400 million guns

[progressive hunter]

Disingenuous claim. The KKK of the mid 19th and early 20th century (who were not liberals), is not the DNC of today. Today, most KKKers are republicans,
View attachment 779534

The Civil Rights Act was introduced by Democrats and signed into law by a Democrat. Liberals on both sides voted for it, and in those days, both sides had their liberal and conservative wing, i.e., liberals on both sides voting for the CRA and conservatives on both sides voting against.


Senator Robert Byrd was a KKK member some 40 years prior to his being a Senator, long since disavowed the KKK and apologized for it too many times to count, so your point is disingenuous.

There's this thing called 'honesty', you might want to try it, you'll feel better.

its exactly the same party no matter how much you wish it wasnt,,

they still use race and blacks for their whipping boys,,

 

[BlindBoo]

enlisting in the military doesnt mean they replace/eliminates the militia,,

It has always been a national military force under the Constitution. Still is, mostly in the form of the National Guard but also the State Guards as well. I've heard several states have Militias that go back to Colonial times .

 

[progressive hunter]

It has always been a national military force under the Constitution. Still is, mostly in the form of the National Guard but also the State Guards as well. I've heard several states have Militias that go back to Colonial times .

you need to get a dictionary,, thats not what a militia is,,

those are enlisted men not civilians,,,

 

[Bell Huey]

It has always been a national military force under the Constitution. Still is, mostly in the form of the National Guard but also the State Guards as well. I've heard several states have Militias that go back to Colonial times .

No, it hasn't. I just posted the US code that covers militias. Do I need to do it again?

 

[Rumpole]

Conversely, if they were as dangerous as you dipshits all claim, there would be no one left in the country.

No, because your 'converse' example is not that at all, in fact, it is a strawman,

Guns are tools, PEOPLE are dangerous.

Nuclear bombs are a tool, people are dangerous.

The above statement of which, of course, reveals the absurdity of your logic insofar as the 'tool' itself MUST be a factor in the evaluation and NOT just the 'people' in the equation.

For your convenience, I will elaborate this point:

By pointing out that nuclear bombs are also a tool, but one that is inherently dangerous, I have underscored the fact that the danger posed by a tool depends on its potential for harm, as well as the person using it.

Your statement suggests that guns are neutral and that the danger lies solely in the people using them. My rebuttal challenges this notion by presenting an example of a tool that is generally considered highly dangerous, regardless of the user. This analogy encourages a reevaluation of your argument, emphasizing that the potential for harm caused by a tool, such as guns or nuclear bombs, should also be considered when discussing the dangers associated with them.

 

[Mr. Friscus]

Disingenuous claim. The KKK of the mid 19th and early 20th century (who were not liberals), is not the DNC of today. Today, most KKKers are republicans,

Doesn’t your leftist woke doctrine demand you Democrats constantly apologize and accept the shame and guilt of slavery and the KKK?? Aren’t you forever stained or something?

Get on your knees boy… and tell Biden, Pelosi, and the rest to do so as well..

We conservatives? We don’t believe in that foolishness. But you guys sure do. So get to groveling

 

[BlindBoo]

If the left was serious about gun violence they would call for the prosecution of ATF leaders as well as former, former president Obama who authorized the shipment of thousands of illegal weapons to Mexican drug cartels.

The Neo-GOP has listen to Faux not News too long.

First the GOP at the time wouldn't confirm Obama's pick to lead the ATF (the old 60 vote threshold was still in effect). Second the AZ agents did not inform the WH of their plan to surveil suspected straw buyers, who were for the most part purchasing the weapons legally. Third, the AZ prosecutors refused to press charges because the agents mishandled the cases and they couldn't prove any AZ law was broken. Finally the Cartels get most of their weapon from stealing from the Mexican Military. The Mexican military buys a lot of weapons from the USA.

I bet the Faux anchors knew they were lying to ya'll back then too.

 

[Rumpole]

True.

It’s a fact that more guns doesn’t make us ‘safer.’'

Very true.

It’s also true that ‘banning’ guns won’t make us safer.

It would it if were possible, practical, and the constitution allowed it.
So, since none are true, that particular point is moot.

What also doesn’t make us safe is the right’s refusal to address the problem of gun crime and violence, resorting instead to lies and demagoguery about guns being ‘banned’ and ‘confiscated.’

Agreed. Guns are regulatable, and we should do it where possible

 

[Blues Man]

But it probably would, because with a gun it so much easier and quick. The fact that other methods are more cumbersome might be just enough to prevent some of those suicides in teetering between living and diving cases.

Suicide is a choice that every single person has the absolute right to make.

 

[Bell Huey]

Very true.

It would it if were possible, practical, and the constitution allowed it.
So, since none are true, that particular point is moot.

Agreed. Guns are regulatable, and we should do it where possible

Firearms are regulated.

 

[Blues Man]

Oh, you mean that crimes are more likely to occur in cities, where most of the people are? Wow, you just made quite a discovery there, Columbus.

And the lowest concentration of guns per capita so it's obviously not the guns it's the people.

 

[Rumpole]

your premise is a lie,,,

when you come up with a law that a criminal will follow you let us know and we can talk about it,,

Criminals do not follow laws against murder, so, according to your logic, we should repeal anti-murder laws?

That a criminal won't follow the law doesn't make it a reason not to make a law.

Why? Because making a law will impose a consequence on breaking it, and, even if it doesn't deter, a criminal act should at least be punishable.

 

[Blues Man]

I already covered that base, shitkicker. I compared states on a per capita basis, which is the most valid methodology of comparison.



Go get fucked by a nest of hornets.

Now compare cites in a state with rural and suburban areas of a state to learn that there is a lower number of guns per capita in urban areas yet that's where almost ALL the gun crimes occur so it's obviously not the guns but rather the PEOPLE

 

[Blues Man]

No, your voting for a criminally corrupt man reveals your hypocrisy.

And what does your voting for a doddering senile old man say about you?

And FYI I do not vote for either side of the corrupt duopoly and haven't in 30 years

 

[Mr. Friscus]

Agreed. Guns are regulatable, and we should do it where possible

Everywhere? Or where necessary?

It’s really a worthy discussion for both sides when participants aren’t rabid partisans representing the other side as the worst evils in human history.

For example.. leftists constantly say something like: “YOU DONT CARE IF CHILDREN DIE IN SCHOOL SHOOTINGS UNLESS YOU WANT TO BAN ALL ASSAULT WEAPONS”

That’s just a hack, irrational, unhinged person.

 

[marvin martian]

Disingenuous claim. The KKK of the mid 19th and early 20th century (who were not liberals), is not the DNC of today. Today, most KKKers are republicans,
View attachment 779534

The Civil Rights Act was introduced by Democrats (sponsors from both sides) and signed into law by a Democrat (LBJ) in 1964. Liberals on both sides voted for it, and in those days, both sides had their liberal and conservative wing, i.e., liberals both sides voting for the CRA and conservatives on both sides voting against.


Senator Robert Byrd was a KKK member many many years prior to his being a Senator, long since disavowed the KKK and apologized for it too many times to count, so your point is disingenuous.

Senator Robert Byrd disavowed his past affiliation with the Ku Klux Klan (KKK) years before his death. He joined the KKK in the early 1940s and held a leadership position within the organization. However, he later claimed that his involvement was a mistake, and he repeatedly apologized and expressed regret for his actions.

Throughout his career, Byrd evolved on civil rights issues and came to support legislation aimed at reducing racial discrimination and promoting equality. In particular, he eventually backed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Voting Rights Act of 1965, and the Fair Housing Act of 1968. By the time of his death, he had distanced himself significantly from his earlier association with the KKK, and many civil rights leaders acknowledged his growth and transformation on these issues.

There's this thing called 'honesty', you might want to try it, you'll feel better.

Patently false. You people made sure this guy kept his job right up until 2020.

 

[progressive hunter]

Criminals do not follow laws against murder, so, according to your logic, we should repeal anti-murder laws?

That a criminal won't follow the law doesn't make it a reason not to make a law.

Why? Because making a law will impose a consequence on breaking it, and, even if it doesn't deter, a criminal act should at least be punishable.

no thats not my logic,,
thats the spin you put on it to justify your fascist desires,,

 

[Blues Man]

Criminals do not follow laws against murder, so, according to your logic, we should repeal anti-murder laws?

That a criminal won't follow the law doesn't make it a reason not to make a law.

Why? Because making a law will impose a consequence on breaking it, and, even if it doesn't deter, a criminal act should at least be punishable.

We already have gun laws that prohibit criminals and the mentally ill from owning guns maybe we should actually enforce them huh?

 

[Mr. Friscus]

Criminals do not follow laws against murder, so, according to your logic, we should repeal anti-murder laws?

I think the point is that if we know criminals WILL be well armed, why are you so aggressively trying to neuter the legal gun owners from protecting themselves, their families, and the public?

That’s entirely why coward runts keep on going to schools… they know they won’t be immediately opposed and can do their harm.. thanks to horrible leftist gun policy. Most school shooting deaths can be blamed on a lack of sufficient security.

 

[progressive hunter]

I think the point is that if we know criminals WILL be well armed, why are you so aggressively trying to neuter the legal gun owners from protecting themselves, their families, and the public?

That’s entirely why coward runts keep on going to schools… they know they won’t be immediately opposed and can do their harm.. thanks to horrible leftist gun policy. Most school shooting deaths can be blamed on a lack of sufficient security.

because hes a criminal nazi fuck is why,,