74 school shootings in 77 weeks...Worth it's own thread.

Id love to annex some states and let the left have at it....an all lefty society.......... and come back a few years later and do a reality show of trying to survive the utopian jungle!!! What a hoot......of course, wouldn't be part of it without bringing my AK..........but what a rush that would be.:2up:

I'd like to see righties in control of a large city. Now that would be a disaster.


AN AERIAL VIEW OF DETROIT LOOKS THE SAME AS NAGASAKI AFTER THE BOMB WAS DROPPED


can you libs get any dumber?
 
Id love to annex some states and let the left have at it....an all lefty society.......... and come back a few years later and do a reality show of trying to survive the utopian jungle!!! What a hoot......of course, wouldn't be part of it without bringing my AK..........but what a rush that would be.:2up:

I'd like to see righties in control of a large city. Now that would be a disaster.


AN AERIAL VIEW OF DETROIT LOOKS THE SAME AS NAGASAKI AFTER THE BOMB WAS DROPPED


can you libs get any dumber?

Capitalists used up Detroit and abandoned it
 
In over 200 years we have never needed the second amendment to defend the first

For 200 years it has stood as a deterrent to those who would seize power by extra-constitutional means. The logical first step towards revoking any of our rights would be to revoke the 2nd Amendment.

No elected official has ever feared armed mobs for his actions in office. Bet your ass they fear what the Free Press has to say about them

The second amendment has NEVER been needed to keep our government in check. Our first amendment does it on a daily basis

the press has never taken a president out of office. a man with a gun has.
 
For 200 years it has stood as a deterrent to those who would seize power by extra-constitutional means. The logical first step towards revoking any of our rights would be to revoke the 2nd Amendment.

No elected official has ever feared armed mobs for his actions in office. Bet your ass they fear what the Free Press has to say about them

The second amendment has NEVER been needed to keep our government in check. Our first amendment does it on a daily basis

the press has never taken a president out of office. a man with a gun has.

The free press has taken many Presidents out of office

Nixon?
 
4. Mandatory insurance for all guns owned


Similar to car insurance. Liability, theft, etc...and you can get reduced rates if you can demonstrate that you are a responsible owner and keep the gun locked in a safe, etc...

Suppose to get free speech, you need to register what you want to say with the government, get it approved, pass a background check, complete a waiting period, pay a fee and buy insurance in case you slander anyone and get sued. You on board with that?

Nope.

Words can't take another human life.

The fact that this needs to be explained is mind boggling.
 
In our entire history we have only had one period when the people were justified in rising against a tyrannical government. The government denied freedom, liberty, the right to vote and a fair trial. The government protected terrorists who bombed churches and schools and lynched with impunity

Yet the oppressed did not rely on their second amendment rights, they instead used their first amendment rights along with freedom of assembly

Modern Democracies no longer rely on guns to resolve their grievances

Then disarm the military.

Our military defends our interests around the globe. We do not need them at home. Haven't in 150 years

pearl harbor was 150 years ago?
 
Its people like spoonman and the rest of the lowbrows in this thread that are the reason that intelligent conversation about this topic are impossible.

So only intelligent people wish to give up their rights?

That's smart as hell, Mr. Highbrow.

Intelligent people recognize there is a problem and that there also can be a logical solution.

And where's the logic in restricting my rights? I haven't shot up a school. I've never shot a rival drug dealer. I respect the law AND the Constitution.
 
I did that, you ignored it.

Forgive me captain high brow. Where? Did you provide your detailed plan on confiscating all 300 million handguns? Did you articulate what the penalty would be for owning one. Wait, are you one of those liberals that deny you do want handguns banned, when all of your rhetoric clearly insinuates you want them gone?

Can you please show again where you clearly articulated what you want done and how it should be done?

Thanks :popcorn:

Holy shit mouth breather. I also already told you that confiscating 300 million guns is ridiculous and not going to happen and not something I support. How many more things do you need repeated for you?

Mouth breather now? Wow! Great argument.
 
1. Longer wait times on ALL gun purchases
2. Expanded background checks on all gun purchases, even during private transactions
3. Registration of all firearms
4. Mandatory insurance for all guns owned
5. MUCH stiffer penalties for illegal gun possession
6. Convicted criminals, mentally unstable can not own a weapon. Zero tolerance.

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

1. Longer waits for all gun purchases? How long? A year? Who knows.....right?\
Longer for first time buyers. But yes we can certainly discuss the length.
2.There are back ground checks, but you want "expanded" back ground checks. I am sure that may seem specific to you, but that is a real general statement.
I am talking about specifically background checks on all gun sales, even in transactions between private citizens. They can travel to an authorized gun dealer who can approve the transaction for a small fee.

This is not a overnight solution, but honest people who want to legally own their guns will do it. And with time fewer unregistered guns will be in the population

Similar to car insurance. Liability, theft, etc...and you can get reduced rates if you can demonstrate that you are a responsible owner and keep the gun locked in a safe, etc...
5. Much stiffer? Ok, I can see that. Of course that is real general statement with all kinds of logistical concerns.
The penalties for being found with an unregistered gun need to be really stiff that people will actually want to comply
6. Are convicted felons and mentally unstable people able to purchase guns now?

The tolerance for these people needs to be tightened up.

Really guy! What part of "shall not be infringed" is so difficult for you to grasp?

OK what's it going to be? Mouth breather? Lowbrow? Inbred?
 
Gun registration fee, tax or insurance will strip the poor from their right to own a gun & defend their family. It is an absolute non-starter.

They are good with that, but not with making a trip to Motor Vehicle to pick up voter ID.
 
There was another shooting yesterday, I hear. This is becoming commonplace. If I lived in the US, I think I would keep my kids home from school. Too much risk of them becoming the victim of a gun wielding maniac.
 
Gun registration fee, tax or insurance will strip the poor from their right to own a gun & defend their family. It is an absolute non-starter.

Now you care about what the poor can afford. Ironic.

Many of us are business owners. There's no profit in poor people. I'd much rather everyone could afford to buy my product.
You mistake my reluctance to feed and house lay abouts with some imagined desire to keep poor people down.

The difference is, I believe you should succeed or fail on your own merits as I have done.
 
In over 200 years we have never needed the second amendment to defend the first

Then you don't understand it.

Actually I do

An armed population has never defended our freedom. A free press has

An armed population has never needed to defend our freedom, but it has always been there as a deterrent.
The press can only make people aware of an attempt to usurp our rights and attempt to sway opinion, but if a totalitarian leader ignored that opinion, a rolled up newspaper ain't gonna stop him, it it?
 
It is our first amendment that keeps us from being a brutal totalitarian state....not the second


Well, the Left is intent on destroying that one as well.

I'll note that without the 2nd, the 1st is left unprotected.

The pen is not mightier than the sword.

Pen-vs.-Sword.png
 
There was another shooting yesterday, I hear. This is becoming commonplace. If I lived in the US, I think I would keep my kids home from school. Too much risk of them becoming the victim of a gun wielding maniac.

This is exactly the sort of fear that the anti-gun crowd wants to instill in people...when people are afraid, they are easier to manipulate. I'm not reading through the other 515 posts, but surely someone has pointed out that CNN debunked this number, and it's actually 15...still a tragedy, but exaggerating just backfires and further contributes to the mistrust that already exists.
 
Guns don't kill people......People with guns kill people

People kill people with everything and anything they can get their hands or with their bare hands.

Yet, two out of three choose their trusty guns

In Japan, where there are strict gun laws, a knife is the weapon of choice.

The US Constitution guarantees me the right to keep and bear arms. If I had to kill someone, you bet your ass I'd use a gun. It's the most efficient tool I have for the purpose.
 
How about this CNN reports the truth of the matter:


A closer look: How many Newtown-like school shootings since Sandy Hook?


CNN determined that 15 of the incidents Everytown included were situations similar to the violence in Newtown or Oregon -- a minor or adult actively shooting inside or near a school. That works out to about one such shooting every five weeks, a startling figure in its own right.
A closer look: How many school shootings since Newtown? - CNN.com


15 not 74. AND of those 15 many were one on one violence.


Sooooo CNN proves the OP report a total LIE. NOT surprising.
 

Forum List

Back
Top