are correct, and there -is- a correlation between gun ownership rates and gun-related death rates.
So?


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> XponentialChaos said:
> 
> 
> > I wasn't trying to bait and switch here.
> ...



A few notes here:  

The numbers I'm putting up also include accidental deaths.

I don't have the numbers for suicide methods in front of me, but that might be something I'll look at later.

This was strictly gun ownership vs gun deaths.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> I don't think this correlation holds true for different countries.  Each country has a different culture and different societal norms.


Interesting.
Each state has a different culture and different societal norms
How is your conclusion sound?


> Why do you think that is?


Dunno.  Tell us.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > XponentialChaos said:
> ...




The CDC has the accidental gun death numbers......

From the CDC accidental gun deaths...keep in mind, we have close to 600 million or more guns in this country and over 17.25 million people can and do carry guns in public for self defense....the numbers?

https://www.cdc.gov/injury/wisqars/leading_causes_death.html

2017...486
2016   495
2015...489http://webappa.cdc.gov/cgi-bin/broker.exe

2014.....461

2013 .....  505
2012 .....  548
2011 .....  591
2010 .....  606
2009 .....  554
2008 .....  592
2007.....   613
2006.....   642
2005 .....  789
2004 .....  649
2003 .....  730
2002 .....  762
2001 .....  802
2000 .....  776
1999 .....  824


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > XponentialChaos said:
> ...




Notice...as more Americans own and carry guns....the accidental gun death number also went down....

https://www.cdc.gov/injury/wisqars/leading_causes_death.html

2017...486
2016   495
2015...489http://webappa.cdc.gov/cgi-bin/broker.exe

2014.....461

2013 .....  505
2012 .....  548
2011 .....  591
2010 .....  606
2009 .....  554
2008 .....  592
2007.....   613
2006.....   642
2005 .....  789
2004 .....  649
2003 .....  730
2002 .....  762
2001 .....  802
2000 .....  776
1999 .....  824


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> XponentialChaos said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



That's interesting right there.  

If there's no correlation between gun ownership rates and suicide rate...but there is a correlation between gun ownership and gun-related deaths...then maybe it's due to accidental deaths?

It's hard to say though, because my statistic is coming from the states while yours is globally.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > XponentialChaos said:
> ...




No..... men who commit suicide use guns...women use poison....  I just posted the accidental gun death numbers......they are tiny.....I bet you thought they would be much higher?


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> XponentialChaos said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



By chance, do you have those numbers by state?  That would be really useful.  If not, I'll try looking into this later.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > XponentialChaos said:
> ...




The CDC may break them down, but I imagine you have higher numbers in high crime states...because criminals tend to leave their guns around the home because of other criminals, and their kids find them.......then you have hunting states....gun accidents there too.......


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> XponentialChaos said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



No expectations.  Just general curiosity.

I like to let numbers speak for themselves.

I can also say that when comparing gun ownership rates to murder, there is basically no correlation at all.  If anything, it's a very slightly negative correlation at -0.096.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > XponentialChaos said:
> ...




CDC may have an injury mapping tag....


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > XponentialChaos said:
> ...




Yes...the CDC does have state maps.......it is just taking forever to load...


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> XponentialChaos said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



I don't think that tendency would go toward criminals.


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> XponentialChaos said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



Appreciated.  I know you like to talk about this stuff so I'm sure you have plenty of good resources ready to go.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > XponentialChaos said:
> ...




Check out accidental deaths in local papers....I know....it isn't the best source...but try to find out if the family is 1) intact 2) has a criminal in the home 3) a history of drug or alcohol abuse.....those are the factors for gun accidents......


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > XponentialChaos said:
> ...




So far you seem like a normal person......if you want to discuss the issue I am more than happy too.......the sharp edge to my posts comes from years of debating the issue with people who simply want guns banned no matter what the facts may say...or the concept that normal people should not be disarmed because a tiny number of people use them for crime.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > XponentialChaos said:
> ...




That map is still working to appear.......WISQARS is a great source.....If you use it, I like to get the text only page...it is easier to get the numbers...


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> XponentialChaos said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



Oh I'm definitely on the other side of you regarding the gun issue. 

I just think the truth can be found in the numbers, and the numbers can also be manipulated and misinterpreted.

For example, I think your 26 year argument doesn't work for reasons I've described.  Obviously we'll disagree on that though.


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> XponentialChaos said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



Can you give me the link?  I can take a shot at it.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > XponentialChaos said:
> ...




Yes....we will...hard to get around a 49% decrease in gun murder, 75% decrease in gun crime and a 72% drop in violent crime as more Americans own and carry guns...


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.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> I can also say that when comparing gun ownership rates to murder, there is basically no correlation at all.  If anything, it's a very slightly negative correlation at -0.096.


Huh.

1999-2017
612,310 gun-related deaths.
180,326  (29.4%) homicides
420,070 (68.6%) suicides
11,914 (1.9%) accidents

What's that tell you?


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > XponentialChaos said:
> ...




https://wisqars.cdc.gov:8443/cdcMapFramework/


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> XponentialChaos said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



What would you say if I argued that we've had a 49% decrease in gun murder, 75% decrease 
in gun crime and a 72% drop in violent crime ever since the original Lion King movie came out?

That shows that Lion King has had a great impact on murder rates in this country, right?


----------



## M14 Shooter (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> What would you say if I argued that we've had a 49% decrease in gun murder, 75% decrease in gun crime and a 72% drop in violent crime ever since the original Lion King movie came out?


Exactly the same thing I'll tell you when you finally try to make a point around your supposed correlation between gun ownership rates and gun deaths:
Correlation does not prove causation .


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> XponentialChaos said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



You're right.  Super slow.  Thanks though.  Definitely going to check this out if I can get it to go.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > XponentialChaos said:
> ...




That would be silly....

The argument from anti gunners is this...

More Guns = More Gun Crime

That is their argument, likely yours too......

26 years...more Americans buy, own and carry guns.....millions and millions of guns....and more and more Americans actually carry those guns into public spaces....now over 17.25 million people..

We had 26 years of More Guns....

What happened during that time...

Gun murder went down 49%
Gun crime went down 75%

the theory, again....  More Guns = More Gun Crime...

The result.... the exact opposite....

So that theory is wrong......if it was right...gun crimes would have gone up, not down with the introduction of more guns into society....


----------



## M14 Shooter (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> I'm specifically linking *gun ownership rate* to* homicides*. (bold and underlined emphasis, yours)
> It's a fact that these two measures have a moderate to high positive correlation.


Heh.

Most states, especially those with high rates of gun ownership rates, do not have registration of guns, or licensure of gun owners.
Thus, the number of guns and ownership rates in those states are - at best - a guess,  and may contain errors as high as an order of magnitude.

Given that, how can your calculated correlation have real any meaning?


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > XponentialChaos said:
> ...



We have 26 years of experience...starting with the violence spike starting in the 1960s.....according to anti-gunners....adding more guns to the country would have increased that violence...instead, it went down, not up.


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> XponentialChaos said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



It's silly because Lion King had nothing to do with those murder rates.  But it's still a true statement - those murder rates significantly decreased ever since the movie Lion King came out. This is what I mean by correlation does not necessarily imply a causation.  You can find some numbers that fit your argument, and you can ignore the possibility that they may have had nothing to do with each other.

I think there are numerous reasons why murder has decreased over time - and I think it's mostly tied to the societal norms in this country, not on whether people own guns or not.  Of course, I know we disagree on this point.  I'm just trying to explain my reasoning for the disagreement.

Also, I didn't say anything about gun crime.


----------



## OldLady (Aug 1, 2019)

M14 Shooter said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > You are oversimplifying and you know it.  If the Second Amendment is going to be used as a roadblock toward effective regulation of guns in this country, then it needs to go.
> ...


You will lose, eventually.  How much you lose is going to be dependent on the choices you make.  I might not be around to see it, but it is inevitable that the mass gun slaughter in this country will stop.


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> XponentialChaos said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



I can make a similar argument for Lion King.  And it would be wrong for the same reason I think you're wrong.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...


13 states, 7-8% of the people.


> How much you lose is going to be dependent on the choices you make.  I might not be around to see it, but it is inevitable that the mass gun slaughter in this country will stop.


Only mass slaughter will remove the right to keep and bear arms.
And then, the REAL mass slaughter will begin.
But, that's OK by you.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > XponentialChaos said:
> ...




Sorry, that doesn't hold water.....

Again, the argument is that adding guns to a society will automatically increase gun murder and gun crime.....

That did not happen.  

Yes...I also agree that many things contributed to the decrease in crime..... more police, better police techniques....

But that isn't their argument.....their argument is 

More Guns = More Gun Crime..... and that didn't happen over the last 26 years....no matter how you try it, it doesn't work.

The reason we have more murder and crime in general is due to societal factors, not gun ownership by normal people....

Singel teenage mothers raising children from multiple males without a father is the biggest factor.....and Europe is beggining to feel the effect of this...as their knife murder rates show......and now illegal guns are flooding that country....so gun crime will be escalating in the not to far future.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> Sorry, that doesn't hold water.....
> Again, the argument is that adding guns to a society will automatically increase gun murder and gun crime.....
> That did not happen.


And thus, the premise is unsound.
-Some- of us know this.


----------



## OldLady (Aug 1, 2019)

M14 Shooter said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > The Center for Disease Control has been effectively prohibited from conducting any meaningful research on guns in the country for decades.
> ...


Don't ignore the Dickey Amendment.  Don't you dare.
 the *Dickey Amendment* is a provision first inserted as a rider into the 1996 federal government omnibus spending bill which mandated that "none of the funds made available for injury prevention and control at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) may be used to advocate or promote gun control."[1] In the same spending bill, Congress earmarked $2.6 million from the CDC's budget, the exact amount that had previously been allocated to the agency for firearms research the previous year, for traumatic brain injury-related research.[2]

The amendment was lobbied for by the NRA. The amendment is named after its author Jay Dickey, a Republican member of the United States House of Representatives from Arkansas.[2] Many commentators have described this amendment as a "ban" on gun violence research by the CDC.[3]
Dickey Amendment - Wikipedia


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...




There is not mass gun slaughter no matter what you say.....

Gun murder is down 49%...... gun accidents down too....nothing you believe about guns is true....

More Americans own guns, more people carry guns......less gun murder not more......

You have nothing but emotion...

600 million guns, 17.25 million carrying guns...

12 mass public shootings in 2018, 

93 people killed.

How is that mass slaughter?

Cars killed 38,000

Can you tell which number is bigger?


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> XponentialChaos said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



I know the argument doesn't hold water.  That's the point.  Correlation does not necessarily imply causation.  And we're already agreeing with the external forces that may have significantly decreased crime, including amount of police and their techniques.  We're both agreeing that something other than guns helped reduce the gun crime, which is why your 26 year argument, while true, is misleading.  Just as it would be misleading for me to say that gun crime has decreased by 49% ever since the movie Lion King came out. 

Once again, I didn't say that more guns = more gun crime.  I can look into it later, but I'm not making that argument.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...




I didn't ignore it I had it in my link...that did not stop gun research it stopped the CDC from advocating gun control....I have links to gun research from the CDC after that Amendment.....you are just wrong...

Here.....just two......there are more...

Obama CDC Study: Silencers Best Option for Noise Reduction at Gun Ranges - The Truth About Guns

The CDC looked at a number of different solutions to reduce the exposure to the hazardous noise levels in shooting ranges and arrived at the same solution as every other logical gun owner: silencers.
The only potentially effective noise control method to reduce students’ or instructors’ noise exposure from gunfire is through the use of noise suppressors that can be attached to the end of the gun barrel. However, some states do not permit civilians to use suppressors on firearms.
Some gun control activists claim that noise on shooting ranges isn’t a health issue. The CDC says otherwise, and the report is right here in black and white. Are these luddites going to argue with science?


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

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

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.


----------



## Slade3200 (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


Oh I think the issue is much more complicated than that with many of factors involved


----------



## Slade3200 (Aug 1, 2019)

WillHaftawaite said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > WillHaftawaite said:
> ...


Are we not enforcing the laws on the books?


----------



## Slade3200 (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > WillHaftawaite said:
> ...


Of course I can’t show that, how does one show proof of a crime that didn’t happen because the “offender” didn’t have access to something? That’s not something that leaves a trail to show. You use common sense and logic. If somebody has a mental break and wants to cause harm and they have have a gun on their hip, they are going to cause much more damage than if they only have their fists or their words.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...





> the* Dickey Amendment *is a provision first inserted as a rider into the 1996 federal government omnibus spending bill which mandated that "*none of the funds* made available for injury prevention and control at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) *may be used to advocate or promote gun control."[1]*


Correct.
The CDC DOES, however, collect information and conducts research, on gun violence.
That is, Congress gives money to do what it is supposed to do, and does not give it money to do what it is not supposed to do.

As I said:  Someone lied to you.


----------



## Slade3200 (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> XponentialChaos said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


Have there been more or less gun regulation laws from 1999 to 2017?


----------



## OldLady (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > M14 Shooter said:
> ...


I have an article based on recent, reliable polls, not emotion.
_According to the 2017 Pew study, 30% of Americans own guns themselves (12 points lower than the 42% who live in households with guns). For Gallup, it was 29% (13 points lower than the 42% who live in households with guns). The GSS pegs it even lower -- only 21% of Americans said they personally own guns (11 points lower than the 32% who live in households with guns)._

There's a gun for every American. Less than 1/3 own guns. - CNNPolitics


----------



## Hugo Furst (Aug 1, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> WillHaftawaite said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...





I'm sure 2aguy has the stats


----------



## Slade3200 (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> XponentialChaos said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


How about “More guns in the hands of dangerous people = more crime”... would you agree with that?


----------



## M14 Shooter (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> I have an article based on recent, reliable polls, not emotion..


Reliable, if you believe the average gun owner will tell a stranger on the other end of an unsolicited phone call that they have a gun.
As I am sure you know, gun owners are paranoid and distrusting - that's why they have guns.
Right?


----------



## OldLady (Aug 1, 2019)

M14 Shooter said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > M14 Shooter said:
> ...


The CDC doesn't just "collect" information on ebola.  They look at ways to stop it from spreading.  Public health and safety is their mission.  The Dickey Amendment should NEVER have been passed.  It is not up to Congress to tell the CDC what the outcome of their research and their recommendations will be.  Talk about messed up.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...


The CDC says otherwise:
_As the nation's health protection agency, *CDC* saves lives and protects people from health threats. To accomplish our *mission*, *CDC* conducts critical science and provides health information that protects our nation against expensive and dangerous health threats, and responds when these arise._
Health Threats, per the CDC:
_The biggest antibiotic-resistant threats in the U.S._
I don't see firearm violence here.
Probably because it isn't a disease.


> The Dickey Amendment should NEVER have been passed.  It is not up to Congress to tell the CDC what the outcome of their research and their recommendations will be


Congress CREATED the CDC; as such, congress has not just the the right, but the responsibility to tell the CDC what it can and can't do.

AND... here an example of the research the CDC does re: firearms:
Search Results | CDC

Someone lied to you, and you bought it.


----------



## OldLady (Aug 1, 2019)

M14 Shooter said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > M14 Shooter said:
> ...


No one has a valid reason to tell an organization poised to do research what its findings can be.
I didn't buy anything--you are ignoring a blatant piece of bullshit passed by the NRA.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> No one has a valid reason to tell an organization poised to do research what its findings can be.


No one has.


> I didn't buy anything--you are ignoring a blatant piece of bullshit passed by the NRA.


I'm sorry the truth isn't what you want it to be.
Perhaps if you thought for yourself a little more often you'd not have this problem.


----------



## OldLady (Aug 1, 2019)

M14 Shooter said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > No one has a valid reason to tell an organization poised to do research what its findings can be.
> ...


I'm right.  You're wrong.  And the Dickey Amendment is atrocious and should have been repealed years ago.


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy

I ran the numbers for a few more measurements and I think the results are interesting.  I'll post some of them.

*Gun ownership rate* vs *Gun Death Rate* (Includes suicide, self-defense, and accidents)  This is the one I referred to before.

Correlation = 0.698.  This is a moderate to strong positive correlation.  In general, more gun owners means more people die from guns.

*Gun ownership rate* vs *Accidental Death Rate*  (Doesn't include car accidents)

Correlation = 0.138.  This is a weak positive correlation.  It's slightly upward.  I'm curious what this would look like if it specifically looked at accidental _gun_-related deaths.  Interestingly, this is more positive than the slightly negative correlation comparing gun ownership rates vs murder rates.  (-0.095)

*Gun ownership rate* vs *Suicide Rate* (includes various forms of suicide)

Correlation = 0.553.  This is moderate positive correlation.  In general, more gun owners means more people commit suicide.

This could be because people who want to kill themselves will go out and buy a gun to do so.  Or it could be because people who already have a gun in the house, and have a bad day, are more likely to finish themselves off.  I suspect it's a bit of both, though it's probably not possible to tell for sure.

*Gun ownership rate* vs *Violent Crime Rate
*
Correlation = 0.111.  This is another weak positive correlation.  It's only slightly upward.  Isn't gun ownership supposed to prevent these kinds of incidents?  That doesn't appear to be the case.


These are a few negative statistics showing that more guns owners are correlated with more gun deaths.  The positive impact of preventing murder is highly over-romanticized in my opinion as it's the only negative correlation and it's the weakest of all the numbers I've calculated.  Even violent crime, which gun ownership is also intended to prevent, is going in the wrong direction.  Granted it's only a slight positive correlation, but its still _positive_.


----------



## Leo123 (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> 2aguy
> 
> I ran the numbers for a few more measurements and I think the results are interesting.  I'll post some of them.
> 
> ...



What are you doing?  Dividing Gun Death Rate by number of guns?  How do you determine "Gun Ownership Rate?"  What is your population of data?  It's hard to understand the results without explaining your data collection and statistical calculations.


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 1, 2019)

Leo123 said:


> XponentialChaos said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy
> ...



Sorry, I was talking to him and I had already shown him the links I was using.

Here's where the gun ownership rate is coming from:  Gun ownership by state
Gun death rate is just the number of gun-related deaths per 100,000 people.  Here is the firearm death rate:  Firearm death rates in the United States by state - Wikipedia

I'm simply calculating the Pearson's correlation coefficient by state, comparing a few different measures to see how closely correlated they are.

Let me know if you need any other links so you can follow along.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > XponentialChaos said:
> ...




No, it isn't misleading and I always point out that for this part of the argument I am not saying that guns reduced crime.......that is for the other part...for this part I am taking on the idea that the Theory of Anti-gunners.....that More Guns = More Gun crime is valid....showing that that isn't true....

If you go back through my posts on this thread I do not make the argument that guns reduced crime.....notice I state more police and better police technique......

Later we can talk about gun ownership reducing crime, in particular the research that actually shows that concealed carry helps reduce crime, in particular interpersonal crime.

And no....the Lion King argument is not the same.......


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...




I didn't say it was...but those posts show the leading cause of violent crime in these cities, while the "root" cause is fatherless homes......


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> WillHaftawaite said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...



As my links show you we are not enforcing these gun laws.....they are letting repeat gun offenders, with violent crimes with illegal guns out on I-Bonds, and out of prison on light sentences..often less than 3 years for violent crimes with guns.....

Look at the news in these shootings in cities, and then look up the history of the shooters they capture...long histories of crime and violence and likely previous gun convictions...


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...




Sorry,  you don't deny 320 million people access to a gun because someone might abuse it....no more than you deny people access to cars because they might drive drunk...


----------



## ABikerSailor (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



So, it's because of fatherless homes that violent crime happens?  You've gotta be kidding.

BTW................your signature should read correctly.  It's actually "it's better to serve in Heaven than to rule in Hell". 

The correct quote says serve, not live.


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> I am not saying that guns reduced crime.......



You're not?  Oh.  Ok then I'm with you on that.  

Not on the rest, but at least on this.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > XponentialChaos said:
> ...




Depends on the state.....but as a fact, using records of concealed carry permits....as more people have started to carry guns.....our gun murder rate went down 49%....our gun crime rate went down 75%....that is the exact opposite of what the anti-gunners say is supposed to happen when more people not only own, but carry guns......

And as we know, the cities with some of the worst gun crime have the most extreme gun control....

Chicago has more gun murder than Houston.....

Chicago..extreme gun control, no gun ranges or stores located in the city....

Houston....gun stores are on almost every corner, more people carry guns, more people own guns, Texas is on the border with the Drug Cartel state of Mexico....

This shows it isn't access to guns that causes gun murder......the policy of Chicago judges to let repeat gun felons, with multiple felonies for illegal gun possession and other violent crimes, out of jail on I bonds and out of prison with less than 3 years on illegal gun possession drives the Chicago gun crime rate.....


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > I am not saying that guns reduced crime.......
> ...




Not on this point...

Concealed carry and gun ownership does lower the crime rate....  

The research on concealed carry helping to lower the  crime rate......

Do Right-to-carry laws reduce violent crime? - Crime Prevention Research Center


_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.

_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._


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> More Guns = More Gun crime is valid....showing that that isn't true....



I haven't checked gun crime specifically.  But it appears that there is a slight upward correlation between violent crime and gun ownership rates.  

That is, of course, if you exclude the time variable.  I don't think that's unreasonable as we have both agreed that various circumstances have changed these numbers over time, including police force numbers and techniques.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

ABikerSailor said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...




Actual research shows this is happening.......

And the quote describes the democrat party, not their leader...... They would rather rule over  a cesspool they create, like Baltimore, than live in a good place they have no control over.


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> XponentialChaos said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



Sorry, I haven't looked into concealed carry yet and what it's impact is.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...




This isn't true....actual gun owners no longer admit to ownership to anonymous strangers over the phone...especially after Sandy Hook when local papers decided to publish the names of gun owners in their papers......letting criminals know where guns were located...

Notice...this is NBC...not "NRA"

NBC Poll: Does Gun Ownership Increase Or Decrease Safety? Anti-Gun Activists Won't Like The Results.

nearly 6 in 10 Americans believe that getting guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens_ increases _safety.

*"In the poll, 58 percent agree with the statement that gun ownership does more to increase safety by allowing law-abiding citizens to protect themselves,"* NBC News reports. "By contrast, 38 percent say that gun ownership reduces safety by giving too many people access to firearms, increasing the chances for accidental misuse."

------

NBC notes that the overall result is a "reversal" of the findings of a 1999 survey that found that 52 percent of respondents believed gun ownership _reduced_ safety. The more positive perspective on gun ownership is partly reflected in gun ownership trends: "*47 percent of American adults say they have a firearm in the household, which is up from 44 percent in 1999."*


Why Women Are Buying More Guns

More than a third of the women who participated in the National Sports Shooting Foundation’s most recent survey identified as new gun owners. This data are consistent with those of other organizations, including the National Sporting Goods Association. According to the NSGA’s Annual Sports Participation Report, the number of women who practice target shooting increased nearly 36 percent (from 4.31 million to 5.86 million) between 2004 and 2014, while the number of women participating in hunting increased 23 percent (from 2.68 million to 3.3 million). In response to a request for comment, an NRA spokesman reported tracking a 77 percent increase between 2004 and 2011 in the number of women who own firearms.

http://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/cnsnewscom-staff/more-guns-less-gun-violence-between-1993-and-2013


Based on data from a 2012 Congressional Research Service (CRS) report(and additional data from another Wonkblog article “There are now more guns than people in the United States”), the number of privately owned firearms in U.S. increased from about 185 million in 1993 to 357 million in 2013.

-------------------------------
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 (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > More Guns = More Gun crime is valid....showing that that isn't true....
> ...




No...sorry......over time...as more people own and carry guns, it is undeniable that the gun murder rate went down, not up.  The gun crime number went down, not up.........26 years......the exact opposite of what was predicted.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

ABikerSailor said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...




Here you go....

Study: Crime rates linked to out-of-wedlock births

A study in the latest issue of _The Journal of Law and Economics_ finds a link between out-of-wedlock births and rates of murder and other crimes.
-------
According to the study, in the years from 1965 to 2002, higher rates of out-of-wedlock births in a given year correlate with higher crime rates roughly 20 years later, when members of that birth cohort had become adults. The findings suggest that children born out of wedlock may receive lower educational and other resource investments from their parents, and may therefore be more likely to commit crimes as adults, say the study’s authors, economists Todd D. Kendall, of the consulting firm Compass Lexecon, and Robert Tamura of Clemson University.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...




It didn't do what you said it did....we have shown you actual gun research the CDC conducted after the Dickey Amendment.....you are just wrong.

Here...more, along with the previous two...gun research conducted after the Dickey Amendment....you have been listening to lies...

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....

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....

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

And this one....

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

And this one...

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.

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 (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> 2aguy
> 
> I ran the numbers for a few more measurements and I think the results are interesting.  I'll post some of them.
> 
> ...




So......accidental gun deaths.....keeping in mind a population of close to 320 million people, close to 600 million guns in private hands, and over 17.25 million people carrying guns for self defense....and you think this means anything?

Accidental gun death by year.......according to the CDC....really?

https://www.cdc.gov/injury/wisqars/leading_causes_death.html

2017...486
2016   495
2015...489http://webappa.cdc.gov/cgi-bin/broker.exe

2014.....461

2013 .....  505
2012 .....  548
2011 .....  591
2010 .....  606
2009 .....  554
2008 .....  592
2007.....   613
2006.....   642
2005 .....  789
2004 .....  649
2003 .....  730
2002 .....  762
2001 .....  802
2000 .....  776
1999 .....  824


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> 2aguy
> 
> I ran the numbers for a few more measurements and I think the results are interesting.  I'll post some of them.
> 
> ...




You are way off......

320 million people..... 600 million guns in private hands, likely more.....over 17.25 million people carrying guns for self defense......how many died in gun accidents..according to the CDC...?

486 in 2017......

Yeah, your numbers don't add up....


https://www.cdc.gov/injury/wisqars/leading_causes_death.html

2017...486
2016   495
2015...489http://webappa.cdc.gov/cgi-bin/broker.exe

2014.....461

2013 .....  505
2012 .....  548
2011 .....  591
2010 .....  606
2009 .....  554
2008 .....  592
2007.....   613
2006.....   642
2005 .....  789
2004 .....  649
2003 .....  730
2002 .....  762
2001 .....  802
2000 .....  776
1999 .....  824


----------



## iceberg (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...


I'm not over simplifying it. If you can't get what you want, you change what you want to in order to get what you wanted in the first place. 

Tell me that's an incorrect take fine. But tell me why.


----------



## iceberg (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...


Then list your specific restrictions and how they would address any mass shooting in the last decade. 

If you can't link changes to solutions, then not much will change, will it?


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> XponentialChaos said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



As we already agreed, there are external reasons why these numbers have changed over time.  As we have already agreed, police likely have a big part in why the murder rate went down in these 26 years.  

You keep repeating this same talking point, and it's not working.  How many gun registration laws have gone into effect in the last 26 years?  I can just as easily argue that crime has gone down in these 26 years due to the gun laws that were passed.


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> XponentialChaos said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy
> ...



Not really.  

It's a relatively small sample size and the correlation is pretty much negligible anyway.  It is, however, positive. Just slightly though.  What do you make of the other numbers?


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> XponentialChaos said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy
> ...



Everyone has their own opinion, but we should at least be able to agree on numbers.  

How do my numbers not "add up"?  How am I "way off"?  Please be specific.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Aug 1, 2019)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...


Wrong.

The _Miller_ Court said nothing about what constitutes a weapon ‘in common use,’ and there’s nothing in _Miller_ prohibiting the regulation of AR 15s and similar rifles and carbines.

And you're also wrong about Hitler: 

“…the notion that Hitler confiscated everyone’s guns is mostly bogus. And the ancillary claim that Jews could have stopped the Holocaust with more guns doesn't make any sense at all if you think about it for more than a minute.”

The Hitler gun control lie


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Aug 1, 2019)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...


Yes the miller court di because other courts have referenced Miller and the in common use ruling
Heller and McDonald
Hitler confiscated Jews guns which was what I referenced stop being a liar.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > XponentialChaos said:
> ...




Gun registration does nothing to reduce crime or mass shootings.   

Again.....the anti-gun argument does not include...."except police..."

The entire argument of the anti-gun side, your side....is that if more guns are put into any society, regardless of police, cultural factors, societal factors, economic factors.....there will be more gun crime and more gun murder.

You can try to ignore that argument, but it is the core argument of your side....

And the last 26 years in this country, when millions upon millions more guns have entered society and more and more people own and carry them in public.....the gun murder rate did not go up...it went down 49%....the gun crime rate did not go up, it went down 75%....

You can't explain that....... 

In science, if you test a theory and the exact opposite from the expected result happens, that means your theory is wrong.....

The More Guns, More Gun crime argument failed.....


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > XponentialChaos said:
> ...




Again....for accidental gun deaths...they went down as more people own and carry guns.....and even then, 483 deaths out of a population of 320 million people, with over 600 million guns and over 17.25 million people carrying those guns in public places shows the other point the anti-gunners make is also not true....that more guns will equal more accidental gun death.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > XponentialChaos said:
> ...




You are adding suicide to gun murder.....that is incorrect.   You are not computing the numbers with the methods used by actual researchers who take into account other factors, remove other factors and base their numbers on actual methods for calculating these numbers....

For example.....

More Guns Mean More Violent Crime--or Less? A Researcher Aims at Scientific American

But Moyer ignores 24 peer-reviewed publications just showing that crime in the U.S. drops after people are allowed to carry concealed handguns.

She references a recent unpublished paper by John Donohue, Abhay Aneja and Kyle Weber, but, unlike other studies, they don’t measure the number of permits issued, account for any other gun-control laws or deal with well-known statistical errors (such as truncation problems from a lot of zero values in the crime rates). The study also relies almost exclusively on trends in Hawaii to predict violent crime rates in Idaho, Minnesota, Mississippi, Nebraska and Utah.
-----

Take one example of Moyer’s sloppiness or bias in her article. Moyer has a long discussion of Arthur Kellermann’s work on the risks of guns in the home, and notes that Kellermann studied “444 people who had been killed between 1987 and 1992 at home.” *But Moyer fails to note that, in fact, in only eight of these 444 homicide cases was the murder weapon a gun that had been kept in the home *(_The New England Journal of Medicine, _February 3, 1994, p. 368). If Moyer had even read the 1998 edition of _More Guns, Less Crime,_ she would have learned this.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Aug 1, 2019)

OldLady said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...


I expect you to lie to me, but lying to yourself in indicative of illness.
Seek help.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > XponentialChaos said:
> ...




Here.....

You Know Less Than You Think About Guns

Do Gun Laws Stop Gun Crimes?

The same week Kristof's column came out, _National Journal_ attracted major media attention with a showy piece of research and analysis headlined "The States With The Most Gun Laws See The Fewest Gun-Related Deaths." The subhead lamented: "But there's still little appetite to talk about more restrictions."

*Critics quickly noted that the Journal's Libby Isenstein had included suicides among "gun-related deaths" and suicide-irrelevant policies such as stand-your-ground laws among its tally of "gun laws." That meant that high-suicide, low-homicide states such as Wyoming, Alaska, and Idaho were taken to task for their liberal carry-permit policies. Worse, several of the states with what the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence considers terribly lax gun laws were dropped from Isenstein's data set because their murder rates were too low!*

*Another of National Journal's mistakes is a common one in gun science: The paper didn't look at gun statistics in the context of overall violent crime, a much more relevant measure to the policy debate. After all, if less gun crime doesn't mean less crime overall—if criminals simply substitute other weapons or means when guns are less available—the benefit of the relevant gun laws is thrown into doubt. When Thomas Firey of the Cato Institute ran regressions of Isenstein's study with slightly different specifications and considering all violent crime, each of her effects either disappeared or reversed.*

Another recent well-publicized study trying to assert a positive connection between gun laws and public safety was a 2013 _JAMA_ _Internal Medicine_ article by the Harvard pediatrics professor Eric W. Fleegler and his colleagues, called "Firearm Legislation and Firearm-Related Fatalities in the United States." It offered a mostly static comparison of the toughness of state gun laws (as rated by the gun control lobbyists at the Brady Center) with gun deaths from 2007 to 2010.

*"States with strictest firearm laws have lowest rates of gun deaths," a Boston Globeheadline then announced. But once again, if you take the simple, obvious step of separating out suicides from murders, the correlations that buttress the supposed causations disappear. As John Hinderaker headlined his reaction at the Power Line blog, "New Study Finds Firearm Laws Do Nothing to Prevent Homicides."*

Among other anomalies in Fleegler's research, Hinderaker pointed out that it didn't include Washington, D.C., with its strict gun laws and frequent homicides. If just one weak-gun-law state, Louisiana, were taken out of the equation, "the remaining nine lowest-regulation states have an average gun homicide rate of 2.8 per 100,000, which is 12.5% less than the average of the ten states with the strictest gun control laws," he found.

October interview with _Slate_ and found it wanting: "There have been studies that have essentially toted up the number of laws various states have on the books and examined the association between the number of laws and rates of firearm death," said Wintemute, who is a medical doctor and researcher at the University of California, Davis. "That's really bad science, and it shouldn't inform policymaking."

Wintemute thinks the factor such studies don't adequately consider is the number of people in a state who _have_ guns to begin with, which is generally not known or even well-estimated on levels smaller than national, though researchers have used proxies from subscribers to certain gun-related magazines and percentages of suicides committed with guns to make educated guesses. "Perhaps these laws decrease mortality by decreasing firearm ownership, in which case firearm ownership mediates the association," Wintemute wrote in a 2013 _JAMA_ _Internal Medicine_ paper. "But perhaps, and more plausibly, these laws are more readily enacted in states where the prevalence of firearm ownership is low—there will be less opposition to them—and firearm ownership confounds the association."











Would Cracking Down on Guns in the U.S. Really Reduce Violence? , by Robert VerBruggen, National Review

There is actually no simple correlation between states’ homicide rates and their gun-ownership rates or gun laws. 
This has been shown numerous times, by different people, using different data sets. 

*A year ago, I took state gun-ownership levels reported by the Washington Post (based on a Centers for Disease Control survey) and compared them with murder rates from the FBI: no correlation. *

*The legal scholar Eugene Volokh has compared states’ gun laws (as rated by the anti-gun Brady Campaign) with their murder rates: no correlation. *

*David Freddoso of the Washington Examiner, a former National Review reporter, failed to find a correlation even between gun ownership in a state and gun murders specifically, an approach that sets aside the issue of whether gun availability has an effect on non-gun crime. (Guns can deter unarmed criminals, for instance, and criminals without guns may simply switch to other weapons.) *


, I recently redid my analysis with a few tweaks. Instead of relying on a single year of survey data, I averaged three years. (The CDC survey, the best available for state-level numbers, included data on gun ownership only in 2001, 2002, and 2004. Those were the years I looked at.) 

*And instead of comparing CDC data with murder rates from a different agency, I relied on the CDC’s own estimates of death by assault in those years. Again: no correlation.*

*------*

Left-leaning media outlets, from Mother Jones to National Journal, get around this absence of correlation by reporting numbers on “gun deaths” rather than gun homicides or homicides in general. 

*More than 60 percent of gun deaths nationally are suicides, and places with higher gun ownership typically see a higher percentage of their suicides committed with a gun. *

Focusing on the number of gun deaths practically guarantees a finding that guns and violence go together. While it may be true that public policy should also seek to reduce suicide, it is homicide — often a dramatic mass killing — that usually prompts the media and politicians to call for gun control, and it is homicide that most influences people as they consider supporting measures to take away their fellow citizens’ access to guns. 


There are large gaps among the states when it comes to homicide, with rates ranging all the way from about two to twelve per 100,000 in 2013, the most recent year of data available from the CDC. These disparities show that it’s not just guns that cause the United States to have, on average, a higher rate of homicide than other developed countries do. Not only is there no correlation between gun ownership and overall homicide within a state, but there is a strong correlation between gun homicide and non-gun homicide — suggesting that they spring from similar causes, and that some states are simply more violent than others. A closer look at demographic and geographic patterns provides some clues as to why this is.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> Granted it's only a slight positive correlation, but its still _positive_.


Given the rates of gun in states w/o gun registration - that is, most of them - is just a guess, and could be off by wide, wide margins, how much confidence do you put in these numbers?


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...




Again with the lie about what hitler did.....

That very article which you quote states....

The law _did_ prohibit Jews and other persecuted classes from owning guns, but this should not be an indictment of gun control in general. 

Hitler banned and confiscated guns from the people he planned on murdering......
that article is a lie.......


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...




You misquote Miller and ignore Heller.....you are vile...

Miller states that military weapons are protected........

United States v. Miller - Wikipedia

The Court cannot take judicial notice that a shotgun having a barrel less than 18 inches long has today any reasonable relation to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, and therefore cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees to the citizen the right to keep and bear such a weapon.

In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a "shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length" at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument. Certainly it is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment, or that its use could contribute to the common defense.

Then Heller states that....

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/07pdf/07-290.pdf

Some have made the argument, bordering on the frivolous, that only those arms in existence in the 18th century are protected by the Second Amendment. 

We do not interpret constitutional rights that way. Just as the First Amendment protects modern forms of communications, e.g., Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union, 521 U. S. 844, 849 (1997), and the Fourth Amendment applies to modern forms of search, e.g., Kyllo v. United States, 533 U. S. 27, 35–36 (2001), *the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding.*

Then Scalia, who wrote the Heller opinion goes even further in Friedman v Highland Park....stating that semi automatic rifles are protected by the 2nd Amendment and mentions the AR-15 rifle by name...

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/15pdf/15-133_7l48.pdf


That analysis misreads Heller. The question under Heller is not whether citizens have adequate alternatives available for self-defense. 

Rather, Heller asks whether the law bans types of firearms commonly used for a lawful purpose—regardless of whether alternatives exist. 554 U. S., at 627–629. And Heller draws a distinction between such firearms and weapons specially adapted to unlawful uses and not in common use, such as sawed-off shotguns. Id., at 624–625.

 The City’s ban is thus highly suspect because it broadly prohibits common semiautomatic firearms used for lawful purposes. 

*Roughly five million Americans own AR-style semiautomatic rifles. See 784 F. 3d, at 415, n. 3. The overwhelming majority of citizens who own and use such rifles do so for lawful purposes, including self-defense and target shooting. See ibid. Under our precedents, that is all that is needed for citizens to have a right under the Second Amendment to keep such weapons. See McDonald, 561 U. S., at 767–768; Heller, supra, at 628–629. *


----------



## M14 Shooter (Aug 1, 2019)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> The _Miller_ Court said nothing about what constitutes a weapon ‘in common use,’ and there’s nothing in _Miller_ prohibiting the regulation of AR 15s and similar rifles and carbines.


Except, of course, AR15s, et al, are in common use for traditionally lawful purposes; as such, they, _prima facie_, constitute "bearable arms", the right to own and use all of which are protected by the 2nd- especially from a ban on said ownership and use, which violate the Constitution at any level of scrutiny.

Its OK - we expected you to lie.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

M14 Shooter said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > The _Miller_ Court said nothing about what constitutes a weapon ‘in common use,’ and there’s nothing in _Miller_ prohibiting the regulation of AR 15s and similar rifles and carbines.
> ...




Clayton is such a scumbag.......... he lies by omission, then has the gaul to call us the liars.


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> The entire argument of the anti-gun side, your side....is that if more guns are put into any society, regardless of police, cultural factors, societal factors, economic factors.....there will be more gun crime and more gun murder.



Look at this quote of yours right here.  

I didn't make this argument.  I don't know who did and I don't care who did.  It doesn't matter what you think "my side" has stated.  You're arguing against a position that I'm not making.  That's called a strawman.

You and I already agreed on at least one reason why the gun  murder rate went down in the last 26 years, and it's because of the police.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > The entire argument of the anti-gun side, your side....is that if more guns are put into any society, regardless of police, cultural factors, societal factors, economic factors.....there will be more gun crime and more gun murder.
> ...




Yes.....but it did not increase when more guns were put into the picture.....


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> XponentialChaos said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



C'mon man, let's be intellectually honest here.  

I specifically stated that "gun death rate" includes suicides.  You don't like the statistic, which is understandable, because it uses suicide.  But there's nothing wrong with the numbers themselves.  So don't tell me that the numbers "don't add up" or that I'm "way off" on the calculations I ran just because you don't agree with the statistic.

Fair?


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 1, 2019)

M14 Shooter said:


> XponentialChaos said:
> 
> 
> > Granted it's only a slight positive correlation, but its still _positive_.
> ...



Sorry bud.  If I thought you were worth the time, I would consider continuing this with you.

I get it.  You like guns.  Now run along and play while the adults talk numbers.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > XponentialChaos said:
> ...




Yes...it is wrong....you are using suicides to increase the number.....suicide has nothing to do with gun murder...the true measure....you don't like that measure because gun murder went down 49% as more people bought and carried guns....


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> XponentialChaos said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



That's correct.  And you and I both agree that external reasons likely contributed to that.  For one, the police.

I feel like I've said this a few times now.  If I haven't, let me make myself perfectly clear. 

I don't claim the following to be accurate.  In fact, I think the following statement is dead wrong:

"if more guns are put into any society, regardless of police, cultural factors, societal factors, economic factors.....there will be more gun crime and more gun murder."

Cool?


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > XponentialChaos said:
> ...




See...... now that just shows you are not honest....M14 simply called out your method and your refusal to explain why gun crime went down over the last 26 years.......you dismiss this fact as unnecessary to your numbers...and that is not true.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > XponentialChaos said:
> ...




Sure.....but then don't mix suicide into gun murder numbers and say there are more gun deaths in states with more guns....that isn't honest......the only measure is gun murder, and gun crime....the illegal use of guns to commit crimes


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> XponentialChaos said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



I already explained this.  The math is correct.  You just disagree with the statistic itself.  You don't think it's relevant to include suicides, which is perfectly fair.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > XponentialChaos said:
> ...




No, the math isn't correct when you need to throw in suicide.  Suicide is different from gun murder and crime...... stating "gun deaths" and mixing the numbers implies that those deaths are a result of criminal action....it is misleading and wrong.


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> XponentialChaos said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



How is that not honest?  

There are more gun deaths in states with more guns.  That's just a fact.  Additionally, it's also a fact that many of those gun deaths are due to suicide.  

There's nothing factually dishonest about those statements.


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> XponentialChaos said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



LoL I already explained this a few times.  I'm not sure I can simplify this any more than I have.

The math is correct with the variables provided as I defined them.  You just question the relevance of the the variable because it includes suicides.  The math, itself, is fine.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > XponentialChaos said:
> ...



Yes...there is.... by stating gun deaths you imply gun crime.....  that is dishonest since any rational person will see that a lack of guns will not impact the suicide rate.   And I pointed out articles that show that taking out gun suicide changes everything....

The same week Kristof's column came out, _National Journal_ attracted major media attention with a showy piece of research and analysis headlined "The States With The Most Gun Laws See The Fewest Gun-Related Deaths." The subhead lamented: "But there's still little appetite to talk about more restrictions."

*Critics quickly noted that the Journal's Libby Isenstein had included suicides among "gun-related deaths" and suicide-irrelevant policies such as stand-your-ground laws among its tally of "gun laws." 

That meant that high-suicide, low-homicide states such as Wyoming, Alaska, and Idaho were taken to task for their liberal carry-permit policies. Worse, several of the states with what the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence considers terribly lax gun laws were dropped from Isenstein's data set because their murder rates were too low!*

Another of _National Journal_'s mistakes is a common one in gun science: The paper didn't look at gun statistics in the context of overall violent crime, a much more relevant measure to the policy debate. After all, if less gun crime doesn't mean less crime overall—if criminals simply substitute other weapons or means when guns are less available—the benefit of the relevant gun laws is thrown into doubt. 

*When Thomas Firey of the Cato Institute ran regressions of Isenstein's study with slightly different specifications and considering all violent crime, each of her effects either disappeared or reversed.*


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > XponentialChaos said:
> ...




And there is the problem...garbage in, garbage out.....


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > XponentialChaos said:
> ...




And here...

"States with strictest firearm laws have lowest rates of gun deaths," a _Boston Globe_headline then announced. 

*But once again, if you take the simple, obvious step of separating out suicides from murders, the correlations that buttress the supposed causations disappear. *

As John Hinderaker headlined his reaction at the _Power Line_ blog, "New Study Finds Firearm Laws Do Nothing to Prevent Homicides."
----

*Among other anomalies in Fleegler's research, Hinderaker pointed out that it didn't include Washington, D.C., with its strict gun laws and frequent homicides. If just one weak-gun-law state, Louisiana, were taken out of the equation, "the remaining nine lowest-regulation states have an average gun homicide rate of 2.8 per 100,000, which is 12.5% less than the average of the ten states with the strictest gun control laws," he found.*

October interview with _Slate_ and found it wanting: "There have been studies that have essentially toted up the number of laws various states have on the books and examined the association between the number of laws and rates of firearm death," said Wintemute, who is a medical doctor and researcher at the University of California, Davis. "That's really bad science, and it shouldn't inform policymaking."

Wintemute thinks the factor such studies don't adequately consider is the number of people in a state who _have_ guns to begin with, which is generally not known or even well-estimated on levels smaller than national, though researchers have used proxies from subscribers to certain gun-related magazines and percentages of suicides committed with guns to make educated guesses. "Perhaps these laws decrease mortality by decreasing firearm ownership, in which case firearm ownership mediates the association," Wintemute wrote in a 2013 _JAMA_ _Internal Medicine_ paper. "But perhaps, and more plausibly, these laws are more readily enacted in states where the prevalence of firearm ownership is low—there will be less opposition to them—and firearm ownership confounds the association."


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> Yes...there is.... by stating gun deaths you imply gun crime.....  that is dishonest



I'm not implying anything.  I'm stating exactly what the facts are.  

If I wanted to give you number regarding gun crime, then I would look up those numbers specifically.

There is absolutely nothing dishonest about what I said.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Yes...there is.... by stating gun deaths you imply gun crime.....  that is dishonest
> ...




You mean except for implying "gun deaths" are gun murder......by the omission of suicide ........ take out suicide and as the article showed.....the numbers reverse.


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> XponentialChaos said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



That's fine.  You can question the relevance all you want, and I've said this a few times because I get that you don't agree with the measurement I'm using.  All I'm saying is that the math, for that variable you don't want to use, is fine.

The numbers aren't "way off".  You just disagree with the measurement.  

This wasn't supposed to be this big of a big deal, lol.  Let's just call it what it is.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Yes...there is.... by stating gun deaths you imply gun crime.....  that is dishonest
> ...




Then this.....

Haskins: Strict gun control will never work in America

For instance, many of the states with the lowest crime rates, including homicide rates, also have some of the fewest limits on gun ownership. In fact, the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, a group that supports enhancing gun-control laws, gave in its recent gun-control report card “F” grades (for having lax gun laws) to five of the six states that have the lowest homicide rates. If having fewer gun restrictions causes more violent crime, why would many states with the lowest homicide rates also have relatively few gun-control laws?

*The data also show there is no connection to higher gun ownership rates and greater amounts of crime. There are only six states in which 50 percent of the households own firearms: Alaska, Arkansas, Idaho, Montana, West Virginia and Wyoming. If gun-control supporters are correct about the dangers of firearms, these states should have significantly higher crime rates, but the opposite is true here as well. Data provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention show four of those six states ranked in the top half of all states for having the lowest homicide rates. Two of the states, Idaho and Wyoming, ranked in the top six.*

Further, many cities with very low legal gun ownership rates and stringent gun-control laws, such as Chicago, have extremely high gun-related murder rates.

Gun-control laws also don’t prevent mass shootings. An analysis conducted by statistician Leah Libresco shows Australia and Britain have not experienced fewer mass shootings or gun-related crimes since enacting their very strict gun-control laws.

-------



It’s also important to note that relative to other problems in our society of 320 million people, gun-related crime caused by Americans who legally own a firearm involved in the crime is virtually nonexistent. 

Of the 33,000 gun-related deaths that occur each year, two-thirds are suicides, and the majority of the remaining 11,000 deaths are gang-related and involve guns that were purchased illegally.

*By contrast, 88,000 people die every year from alcohol-linked causes. That means if you exclude suicides, alcohol is 650 percent deadlier than guns (including gang-related crime), and virtually no one is calling for another Prohibition, which, it’s worth pointing out, was a complete disaster.*


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> XponentialChaos said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



I didn't intend to imply that "gun deaths" are "gun murder".  Very different measurements.


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> XponentialChaos said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



Not related to what I said.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > XponentialChaos said:
> ...




Yes.....change a measurement by a 1/4 inch and the math still works, but the building collapses...the math was right, the numbers were just the wrong numbers that were needed for the end result...


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> XponentialChaos said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



There we go.  Now we're on the same page again.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > XponentialChaos said:
> ...




And here is an example...

More Minnesotans Own Guns, Violent Crime Remains Low | Ryan McMaken

Like numerous northern states with fairly high rates of gun ownership, Minnesota also enjoys very low homicide rates. 

First of all, as noted here at mises.org, homicide rates in the United States vary considerably by state and region. Claims about homicide and violence "in the United States" are usually meaningless because of the large variations from place to place in the United States. 

In Minnesota, the homicide rate in 2016 was 1.8 per 100,000. That's about equal to the homicide rate in British Columbia, Canada. 
------

*Secondly, it is also true nationwide that homicide rates do not increase with increasing gun ownership. In fact, as we've shown here at mises.org, from 1994 to 2013, gun ownership increased substantially, while homicide rates fell. Moreover, homocide rates are now near 50-year lows, and have falled considerably from the 1980s and 1990s.*


----------



## M14 Shooter (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> Sorry bud.  If I thought you were worth the time, I would consider continuing this with you.


Ah.  You cant man up and face the fact your computations are almost certainly invalid because of the uncertain validity of the information you used.
I accept your concession.


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> XponentialChaos said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



This is the same argument all over again.  We already agreed that a reason for the declining crime rates and homicide rates is the police, among other reasons.

However, when we remove the time period and just compare gun ownership rates to violent crime rates, there's a slightly positive correlation.  This number negates the effects of police efforts over time and just looks at gun ownership vs violent crime rates.


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 1, 2019)

M14 Shooter said:


> XponentialChaos said:
> 
> 
> > Sorry bud.  If I thought you were worth the time, I would consider continuing this with you.
> ...



K.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > XponentialChaos said:
> ...




This is why I continue to debate anti-gunners such as yourself.....I find new research......

It goes right to you "equation" and computations....M14 has brought this up in his posts....

Why Gun Ownership Rates Tell Us Little About Homicide Trends in America | Ryan McMaken


There have always been two big problems with these types of studies, and both were covered in a 2018 Rand Corp. analysis. One is that there is no data which directly tells us how many guns are owned by or available to Americans. Researches attempting to show correlations between crime and gun ownership must rely on proxies such as the "FS/S" proxy, which is the proportion of suicides that were firearm suicides. Other proxies include the proportion of residents who are military veterans, and "subscriptions per 100,000 people to _Guns & Ammo_."

Writing for Rand, researcher Rouslan Karimov finds this reliance on these proxies problematic, and notes "many such study designs are currently hampered by poor information on the prevalence of gun ownership and the consequent reliance on proxy measures of availability and prevalence."

A second problem with the more-guns-more-crime hypothesis is the fact that a high crime rate may_ itself _be a driver of high rates of gun ownership. Karimov notes:

----------

Perhaps the largest study within this theoretical framework is Randolph Roth's _American Homicide_. Roth is doubtful of the pat answers given by both pundits and academics "who claim that they can measure the impact of gun laws or unemployment or the death penalty on homicide rates by controlling statistically for the impact of other variables." According to Roth, "Those claims are false."

Roth contends that any serious analysis must take into account trends in homicide measures over numerous decades in a wide variety of times and places. With this data, Roth concludes is it reasonable to accept LaFree's contention that the variables that correlate most clearly with homicide are "the proportion of adults who say they trust their government to do the right thing and the proportion who believe that most public officials are honest."

-----

The possibility the root causes of homicide lie far deeper than guns, however, would force gun-control advocates to prove that reducing access to legal guns would actually make Americans more peaceful. If Americans really are more homicidal due to deep-seated cultural and historical factors, then homicide is likely to persist at similar rates even in the absence of legal guns. Indeed, significant restrictions of access to guns may simply reduce access to necessary self-defense for many within what is a resiliently violent population.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > XponentialChaos said:
> ...




And now....to throw in Concealed carry laws and gun ownership.....they do, in fact, help to decrease gun crime.....

You can't take away the fact that more guns did not lead to more gun crime......you want to, but you can't.  You aren't factoring everything you need to make that conclusion.....

Normal people who own guns are not using those guns for crime...that is a fact.....so the mere existence of guns does not equal higher gun crime rates.........    Lax policies toward criminals are not in your equation.... the effect of single parent homes and violence is not in your equation.....there are so many variables you can't account for, that your number fails to be even remotely accurate.


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> XponentialChaos said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



Any data set is going to be imperfect - whether by polling or other means.  The best we can do is work with the numbers we have. 

I'm sure we have imperfect data on the CDC as well that you're referencing.  Still, it's the best we have.


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> XponentialChaos said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



I haven't said anything about concealed carry laws.  I'm not sure this applies to what I've said.

States with more gun owners have a positive correlation with violent crime.  That's a fact.  I'm not implying anything other than what I said in that sentence.  That sentence is a fact.

I didn't say "gun crime".  I said "violent crime".  I haven't run the numbers with gun crime.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > XponentialChaos said:
> ...




No, it's not.  As my links show.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > XponentialChaos said:
> ...




Things you are not taking into account......

Here Are 8 Stubborn Facts on Gun Violence in America


The rate of gun ownership is higher among whites than it is among African-Americans, but the murder rate among African-Americans is significantly higher than the rate among whites.
-------
*6. There is no clear relationship between strict gun control legislation and homicide or violent crime rates.*


The Brady Campaign Against Gun Violence ironically makes this clear with its ratings for states based on gun laws. “Gun freedom” states that score poorly, like New Hampshire, Vermont, Idaho, and Oregon, have some of the lowest homicide rates. Conversely, “gun-control-loving” states that received high scores, like Maryland and Illinois, experience some of the nation’s highest homicide rates.
The Crime Prevention Research Center notes that, if anything, the data indicate that countries with high rates of gun ownership tend to have lower homicide rates—but this is only a correlation, and many factors do not necessarily support a conclusion that high rates of gun ownership cause the low rates of homicide.
Homicide and firearm homicide rates in Great Britain spiked in the years immediately following the imposition of severe gun control measures, despite the fact that most developed countries continued to experience a downward trend in these rates. This is also pointed out by noted criminologist John Lott in his book “The War on Guns.”
Similarly, Ireland’s homicide rates spiked in the years immediately following the country’s 1972 gun confiscation legislation.
Australia’s National Firearms Act appears to have had little effect on suicide and homicide rates, which were falling before the law was enacted and continued to decline at a statistically unremarkable rate compared to worldwide trends.
According to research compiled by John Lott and highlighted in his book “The War on Guns,” Australia’s armed and unarmed robbery rates both increased markedly in the five years immediately following the National Firearms Act, despite the general downward trend experienced by other developed countries.
Great Britain has some of the strictest gun control laws in the developed world, but the violent crime rate for homicide, rape, burglary, and aggravated assault is much higher than that in the U.S. Further, approximately 60 percent of burglaries in Great Britain occur while residents are home, compared to just 13 percent in the U.S., and British burglars admit to targeting occupied residences because they are more likely to find wallets and purses.
It is difficult to compare homicide and firearm-related murder rates across international borders because countries use different methods to determine which deaths “count” for purposes of violent crime. For example, since 1967, Great Britain has excluded from its homicide counts any case that does not result in a conviction, that was the result of dangerous driving, or in which the person was determined to have acted in self-defense. All of these factors are counted as “homicides” in the United States.


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> XponentialChaos said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



Show me.


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 1, 2019)

2aguy said:


> XponentialChaos said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



They're comparing violent crime in different countries.  I already addressed this with you in post #1518.

I can repeat myself though if you like.


----------



## Leo123 (Aug 1, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> Leo123 said:
> 
> 
> > XponentialChaos said:
> ...



OK thanks but those links prove nothing because all data is impossible to collect and it is impossible to know just how many guns there are.  There is over 393,000,000 known guns in the U.S. but those are the only the ones that are known and can be quantified.    The number of guns leaving circulation, illegal, etc. is unknown so, even trying to count the number of guns in the U.S. is nothing more than an academic exercise.   Taking such sketchy data and trying to apply a statistical model to prove some kind of point is pretty futile.  Like they used to say in the early days of computing ..... "garbage in - garbage out."


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 2, 2019)

Leo123 said:


> OK thanks but those links prove nothing because all data is impossible to collect and it is impossible to know just how many guns there are.  There is over 393,000,000 known guns in the U.S. but those are the only the ones that are known and can be quantified.    The number of guns leaving circulation, illegal, etc. is unknown so, even trying to count the number of guns in the U.S. is nothing more than an academic exercise.   Taking such sketchy data and trying to apply a statistical model to prove some kind of point is pretty futile.  Like they used to say in the early days of computing ..... "garbage in - garbage out."



The same can be said of just about any data.  

Both sides are looking at the same data.  Both sides are using that data to make arguments for or against gun legislation.  Yet somehow the quality of the data only becomes a concern when the opposition uses it.


----------



## Leo123 (Aug 2, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> [QUTE="Leo123, post: 22833613, member: 65921"]
> 
> OK thanks but those links prove nothing because all data is impossible to collect and it is impossible to know just how many guns there are.  There is over 393,000,000 known guns in the U.S. but those are the only the ones that are known and can be quantified.    The number of guns leaving circulation, illegal, etc. is unknown so, even trying to count the number of guns in the U.S. is nothing more than an academic exercise.   Taking such sketchy data and trying to apply a statistical model to prove some kind of point is pretty futile.  Like they used to say in the early days of computing ..... "garbage in - garbage out."



The same can be said of just about any data.

Both sides are looking at the same data.  Both sides are using that data to make arguments for or against gun legislation.  Yet somehow the quality of the data only becomes a concern when the opposition uses it.[/QUOTE]

Yes, because the quality of the data is IMPORTANT!!!!   Especially when you are advocating weakening the 2nd amendment!!!   The 'gun grabbers' have the burden of PROVING the 2nd amendment is not applicable to "We the People"....So far all they have is sycophant MSM and fake 'studies' which is the WEAKEST argument against  gun ownership by We The People.


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 2, 2019)

Leo123 said:


> Yes, because the quality of the data is IMPORTANT!!!!   Especially when you are advocating weakening the 2nd amendment!!!   The 'gun grabbers' have the burden of PROVING the 2nd amendment is not applicable to "We the People"....So far all they have is sycophant MSM and fake 'studies' which is the WEAKEST argument against  gun ownership by We The People.



It sure is convenient that the inevitable burden of imperfect data is only of consequence to the opposition, because you say so.


----------



## OldLady (Aug 2, 2019)

2aguy said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


I'm confused, Guy.  Why did all these people respond to YOUR polls showing higher gun ownership when you said they would not respond honestly to MINE?


----------



## Blues Man (Aug 2, 2019)

RealDave said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...


The gun doesn't lead to mass killings.

If the AR 15 led to mass killings there would be a hell of a lot more of them since there are over 8 million AR 15s in private hands.

What percentage of privately owned Ar 15s are used to commit murder?


----------



## Blues Man (Aug 2, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Your point has been brought up before.  The theory by anti-gun activists is that regardless of those other factors......More Guns = More Gun crime.   That is where they hang their hat.
> ...


but do they have an overall higher murder rate?

Why do you want to use the term gun murder?

Is getting murdered by someone with a gun somehow worse than getting murdered by a guy with a knife?


----------



## Blues Man (Aug 2, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Other researchers have done the same thing and found the opposite....and then you get into the chicken and egg problem.....
> ...



But it doesn't

There are fewer guns per person in urban areas yet there is a higher murder rate in urban areas than there is in rural and semi-rural areas where there is a higher percntage of gun ownership


----------



## Blues Man (Aug 2, 2019)

OldLady said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...


Why wouldn't any law abiding gun owner want to give up his guns?

My guns are not going to be used to commit murder so they are no danger to the public.

You do not curb the rights of people who have never done anything wrong


----------



## Blues Man (Aug 2, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > XponentialChaos said:
> ...



Again why is it you think getting murdered by  gun is worse than getting murdered in any of a million other ways?

There are more guns per person in NH than there is in CA yet the murder rate in CA is 4 times higher than that of NH

NH has far looser gun laws than CA
The only conclusion one can draw from that is that gun laws do not lower the murder rate


----------



## Blues Man (Aug 2, 2019)

OldLady said:


> Less than a third of Americans own a gun.  But that's still 100 million, and the average would be that each of them owns three or four.  Of course, many own more than that and many own only one, like a handgun for personal protection when out in the city or a shotgun in the closet for when varmints hit the yard.
> 
> The danger of so many guns is that when one of those 100 million people has a really bad nasty day or goes a little off the wall mentally, all that person has to do is grab the gun and start shooting. That doesn't even take into account pissed off teenagers who feel "dissed" by a FB post or who are challenged to kill a rival gang member to be a big "man."   It plays out every day in domestics, in the streets, and we haven't even mentioned criminals who shoot people for hire and use guns to hold up stores etc.
> All those guns, for all those reasons, need to be much more strictly limited and handed out much more cautiously.



And yet the murder rates of states with lax gun laws are in many cases lower than the states with extremely strict gun laws

Gun laws that are not enforced have zero effect on the murder rate.

We have proof that when state and federal gun laws that we already have are followed and strictly enforced that crime and murder rates do decrease.


----------



## Blues Man (Aug 2, 2019)

OldLady said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...


No it hasn't

The only restriction on the CDC was they not use any money granted to promote gun control

There was no prohibition on doing the research and publishing the results


----------



## Blues Man (Aug 2, 2019)

OldLady said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...


Dickey doesn't prohibit the CDC from doing any research on guns as they relate to the health of the people in this country.

Your own quote explicitly shows that the only restriction was that the money granted not be used to promote gun control.


----------



## Blues Man (Aug 2, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> WillHaftawaite said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


 no we're not.

When we do they work

Virginia Project Exile

_*Study 1*_
_*Firearm Homicide Rates, Project Exile*_
_*Rosenfeld and colleagues (2005) found a statistically significant intervention effect for Project Exile. Firearm homicides in Richmond exhibited a 22 percent yearly decline, compared with the average reduction of about 10 percent per year for other large U.S. cities. The difference is statistically significant.*_

 Now what would happen if every state did the same thing?


----------



## Blues Man (Aug 2, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> Leo123 said:
> 
> 
> > XponentialChaos said:
> ...



Those numbers include suicides and suicide is not a crime.

more than 2\3 of "gun deaths" are suicides. Suicide is a choice and that is all it is.  There is absolutely no evidence that people who commit suicide with a gun would not have committed suicide if a gun was not available


----------



## Blues Man (Aug 2, 2019)

ABikerSailor said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...



Where is violent crime most prevalent in this country?

In urban areas that have been historically plagued by segregation, high unemployment and under employment, poor education, poverty and drugs, and the breakdown of the family unit.

This isn't rocket science it's an historical fact.

Take an urban area of comparable size where those societal ills are less present and compare the two then tell me it's guns and guns alone that are the problem


----------



## Blues Man (Aug 2, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > XponentialChaos said:
> ...



it's negligible.

People with CCW permits tend to be some of the mst law abiding people in the country

Concealed Carry Permit Holders Crime Statistics (updated)


----------



## OldLady (Aug 2, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > M14 Shooter said:
> ...


Of course we do; we do it all the time.  There are always a few who ruin it for everybody else, as my second grade teacher used to say.
I have never been a terrorist, but I cannot take a bottle of water on the plane with me, or a normal size bottle of shampoo, or a lighter or my Swiss Army knife.  Why am I being inconvenienced with all this tripe when I never did anything wrong?


----------



## OldLady (Aug 2, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> ABikerSailor said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


You're right, of course.  Limiting guns alone is NOT going to be the answer.


----------



## Blues Man (Aug 2, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > XponentialChaos said:
> ...



By using the term "gun death" or " gun murder" you are massaging the outcomes.  Lies damn lies and statistics 

What is the murder rate on these areas as compared to others?

The entire argument is more guns equals more murder and that is untrue.

Suicide numbers are completely irrelevant.  Suicide is not a crime and there is absolutely no evidence that a person would not have committed suicide if a gun was not available.


----------



## Blues Man (Aug 2, 2019)

OldLady said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > ABikerSailor said:
> ...



Limiting guns at all isn't an answer.

Guns do not cause crime


----------



## Blues Man (Aug 2, 2019)

OldLady said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...



I'm not a second grader anymore.

And your airplane analogy misses the mark by a light year at least.  Your rights are not violated because you can't take a bottle of water through airport security and you are free to buy another bottle of water from any of the places on the concourse and you can take that bottle of water on any plane.


----------



## OldLady (Aug 2, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > M14 Shooter said:
> ...


The CDC has some of the smartest people in the country working for it.  As a government agency, it has some of the best access to information from various places and the ability to carry out some real research into what in hell is causing so much gun violence in our country.  If it isn't guns, what is it?
YOU may think the Dickey Amendment was a nothing burger, but the NRA was obviously feeling pretty threatened by the fact that the CDC might conduct some research into it.  And the NRA was feeling pretty sure what the CDC's overall conclusions would be.
Argue your micro-points.  This is not how science is done; everyone knows it but you.


----------



## Blues Man (Aug 2, 2019)

OldLady said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...



The CDC has never been prohibited from doing research on gun violence.
That Congress hasn't granted money for any gun study is not a result of the Dickey Amendment


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 2, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> Leo123 said:
> 
> 
> > OK thanks but those links prove nothing because all data is impossible to collect and it is impossible to know just how many guns there are.  There is over 393,000,000 known guns in the U.S. but those are the only the ones that are known and can be quantified.    The number of guns leaving circulation, illegal, etc. is unknown so, even trying to count the number of guns in the U.S. is nothing more than an academic exercise.   Taking such sketchy data and trying to apply a statistical model to prove some kind of point is pretty futile.  Like they used to say in the early days of computing ..... "garbage in - garbage out."
> ...




No.......Pew looked at actual gun murder and gun crime.....gun murder over the last 26 years has gone down 49%,  gun crime is down 75%.... not even looking at the argument that law abiding people owning more guns has helped to reduce those stats....the one thing that is clear......more Americans now own guns, more Americans now carry guns for self defense....and it did not cause the gun murder rate to go up...it did not cause the gun crime rate to go up.....this shows that the entire argument of the anti-gun movement..... More Guns = More Gun crime...is wrong....and has no basis in fact, truth or reality......

That is the truth....you don't have the information to crunch those numbers.....so you can say your math is correct all you want...you don't have all the data.....

What we do have is 26 years of actual experience implementing the theory of anti-gunners...

More Guns = More Gun Crime.....and the exact opposite happened......in science, that means their theory is wrong.

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 (Aug 2, 2019)

OldLady said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...




Guns are not germ cells....they do not take over the minds of human beings and cause them to commit murder.

Actual research into crime shows that children from broken homes...... homes without fathers, are involved in crime in huge percentages......it is young males raised without fathers in communities with over 75 percent of the children raised without fathers that causes murder and violence...not guns......you guys don't care about that truth...you just want to ban guns.

Actual research shows that the people who use guns to murder people are a tiny number.....isolated to small areas of our major cities.......that is the truth....you don't care about that, you just want to ban guns.

The CDC....after the Dickey Amendment........researched gun violence in Delaware.....

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

WILMINGTON, Del. — 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.

---

The study has been received here with a measure of enthusiasm and questions about what to do next. 
-----

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.”
-----

“You’ve got maybe a few hundred holding the city hostage,” a county councilman, Jea P. Street, said.


----------



## RealDave (Aug 2, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


 Backwards thinking and deceptive by looking at murder rates instead of mass killings.

The availability of the AR-15 leads those who decide to do mass killing a powerful weapon to enable the high  body counts they want.

If the assault type rifle was not available, would they have have made the attack?  Would they have had the courage?  Would law enforcement more aggressively go after these shooters if they were not so well armed?

People are breing slaughtered because a bunch of gun nuts want their toy.  And it is a toy because there is no need for them in the general public.


----------



## Blues Man (Aug 2, 2019)

RealDave said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...



Less than 1% of all murders are committed in mass shootings.  Not all mass shooting involve AR 15 rifles.

Your argument doesn't hold water as you can provide absolutely no evidence that if an AR 15 had not been available that any mass shooting would not have happened anyway


----------



## OldLady (Aug 2, 2019)

Blues Man said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


I haven't flown in awhile.  'Bout time they let you do that.


Blues Man said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


Then what was the Dickey Amendment for, if not to specifically stop gun studies that might conclude guns have something to do with gun violence?


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 2, 2019)

OldLady said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > ABikerSailor said:
> ...




Here.....some actual answers...from a left winger who hates guns.......notice that after she does the research, her answer focuses on specific types of people...not guns......

Since she isn't talking about banning guns, you likely will ignore her.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...ory.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.0630863f284c

Before I started researching gun deaths, gun-control policy used to frustrate me. I wished the National Rifle Association would stop blocking common-sense gun-control reforms such as banning assault weapons, restricting silencers, shrinking magazine sizes and all the other measures that could make guns less deadly.

*Then, my colleagues and I at FiveThirtyEight spent three months analyzing all 33,000 lives ended by guns each year in the United States, and I wound up frustrated in a whole new way. *

We looked at what interventions might have saved those people, and the case for the policies I'd lobbied for crumbled when I examined the evidence. The best ideas left standing were narrowly tailored interventions to protect subtypes of potential victims, not broad attempts to limit the lethality of guns.
----

As my co-workers and I kept looking at the data, it seemed less and less clear that one broad gun-control restriction could make a big difference. 
----

But I can't endorse policies whose only selling point is that gun owners hate them. Policies that often seem as if they were drafted by people who have encountered guns only as a figure in a briefing book or an image on the news.
-----

*Instead, I found the most hope in more narrowly tailored interventions. Potential suicide victims, women menaced by their abusive partners and kids swept up in street vendettas are all in danger from guns, but they each require different protections.*


----------



## Blues Man (Aug 2, 2019)

OldLady said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...



You answered that question when you posted the description of the Dickey Amendment

The purpose was to prohibit the CDC from using government funds to promote gun control as that type of political activism in not part of the CDC's mandate.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 2, 2019)

OldLady said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...




This is what the Dickey Amendment was for...

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.*
_


----------



## OldLady (Aug 2, 2019)

2aguy said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


No one said those things weren't true.  They're obvious.  They have one thing in common, though--protection from GUNS.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 2, 2019)

RealDave said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...




Let's look at mass public shootings....

US mass shootings, 1982-2019: Data from Mother Jones’ investigation

2018.....12......how many involved a rifle....?  3 of them used a semi-auto rifle....

There are close to, if not over, 18 million of these rifles in public hands....

18,000,000 vs.  3  used for mass shootings, out of 12 shooting that year...

Keep in mind, in one of those shootings an AR-15 owned by a legal gun owner stopped the shooter......

93 people were killed in the entire 12 shootings......

So excuse us if these numbers don't prove to us that you aren't irrational in your fear of these weapons....

A rental truck in Nice, France was used to kill 86 and wound 435......so again, don't tell us these rifles pose a serious threat when you look at these actual numbers....

All rifle types are used to murder fewer people each and every year than knives, clubs and bare hands.....

Expanded Homicide Data Table 8


Rifles..... 403

Knives.....1,591

Hands and feet......696

Clubs.....467

You are irrational....


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 2, 2019)

RealDave said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...



The availability of the AR-15 leads those who decide to do mass killing a powerful weapon to enable the high  body counts they want.

Gilroy.....3 killed....stopped by someone with a gun...

Republican baseball team shooting....same rifle, 0 killed

Russian Polytechnik shooting  20 killed with 5 shot pump action shot gun 70 injured.

Navy Yard shooting....12 killed

Virginia Tech shooting....32 killed, 2 pistols.

Luby's Cafe...24 killed, 2 pistols...

It isn't the gun, it is the gun free zone that allows these killers to kill.......they stop when someone points a gun at the shooter....they surrender, commit suicide, run away or are killed....

Armed normal people at mass shootings have 94% success rate at stopping these killers.......

Armed Citizens Are Successful 94% Of The Time At Active Shooter Events [FBI]

*Of all the active shooter events there were 33 at which an armed citizen was present. Of those, Armed Citizens were successful at stopping the Active shooter 75.8% of the time (25 incidents) and were successful in reducing the loss of life in an additional 18.2% (6) of incidents. In only 2 of the 33 incidents (6.1%) was the Armed Citizen(s) not helpful in any way in stopping the active shooter or reducing the loss of life.

Thus the headline of our report that Armed Citizens Are Successful 94% Of The Time At Active Shooter Events.*


In the 2 incidents at which the armed citizen “failed” to stop or slow the active shooter, one is the previously mentioned incident with hunters. The other is an incident in which the CCWer was shot in the back in a Las Vegas Walmart when he failed to identify that there were 2 Active Shooters involved in the attack. He neglected to identify the one that shot him in the back while he was trying to ambush the other perpetrator.

We also decided to look at the breakdown of events that took place in gun free zones and the relative death toll from events in gun free zones vs non-gun-free zones.

Of the 283 incidents in our data pool, we were unable to identify if the event took place in a gun-free zone in a large number (41%) of the events. Most of the events took place at a business, church, home, or other places at which as a rule of law it is not a gun free zone but potentially could have been declared one by the property owner. Without any information in the FBI study or any indication one way or the other from the news reports, we have indicated that event with a question mark.

If you look at all of the Active Shooter events (pie chart on the top) you see that for those which we have the information, almost twice as many took place in gun free zones than not; but realistically the vast majority of those for which we have no information (indicated as ?) are probably NOT gun free zones.

If you isolate just the events at which 8 or more people were killed the data paints a different picture (pie chart on the bottom). In these incidents, 77.8% took place in a gun-free zone suggesting that gun free zones lead to a higher death rate vs active shooter events in general

=====

One of the final metrics we thought was important to consider is the potential tendency for armed citizens to injure or kill innocent people in their attempt to “save the day.” A common point in political discussions is to point out the lack of training of most armed citizens and the decrease in safety inherent in their presence during violent encounters.

As you can see below, however, at the 33 incidents at which Armed Citizens were present, there were zero situations at which the Armed Citizen injured or killed an innocent person. It never happened.


----------



## RealDave (Aug 2, 2019)

2aguy said:


> XponentialChaos said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


 States without major cities have lower crime rates but you can pretend it is about the guns

Crime rates are not gun violence rates.

Mass killings are not typical murders.

Homicides include people killing people because of relationships, people killing people while committing crimes and gang violence and then tyou ave people wanting to kill as many people as they can.  It is these killings we are talking about & your bullshit attempts of burying statistics is obvious & dishonest.

So shove your homicide rates & pretend crime rates are down because a bunch of gun lovers decide to own 30 guns.  The ban of assault rifles reduced deaths due to mass killings.   You can pout, & stomp tour feet & spew irrelevant statistics and stories but it does not change that these weapons feed these mass killings usually of innocent children & women.


----------



## RealDave (Aug 2, 2019)

2aguy said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > Blues Man said:
> ...


 There you go again, citiing homicide rates.  Please, your game is obvious.  Just STFU & keep supporting the slaughter of our children because you assfucks need to own a toy.

I suspect that most AR-15 uses involve drinking beer & shooting targets - usually beer cans & bottles.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 2, 2019)

RealDave said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > XponentialChaos said:
> ...



So shove your homicide rates & pretend crime rates are down because a bunch of gun lovers decide to own 30 guns.  

Bzzzzzzzz, wrong answer....

Your theory...not mine......

More Guns = More Gun crime......

26 years...more gun ownership in this country, more people carrying guns...

Result:

gun murder down 49%
gun crime down 75%

Your theory is that regardless of any other factor....simply adding guns to a society increases gun murder and gun crime......

The exact opposite happened...does this mean guns helped lower those rates.....that isn't the argument for this point......you point, again.....simply adding guns will increase those rates.....

The exact opposite happened....

In science, when you have a theory, then conduct an experiment to prove that theory.......and the exact opposite happens....in science, that means your theory is completely wrong......


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 2, 2019)

RealDave said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...




Yes.....I am showing you actual facts, truth and reality.....you are spewing emotions and feelings.......


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 2, 2019)

RealDave said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...




Yes.....I am guilty of using facts and truth.....you got me....


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 2, 2019)

RealDave said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > XponentialChaos said:
> ...




Mass public shootings in 2018....

12

Deaths...

93

Knives kill over 1,500 people every single year......

According to your logic, we must ban all knives.....they kill more people.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Aug 2, 2019)

OldLady said:


> You're right, of course.  Limiting guns alone is NOT going to be the answer.


Limiting the rights of the law abiding is not part of the answer at all.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Aug 2, 2019)

OldLady said:


> The CDC has some of the smartest people in the country working for it.  As a government agency, it has some of the best access to information from various places and the ability to carry out some real research into what in hell is causing so much gun violence in our country.  If it isn't guns, what is it?


The CDC is free to, and is funded to, collect information and do research on gun violence.
Not sure why you refuse to understand this.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Aug 2, 2019)

RealDave said:


> Backwards thinking and deceptive by looking at murder rates instead of mass killings.
> The availability of the AR-15 leads those who decide to do mass killing a powerful weapon to enable the high  body counts they want.



1982-Present
15 (out of 10-12 million)  AR15s were used to in mass shootings to kill 253 people, for an average of 6.74 per year.
Your knee-jerk, hyper-reactionary, bigoted conclusion:   SEE!!!!!   BAN THEM!!!!!!


----------



## M14 Shooter (Aug 2, 2019)

OldLady said:


> Then what was the Dickey Amendment for, if not to specifically stop gun studies that might conclude guns have something to do with gun violence?


If you actually read the Dickey amendment, you'd know.


----------



## RealDave (Aug 2, 2019)

2aguy said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



  False assumptions;

1)  The increase of guns purchased  is increase of gun owners.  You actually no data on the number of gun owners.  How any people bought guns that did not require any registration?

2)  You think the reduction of gun violence (if true) is due to this increase in gun sales.


----------



## pismoe (Aug 2, 2019)

RealDave said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...


---------------------------------   no ones Business but the individual gun buyer and gun owners  business  RDave.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Aug 2, 2019)

RealDave said:


> False assumptions;
> 1)  The increase of guns purchased  is increase of gun owners.  You actually no data on the number of gun owners.  How any people bought guns that did not require any registration?


If the claim is more guns = more gun (x), the increase/decrease in gun _owners _doesn't matter.

The huge majority of people who buy guns do not register them; the huge majority of guns are unregistered.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 2, 2019)

Old Yeller said:


> Same day in Brooklyn 11 were shot by one.   Why no press on that?  Does not fit the White Supremecy angle you want to publish?




I just want you to know.....I have an alibi!


----------



## pismoe (Aug 2, 2019)

M14 Shooter said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > False assumptions;
> ...


-----------------------------------------------    Yeah REGISTER , maybe I should keep my mouth shut but where and in which States are guns OFFICIALLY Registered RDave ???


----------



## pismoe (Aug 2, 2019)

RealDave said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...


-----------------------------------------------   I keep hearing the word Registered so where is it in the USA that GUN's are registered  RDave ??-----------    just curious RDave .


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 2, 2019)

M14 Shooter said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > Backwards thinking and deceptive by looking at murder rates instead of mass killings.
> ...




They call us cowards who are afraid....yet they pee their pants for numbers like that and go ape crap just hearing about guns....


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 2, 2019)

RealDave said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...




I haven't addressed gun sales and violence reduction...

What I am pointing out is that your theory is wrong...

You and the anti-gunners believe with religious fervor.....

More Guns = More Gun crime... you do not say....yeah, but only if lots of people own them....no your theory, your argument, your faith....

*More Guns = More Gun Crime...*

Theory is put into practice over 26 years.....from  200 million guns in 1990s  in private hands to close to if not over 600 million guns in private hands in 2017....

*More Guns

Then...what happened?
*
Gun murder down 49%

Gun crime down 75%...

*Less Gun Crime...

Your Theory....

More Guns = More Gun Crime

Result.....Gun murder down 49%, gun crime down 75%


Less gun crime

In actual science.....you know, real science....when you have a theory, and then you conduct an experiment based on that theory, and then the exact opposite of your theory happens....?

That means your theory is wrong....*


----------



## RealDave (Aug 2, 2019)

2aguy said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



Your interpretation is wrong.

Not more guns, more gun owners.

Really, If I owned 500 guns instead of 5, would that make me commit more crime?


----------



## RealDave (Aug 2, 2019)

pismoe said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



S
So, when you buy a handgun, is it registered?  No where is it written down that you bought a handgun & what it is & where you bought it?


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 2, 2019)

RealDave said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...




You are the ones who state....

More guns = More gun crime....

More Americans own and carry guns and the crime rate went down, not up...

You are now being a sniveling little whiner....Ooooh...but those 400 million guns were bought by 3 guys in Idaho so that doesn't count......

Your theory is wrong....you are basing it on fear....not facts or truth.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Aug 2, 2019)

RealDave said:


> So, when you buy a handgun, is it registered?
> No where is it written down that you bought a handgun & what it is & where you bought it?


I never buy new guns, so...  no.


----------



## Leo123 (Aug 2, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> Leo123 said:
> 
> 
> > Yes, because the quality of the data is IMPORTANT!!!!   Especially when you are advocating weakening the 2nd amendment!!!   The 'gun grabbers' have the burden of PROVING the 2nd amendment is not applicable to "We the People"....So far all they have is sycophant MSM and fake 'studies' which is the WEAKEST argument against  gun ownership by We The People.
> ...



You are falsely attributing another’s post to me.  Please correct.


----------



## Blues Man (Aug 2, 2019)

RealDave said:


> pismoe said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...



Are Guns Registered in a National Firearms Registry

The Firearm Owners' Protection Act of 1986 (FOPA) is a United States federal law that revised many provisions of the Gun Control Act of 1968. As such, FOPA makes it illegal for the national government or any state in the country to keep any sort of database or registry that ties firearms directly to their owner. The exact wording of the provision is as follows:

No such rule or regulation prescribed [by the Attorney General] after the date of the enactment of the Firearms Owners Protection Act may require that records required to be maintained under this chapter or any portion of the contents of such records, be recorded at or transferred to a facility owned, managed, or controlled by the United States or any State or any political subdivision thereof, nor that any system of registration of firearms, firearms owners, or firearms transactions or disposition be established. Nothing in this section expands or restricts the Secretary's authority to inquire into the disposition of any firearm in the course of a criminal investigation.


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 2, 2019)

Leo123 said:


> XponentialChaos said:
> 
> 
> > Leo123 said:
> ...



No mistake.  That was to you.


----------



## Leo123 (Aug 2, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> Leo123 said:
> 
> 
> > XponentialChaos said:
> ...


No it was not my post.


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 2, 2019)

Leo123 said:


> XponentialChaos said:
> 
> 
> > Leo123 said:
> ...



Post #1648, on page 165.

You said the following:
_
"Yes, because the quality of the data is IMPORTANT!!!! Especially when you are advocating weakening the 2nd amendment!!! The 'gun grabbers' have the burden of PROVING the 2nd amendment is not applicable to "We the People"....So far all they have is sycophant MSM and fake 'studies' which is the WEAKEST argument against gun ownership by We The People."_


----------



## Leo123 (Aug 2, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> Leo123 said:
> 
> 
> > XponentialChaos said:
> ...



I checked it out and it looks like I owe you an apology.  It looks like the quote was screwed up.   My apology.


----------



## RealDave (Aug 3, 2019)

2aguy said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



You are making incorrect assumptions


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 3, 2019)

RealDave said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...




Nope......that is your theory...

More guns = More gun crime....

26 year experiment with More Guns...

The exact opposite of your theory happens...

In Science.....real science.......that means your theory is wrong...


----------



## RealDave (Aug 3, 2019)

2aguy said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


Fuck off gunboy.  I don't have a "theory".  My desire is to keep guns way rfom those that misuse them, to make sure you gunnuts have training so you quit leaving your guns laying around where kids can get them and ro ban assault type rifles.

You assfucks are so God damn stupid that you think people want to take away all guns as you spew dishonest statistics.

Your plan of passing out guns to everyone is stupid.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 3, 2019)

RealDave said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...



My desire is to keep guns way rfom those that misuse them,

Funny then that nothing you propose would do that.....funny that everything you propose only targets law abiding people who don't use their legal guns for crime.....funny way of stopping criminals when nothing you propose would actually work.

Again...

All rifles in 2017.... 483 murders.....

18 million semi-auto rifles in public hands.....

Knives kill over 1,500 people every single year, 

Pools over 3,500

Do you see those numbers...that is why we think you are a moron.


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Aug 3, 2019)

Police Source: 18 Dead in Walmart shooting
Multiple people killed in a shooting in El Paso, Texas, police say
El Paso Walmart shooting: Multiple people dead, police say
*UPDATE: 1:06 p.m.* – An officers on the scene tell KTSM that 18 people are dead at the scene. An updated number of injured has not been given by EPPD. We are waiting to confirm from an El Paso Police spokesperson.

*UPDATE: 12:53 p.m. *El Paso Police say anyone looking to reunite with loved ones who may have been inside the Walmart or Cielo Vista Mall are asked to gather at MacArthur Intermediate School located 8101 Whitus Dr.

A KTSM photographer confirms that Bassett Place Mall was also being evacuated as a precaution.

*UPDATE: 12:46 p.m. *El Paso Mayor Dee Margo confirms to KTSM that there are multiple fatalities involved in today’s shooting at Walmart.

Margo says that three suspects believed to be involved were taken into custody. El Paso Police are expected to give a press conference within the hour.


----------



## candycorn (Aug 3, 2019)

More guns equals more gun violence.  The Wal Mart slogan applies.  Always.


----------



## RealDave (Aug 3, 2019)

2aguy said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...




El Paso.  Thank you for enabling yet another mass killing.


----------



## RealDave (Aug 3, 2019)

2aguy said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



AGAIN.  The ban on ASSAULT TYPE RIFLES has to do with  MASS KILLINGS.

Knives are used fior ,many useful things besides killing.

Your pool can't get stolen by a criminal & used to kill me.  You can't mishandle your pool & kill me.  

You are such a dipstick.  The idea you got a permit to own a gun is proof there is a problem in the system.


----------



## Leo123 (Aug 3, 2019)

candycorn said:


> More guns equals more gun violence.  The Wal Mart slogan applies.  Always.



Using a tragic incident to promote a political view is disgusting and despicable.


----------



## pismoe (Aug 3, 2019)

RealDave said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...


--------------------------------------   you sounds like you are getting frantic and its fun and funny to see .   Sounds like you aren't making many anti gun converts at least here on the board RDave .  [chuckle] .


----------



## rightwinger (Aug 3, 2019)

We don’t care about Gilroy any more
We got 20 killed in El Paso

That is the way the gun lobby works. There is always a new killing to make you forget about the old one


----------



## conserveguy877 (Aug 3, 2019)

Cue the over politicization by swamp democrats.


----------



## conserveguy877 (Aug 3, 2019)

rightwinger said:


> We don’t care about Gilroy any more
> We got 20 killed in El Paso
> 
> That is the way the gun lobby works. There is always a new killing to make you forget about the old one


Now you scoreboard shootings for political gain? Sad!


----------



## rightwinger (Aug 3, 2019)

conserveguy877 said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > We don’t care about Gilroy any more
> ...



Some political gain

Not even enough time for thoughts and prayers before the next one happens

Thank god we have guns to keep us safe


----------



## rightwinger (Aug 3, 2019)

Nobody will even remember Gilroy

Might as well close this thread


----------



## EvilCat Breath (Aug 3, 2019)

Think of Gilroy and El Paso as skirmishes in the larger war to eliminate Americans.


----------



## conserveguy877 (Aug 3, 2019)

rightwinger said:


> conserveguy877 said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...


That makes no sense. Especially after your politicizing.


----------



## conserveguy877 (Aug 3, 2019)

Govern Greg Abbott right on scene after the shooting to console this tragedy. Where was the California Democrat governor at?


----------



## Brain357 (Aug 3, 2019)

Good thing republicans made that kind of firepower completely legal.  Working out really well, so popular with mass killers.


----------



## Leo123 (Aug 3, 2019)

rightwinger said:


> We don’t care about Gilroy any more
> We got 20 killed in El Paso
> 
> That is the way the gun lobby works. There is always a new killing to make you forget about the old one



Why would the pro gun lobby want more people killed?  It just gives more excuses for gun grabbers to use innocent dead bodies to promote their lies.


----------



## Leo123 (Aug 3, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Good thing republicans made that kind of firepower completely legal.  Working out really well, so popular with mass killers.



On another gun grabber jumps of the smell of dead bodies to try to spread propaganda.


----------



## theHawk (Aug 4, 2019)

RealDave said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > RealDave said:
> ...



He was enabled by open borders policies thanks to leftwingers.


----------



## RealDave (Aug 4, 2019)

theHawk said:


> RealDave said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


 

Therre is no open border policy.  Just you lying.


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 5, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> Thoughts and prayers.
> 
> See you guys in two weeks for the next mass shooting.
> 
> Edit:  Dated July 29



Damn it!  I was inaccurate.  It was less than one week this time.

Oh well.  Thoughts and prayers.


----------



## ABikerSailor (Aug 5, 2019)

XponentialChaos said:


> XponentialChaos said:
> 
> 
> > Thoughts and prayers.
> ...



You know, the world is getting crazier and crazier, faster and faster. 

Never thought that I'd see 2 mass shootings in the same day in this country.


----------



## XponentialChaos (Aug 5, 2019)

So, how long until the next one?

I'm gonna go with 16 days.

Thoughts and prayers.


----------



## pismoe (Aug 6, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > EvilEyeFleegle said:
> ...


----------------------   as we work to make the world as we Wish it to be EEFleegle .


----------



## M14 Shooter (Aug 7, 2019)

RealDave said:


> Fuck off gunboy.  I don't have a "theory".


No.  You suffer from hoplophobia.


> My desire is to keep guns way rfom those that misuse them, to make sure you gunnuts have training so you quit leaving your guns laying around where kids can get them and ro ban assault type rifles.


Wow.    How did you come to hate the constitution so much?


----------



## M14 Shooter (Aug 7, 2019)

candycorn said:


> More guns equals more gun violence.


This is, of course, a lie.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Aug 7, 2019)

RealDave said:


> AGAIN.  The ban on ASSAULT TYPE RIFLES has to do with  MASS KILLINGS.


And is based on absolute ignorance and the irrational fear that stems from it.


----------



## protectionist (Aug 7, 2019)

Vandalshandle said:


> My thoughts and prayers go out to the 18 to 21 year old white supremacists in California who, because of a new CA law, must drive to Nevada to buy their semi-automatic rifles.


Are you also concerned about *Black* Supremacists ? And* Muslim* Supremacists ?


----------



## Vandalshandle (Aug 7, 2019)

protectionist said:


> Vandalshandle said:
> 
> 
> > My thoughts and prayers go out to the 18 to 21 year old white supremacists in California who, because of a new CA law, must drive to Nevada to buy their semi-automatic rifles.
> ...



I have never seen a mass shooting by either. The closet we have come to that was the Saudi Arabian suicide bombers on 9/11, to which Trump responded by banning immigration from Muslim countries OTHER than Saudi Arabia.


----------



## protectionist (Aug 7, 2019)

Vandalshandle said:


> I have never seen a mass shooting by either. The closet we have come to that was the Saudi Arabian suicide bombers on 9/11, to which Trump responded by banning immigration from Muslim countries OTHER than Saudi Arabia.


There have been dozens in the US since 9/11.  Better quit watching CNN/MSNBC OMMISION media.

Islamic Attacks on America

And mass shootings by *blacks* have been happening too.  Here a few to wrap your "never seen" head around >>

1. Colin Ferguson - opened fire on a crowded Long Island Rail Road train in 1993, killing six people and injuring 19.  His lawyers used the "black rage" defense, claiming that Ferguson had been driven to insanity because of racism, and could not be held responsible for his crimes.

2.  Omar S. Thornton - in 2010, disciplined for stealing inventory. After signing a resignation agreement, Thornton opened fire, killing 8 people, before turning the gun on himself.

3.  Maurice Clemmons -  shot and killed four police officers in Parkland, Wash.

4.  John Allen Muhammad - better known as the "D.C. sniper," was the mastermind of the 2003 Beltway sniper attacks. He killed 17 people, and wounded 7 more.

5.  Nathan Dunlap - shot and killed four people in a Chuck E. Cheese's restaurant in 1993.

6.  Lee Boyd Malvo - accomplise to John Allen Muhammad, he engaged in over a dozen cold-blooded shootings, and confessed to a plan to kill six white people in order to "terrorize the nation."  They killed 3 times that many.

7.  Christopher Dorner - in February 2013, Dorner killed four people, including three police officers, and left three injured.

8.  Aaron Alexis - 2013 killer of the *Washington Navy Yard shooting massacre. *He incurred 15 casualties, killing 12 of them.  Here a photo of him during his bloody rampage, from a CCTV camera >>>


----------



## Vandalshandle (Aug 7, 2019)

protectionist said:


> Vandalshandle said:
> 
> 
> > I have never seen a mass shooting by either. The closet we have come to that was the Saudi Arabian suicide bombers on 9/11, to which Trump responded by banning immigration from Muslim countries OTHER than Saudi Arabia.
> ...



Apparently, you, and the hate Islamic blog you are quoting, defines a "mass shooting" as including one Muslim stabbing one non--Muslim.


----------



## 22lcidw (Aug 7, 2019)

rightwinger said:


> conserveguy877 said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...


Soon enough the move slowly to the next level. Thousands killed at a time would be spectacular, don't you think? So we go from fisticuffs and manhood and move to knives, swords machetes and the equivalent to guns and acids and the same which we are into now. and to more efficient ways of getting back in land, sea or air. And the surveillance and restrictions will increase on us all as the tyranny spreads for our safety. What a beautiful thing.


----------



## P@triot (Aug 7, 2019)

The left hates facts. The left simply cannot bring themselves to accept reality...

No, The U.S. Does Not Lead The World In Mass Shootings


----------



## protectionist (Aug 7, 2019)

Vandalshandle said:


> Apparently, you, and the hate Islamic blog you are quoting, defines a "mass shooting" as including one Muslim stabbing one non--Muslim.


Apparently you didn't read the link, and still are oblivious-ignorant.  Quite a few of these Islamic massacres were big news, that even the leftist OMISSION media reported on.

Here's a few to help you out with the number of dead in parentheses >>

Fort Hood shooting massacre (13)..... San Bernardino (14)......Orlando Pulse Club (49).....Fort Lauderdale.(5).....New York City Bike path.(8)..…..John Allen Muhammad -Beltway Sniper (17)…...Chattanooga recruiting station.(5)..…...Boston Marathon bombing (3)…...Waltham, MA throat slashings (3)…...Marquette Park shooting (5)…….Montgomery Cty, MD snipers (5)….2002 LAX shooting (3)…….1993 World Trade center attack (6 dead, 1,040 wounded)…..Oakland, CA shooting (4)…...Wash DC Nation of Islam shooting massacre (8)…..Other attacks with lesser numbers dead I didn't list


----------



## protectionist (Aug 7, 2019)

P@triot said:


> The left hates facts. The left simply cannot bring themselves to accept reality...
> 
> No, The U.S. Does Not Lead The World In Mass Shootings


And this list (with America as 11th) includes only Europe. If the continents of Africa and Asia (incl. the Middle East) were included, the US would come in far lower (maybe # 100)  (Note: there are almost 200 countries in the world)


----------



## Vandalshandle (Aug 7, 2019)

protectionist said:


> Vandalshandle said:
> 
> 
> > Apparently, you, and the hate Islamic blog you are quoting, defines a "mass shooting" as including one Muslim stabbing one non--Muslim.
> ...



Let's compare that to the mass shooting totals of the last 1 1/2 years, which is over 500 incidences.


----------



## protectionist (Aug 8, 2019)

Vandalshandle said:


> Let's compare that to the mass shooting totals of the last 1 1/2 years, which is over 500 incidences.


Yeah ? Let's just say I don't believe you, and I'll take you up on what you just said >>> _ "Let's compare that to the mass shooting totals of the last 1 1/2 years"
_
I won't even request that you show us _"over 500 incidences". _ I'm wondering if you can even match (_"compare"_ as you said) even the 15 that I listed. * Go ahead, list 15 of these mass shooting incidences *that you know of (that I didn't list)


----------



## Vandalshandle (Aug 8, 2019)

protectionist said:


> Vandalshandle said:
> 
> 
> > Let's compare that to the mass shooting totals of the last 1 1/2 years, which is over 500 incidences.
> ...



Okee doockie. You are on:

List of mass shootings in the United States in 2018 - Wikipedia

List of mass shootings in the United States in 2019 - Wikipedia


----------



## protectionist (Aug 8, 2019)

Vandalshandle said:


> Okee doockie. You are on:
> 
> List of mass shootings in the United States in 2018 - Wikipedia
> 
> List of mass shootings in the United States in 2019 - Wikipedia


No, no links, You list them, just like I did.  Go ahead.

And since this exchange started with you talking about _"white supremacists"_, to which I listed 15 examples of Islamic supremacist massacres, now you should list 15 examples of white supremacist massacre attacks (with 3 or more killed in each)  Think you can do it  ?


----------



## Vandalshandle (Aug 8, 2019)

protectionist said:


> Vandalshandle said:
> 
> 
> > Okee doockie. You are on:
> ...



Right. I will hand type 500 white supremacists random and mass shootings for you, because all I have to do in my life is tom fill your every desire.


----------



## protectionist (Aug 8, 2019)

Vandalshandle said:


> Right. I will hand type 500 white supremacists random and mass shootings for you, because all I have to do in my life is tom fill your every desire.









I said match the number i posted > *15*, not 500.  Took me all of 2 minutes to do it.  If you know of 15 instances of white supremacist massacre attacks (with 3 or more killed in each), you could easily list them here.

Since you're running away from the challenge, it looks like YOU CAN'T list 15 instances of white supremacist massacre attacks (with 3 or more killed in each).


----------

