Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Kind of tough to see shit if you don't get out of your basement.
Fucking liar.
wouldn't know, guy, I don't own a basement on either of my properties.
What I do know is my next door neighbor shot himself in 2010 because despite the fact he had a whole host of issues, he was able to get a gun.
But not before he shot a bullet through the common area of the complex where we live.
Then 3/4 of the States will pass laws fixing the situation, and good luck if places like NYC want to confiscate legally owned firearms.
Some things may go too far, and people will not take it.
But you will be cowering in your basement, scared of things that go bang (and Mormons).
Guy, most people favor common sense gun control. Sorry, you nuts who want to arm terrorists and crazy people because a slave rapist said so are in the minority.
No, what I'm saying is that a lot of those people saying their gun had been "stolen" had probably transferred it illegally. 75% of the traces found the original owner said the gun had been stolen, but the majority were not reported to police. Now, why would that be? If one of your guns were stolen, wouldn't you report it? Why wouldn't you?In Chicago, only 15% of the guns used in crimes were legally owned. The guns had been stolen (though not reported to police), traded or sold at a gun show, or sold to someone else--all transfers not including background checks. Eventually, it got into the hands of someone who used it in a crime. If the person who DID initially buy the gun legally and had the background check, was held responsible for the crime if he/she had transferred the gun without another background check or did not report it stolen, then...illegal guns on the streets would go way down.So now suicide is a violent crime?
33,000 gun deaths.
70,000 gun injuries
400,000 gun crimes
$270,000,000,000 in economic losses a year
We know you guys are violent. Why we put up with your nonsense is the real question.
When did that law pass?
And legal gun owners are not responsible for anything done by people who illegally, sell ,buy or use guns.
Unless of course you want to hold every person with a penis responsible for every rape that happens as well
Are you saying that someone possessing a gun he/she stole legally has it in their possession?
Prove what you say about illegal guns on the streets going down. You Liberals sure have a knack about saying things WILL happen as if they had already occurred.
I can't prove it would make it a difference unless it is tried, but if you were held responsible for a gun that left your possession without following the law, wouldn't you be more careful?
No, what I'm saying is that a lot of those people saying their gun had been "stolen" had probably transferred it illegally. 75% of the traces found the original owner said the gun had been stolen, but the majority were not reported to police. Now, why would that be? If one of your guns were stolen, wouldn't you report it? Why wouldn't you?In Chicago, only 15% of the guns used in crimes were legally owned. The guns had been stolen (though not reported to police), traded or sold at a gun show, or sold to someone else--all transfers not including background checks. Eventually, it got into the hands of someone who used it in a crime. If the person who DID initially buy the gun legally and had the background check, was held responsible for the crime if he/she had transferred the gun without another background check or did not report it stolen, then...illegal guns on the streets would go way down.So now suicide is a violent crime?33,000 gun deaths.
70,000 gun injuries
400,000 gun crimes
$270,000,000,000 in economic losses a year
We know you guys are violent. Why we put up with your nonsense is the real question.
When did that law pass?
And legal gun owners are not responsible for anything done by people who illegally, sell ,buy or use guns.
Unless of course you want to hold every person with a penis responsible for every rape that happens as well
Are you saying that someone possessing a gun he/she stole legally has it in their possession?
Prove what you say about illegal guns on the streets going down. You Liberals sure have a knack about saying things WILL happen as if they had already occurred.
I can't prove it would make it a difference unless it is tried, but if you were held responsible for a gun that left your possession without following the law, wouldn't you be more careful?
No......it is property....you are only in trouble if you knowingly gave it to a criminal....otherwise the decision to report it is up to you...and wether you do or not has no bearing on how it is used by the guy who stole it.....and if you gave it to a felon, and that felon gets caught, he will tell the cops and they can set up a sting if you are a career gun trafficker...I have already posted stories that show prosecutors are not going to prosecute the baby momma of a gang member especially if she says she was forced to do it......
There is a simple solution.......when someone commits a crime with a gun...arrest them and lock them up 30 years....
That is the actual, 100% solution to the problem and it works every single time....and it doesn't bother normal gun owners......
Why is that so hard to understand?
No, what I'm saying is that a lot of those people saying their gun had been "stolen" had probably transferred it illegally. 75% of the traces found the original owner said the gun had been stolen, but the majority were not reported to police. Now, why would that be? If one of your guns were stolen, wouldn't you report it? Why wouldn't you?In Chicago, only 15% of the guns used in crimes were legally owned. The guns had been stolen (though not reported to police), traded or sold at a gun show, or sold to someone else--all transfers not including background checks. Eventually, it got into the hands of someone who used it in a crime. If the person who DID initially buy the gun legally and had the background check, was held responsible for the crime if he/she had transferred the gun without another background check or did not report it stolen, then...illegal guns on the streets would go way down.So now suicide is a violent crime?33,000 gun deaths.
70,000 gun injuries
400,000 gun crimes
$270,000,000,000 in economic losses a year
We know you guys are violent. Why we put up with your nonsense is the real question.
When did that law pass?
And legal gun owners are not responsible for anything done by people who illegally, sell ,buy or use guns.
Unless of course you want to hold every person with a penis responsible for every rape that happens as well
Are you saying that someone possessing a gun he/she stole legally has it in their possession?
Prove what you say about illegal guns on the streets going down. You Liberals sure have a knack about saying things WILL happen as if they had already occurred.
I can't prove it would make it a difference unless it is tried, but if you were held responsible for a gun that left your possession without following the law, wouldn't you be more careful?
So we can hold a person liable if someone steals their car, drives drunk, and kills someone?
Criminal liability has to follow an act, and a desire to cause said act. Someone who has their gun stolen and doesn't report it doesn't have the desire for someone to go out and kill someone else with their stolen gun.
No, what I'm saying is that a lot of those people saying their gun had been "stolen" had probably transferred it illegally. 75% of the traces found the original owner said the gun had been stolen, but the majority were not reported to police. Now, why would that be? If one of your guns were stolen, wouldn't you report it? Why wouldn't you?In Chicago, only 15% of the guns used in crimes were legally owned. The guns had been stolen (though not reported to police), traded or sold at a gun show, or sold to someone else--all transfers not including background checks. Eventually, it got into the hands of someone who used it in a crime. If the person who DID initially buy the gun legally and had the background check, was held responsible for the crime if he/she had transferred the gun without another background check or did not report it stolen, then...illegal guns on the streets would go way down.So now suicide is a violent crime?
When did that law pass?
And legal gun owners are not responsible for anything done by people who illegally, sell ,buy or use guns.
Unless of course you want to hold every person with a penis responsible for every rape that happens as well
Are you saying that someone possessing a gun he/she stole legally has it in their possession?
Prove what you say about illegal guns on the streets going down. You Liberals sure have a knack about saying things WILL happen as if they had already occurred.
I can't prove it would make it a difference unless it is tried, but if you were held responsible for a gun that left your possession without following the law, wouldn't you be more careful?
So we can hold a person liable if someone steals their car, drives drunk, and kills someone?
Criminal liability has to follow an act, and a desire to cause said act. Someone who has their gun stolen and doesn't report it doesn't have the desire for someone to go out and kill someone else with their stolen gun.
By Joey's logic, you should be able to prosecute the car dealer that sold you the car, if you use it to kill someone.
No, what I'm saying is that a lot of those people saying their gun had been "stolen" had probably transferred it illegally. 75% of the traces found the original owner said the gun had been stolen, but the majority were not reported to police. Now, why would that be? If one of your guns were stolen, wouldn't you report it? Why wouldn't you?In Chicago, only 15% of the guns used in crimes were legally owned. The guns had been stolen (though not reported to police), traded or sold at a gun show, or sold to someone else--all transfers not including background checks. Eventually, it got into the hands of someone who used it in a crime. If the person who DID initially buy the gun legally and had the background check, was held responsible for the crime if he/she had transferred the gun without another background check or did not report it stolen, then...illegal guns on the streets would go way down.So now suicide is a violent crime?
When did that law pass?
And legal gun owners are not responsible for anything done by people who illegally, sell ,buy or use guns.
Unless of course you want to hold every person with a penis responsible for every rape that happens as well
Are you saying that someone possessing a gun he/she stole legally has it in their possession?
Prove what you say about illegal guns on the streets going down. You Liberals sure have a knack about saying things WILL happen as if they had already occurred.
I can't prove it would make it a difference unless it is tried, but if you were held responsible for a gun that left your possession without following the law, wouldn't you be more careful?
So we can hold a person liable if someone steals their car, drives drunk, and kills someone?
Criminal liability has to follow an act, and a desire to cause said act. Someone who has their gun stolen and doesn't report it doesn't have the desire for someone to go out and kill someone else with their stolen gun.
By Joey's logic, you should be able to prosecute the car dealer that sold you the car, if you use it to kill someone.
No, what I'm saying is that a lot of those people saying their gun had been "stolen" had probably transferred it illegally. 75% of the traces found the original owner said the gun had been stolen, but the majority were not reported to police. Now, why would that be? If one of your guns were stolen, wouldn't you report it? Why wouldn't you?In Chicago, only 15% of the guns used in crimes were legally owned. The guns had been stolen (though not reported to police), traded or sold at a gun show, or sold to someone else--all transfers not including background checks. Eventually, it got into the hands of someone who used it in a crime. If the person who DID initially buy the gun legally and had the background check, was held responsible for the crime if he/she had transferred the gun without another background check or did not report it stolen, then...illegal guns on the streets would go way down.
Are you saying that someone possessing a gun he/she stole legally has it in their possession?
Prove what you say about illegal guns on the streets going down. You Liberals sure have a knack about saying things WILL happen as if they had already occurred.
I can't prove it would make it a difference unless it is tried, but if you were held responsible for a gun that left your possession without following the law, wouldn't you be more careful?
So we can hold a person liable if someone steals their car, drives drunk, and kills someone?
Criminal liability has to follow an act, and a desire to cause said act. Someone who has their gun stolen and doesn't report it doesn't have the desire for someone to go out and kill someone else with their stolen gun.
By Joey's logic, you should be able to prosecute the car dealer that sold you the car, if you use it to kill someone.
Ever notice all the hate the anti gunners show to the people who didn't use the gun to commit the crime.....? They want to just smash them......and only think of the actual trigger pullers as an after thought......they are really messed up in the head.....
No, what I'm saying is that a lot of those people saying their gun had been "stolen" had probably transferred it illegally. 75% of the traces found the original owner said the gun had been stolen, but the majority were not reported to police. Now, why would that be? If one of your guns were stolen, wouldn't you report it? Why wouldn't you?Are you saying that someone possessing a gun he/she stole legally has it in their possession?
Prove what you say about illegal guns on the streets going down. You Liberals sure have a knack about saying things WILL happen as if they had already occurred.
I can't prove it would make it a difference unless it is tried, but if you were held responsible for a gun that left your possession without following the law, wouldn't you be more careful?
So we can hold a person liable if someone steals their car, drives drunk, and kills someone?
Criminal liability has to follow an act, and a desire to cause said act. Someone who has their gun stolen and doesn't report it doesn't have the desire for someone to go out and kill someone else with their stolen gun.
By Joey's logic, you should be able to prosecute the car dealer that sold you the car, if you use it to kill someone.
Ever notice all the hate the anti gunners show to the people who didn't use the gun to commit the crime.....? They want to just smash them......and only think of the actual trigger pullers as an after thought......they are really messed up in the head.....
They chastise someone like me that had a gun stolen from his LOCKED car that was sitting on PRIVATE PROPERTY. However, they say nothing about the thief that unlawfully went into that LOCKED car, while it was on PRIVATE PROPERTY, and took something that DIDN'T belong to him/her. Somehow they consider it my fault for not breaking the law and give a pass to the person that did, all the while, thinking background checks will stop things like that.
No, what I'm saying is that a lot of those people saying their gun had been "stolen" had probably transferred it illegally. 75% of the traces found the original owner said the gun had been stolen, but the majority were not reported to police. Now, why would that be? If one of your guns were stolen, wouldn't you report it? Why wouldn't you?
I can't prove it would make it a difference unless it is tried, but if you were held responsible for a gun that left your possession without following the law, wouldn't you be more careful?
So we can hold a person liable if someone steals their car, drives drunk, and kills someone?
Criminal liability has to follow an act, and a desire to cause said act. Someone who has their gun stolen and doesn't report it doesn't have the desire for someone to go out and kill someone else with their stolen gun.
By Joey's logic, you should be able to prosecute the car dealer that sold you the car, if you use it to kill someone.
Ever notice all the hate the anti gunners show to the people who didn't use the gun to commit the crime.....? They want to just smash them......and only think of the actual trigger pullers as an after thought......they are really messed up in the head.....
They chastise someone like me that had a gun stolen from his LOCKED car that was sitting on PRIVATE PROPERTY. However, they say nothing about the thief that unlawfully went into that LOCKED car, while it was on PRIVATE PROPERTY, and took something that DIDN'T belong to him/her. Somehow they consider it my fault for not breaking the law and give a pass to the person that did, all the while, thinking background checks will stop things like that.
This is why I seriously think they have a problem in their brains.....I am serious when I say this....they have Reality Dyslexia.....they see reality backwards, the way someone with Dyslexia sees words.......they can function at every other aspect of life.....but the dyslexic can't see words properly...so too with Reality Dyslexics.....they can't understand the truth, facts, reality or the actual difference between Right and Wrong and Good and Evil....and just look at how they post and you will see this.....
So we can hold a person liable if someone steals their car, drives drunk, and kills someone?
Criminal liability has to follow an act, and a desire to cause said act. Someone who has their gun stolen and doesn't report it doesn't have the desire for someone to go out and kill someone else with their stolen gun.
By Joey's logic, you should be able to prosecute the car dealer that sold you the car, if you use it to kill someone.
Ever notice all the hate the anti gunners show to the people who didn't use the gun to commit the crime.....? They want to just smash them......and only think of the actual trigger pullers as an after thought......they are really messed up in the head.....
They chastise someone like me that had a gun stolen from his LOCKED car that was sitting on PRIVATE PROPERTY. However, they say nothing about the thief that unlawfully went into that LOCKED car, while it was on PRIVATE PROPERTY, and took something that DIDN'T belong to him/her. Somehow they consider it my fault for not breaking the law and give a pass to the person that did, all the while, thinking background checks will stop things like that.
This is why I seriously think they have a problem in their brains.....I am serious when I say this....they have Reality Dyslexia.....they see reality backwards, the way someone with Dyslexia sees words.......they can function at every other aspect of life.....but the dyslexic can't see words properly...so too with Reality Dyslexics.....they can't understand the truth, facts, reality or the actual difference between Right and Wrong and Good and Evil....and just look at how they post and you will see this.....
To them, law abiding means you were wrong and lawbreaking means it's OK.
You have repeatedly said you want gun store clerks in prison based on what their customers do with a gun, despite the clerk following all the federal, state and local laws, and despite the clerk having no way of knowing what the customer plans to do. That is not "reasonable". You want guns banned. At least have the balls to be honest about it.
Yes, that's what I'd like to see. I'd also like to see all the Mormons sent to a Cult Deprogramming Camp, but heck, I'm willing to be reasonable, unlike you guys.
You know, guys who apparently think that someone who can't get on an airliner because the FBI thinks he might be a terrorist, but he's totally free to buy an AR-15 and a 100 round clip like Joker Holmes and Omar Mateen did.
The problem is YOU want to define reasonable.
You have repeatedly said you want gun store clerks in prison based on what their customers do with a gun, despite the clerk following all the federal, state and local laws, and despite the clerk having no way of knowing what the customer plans to do. That is not "reasonable". You want guns banned. At least have the balls to be honest about it.
Yes, that's what I'd like to see. I'd also like to see all the Mormons sent to a Cult Deprogramming Camp, but heck, I'm willing to be reasonable, unlike you guys.
You know, guys who apparently think that someone who can't get on an airliner because the FBI thinks he might be a terrorist, but he's totally free to buy an AR-15 and a 100 round clip like Joker Holmes and Omar Mateen did.
The problem is YOU want to define reasonable.
No. The problem is that *you* don't think anything is reasonable
I am NOT against people being armed. My problem is when some loon and monster becomes armed only to go kill dozens of people.
You have repeatedly said you want gun store clerks in prison based on what their customers do with a gun, despite the clerk following all the federal, state and local laws, and despite the clerk having no way of knowing what the customer plans to do. That is not "reasonable". You want guns banned. At least have the balls to be honest about it.
Yes, that's what I'd like to see. I'd also like to see all the Mormons sent to a Cult Deprogramming Camp, but heck, I'm willing to be reasonable, unlike you guys.
You know, guys who apparently think that someone who can't get on an airliner because the FBI thinks he might be a terrorist, but he's totally free to buy an AR-15 and a 100 round clip like Joker Holmes and Omar Mateen did.
The problem is YOU want to define reasonable.
No. The problem is that *you* don't think anything is reasonable
You have repeatedly said you want gun store clerks in prison based on what their customers do with a gun, despite the clerk following all the federal, state and local laws, and despite the clerk having no way of knowing what the customer plans to do. That is not "reasonable". You want guns banned. At least have the balls to be honest about it.
Yes, that's what I'd like to see. I'd also like to see all the Mormons sent to a Cult Deprogramming Camp, but heck, I'm willing to be reasonable, unlike you guys.
You know, guys who apparently think that someone who can't get on an airliner because the FBI thinks he might be a terrorist, but he's totally free to buy an AR-15 and a 100 round clip like Joker Holmes and Omar Mateen did.
The problem is YOU want to define reasonable.
No. The problem is that *you* don't think anything is reasonable
show us reasonable and we will accept it.......you guys don't have anything reasonable....
No, what I'm saying is that a lot of those people saying their gun had been "stolen" had probably transferred it illegally. 75% of the traces found the original owner said the gun had been stolen, but the majority were not reported to police. Now, why would that be? If one of your guns were stolen, wouldn't you report it? Why wouldn't you?Are you saying that someone possessing a gun he/she stole legally has it in their possession?
Prove what you say about illegal guns on the streets going down. You Liberals sure have a knack about saying things WILL happen as if they had already occurred.
I can't prove it would make it a difference unless it is tried, but if you were held responsible for a gun that left your possession without following the law, wouldn't you be more careful?
So we can hold a person liable if someone steals their car, drives drunk, and kills someone?
Criminal liability has to follow an act, and a desire to cause said act. Someone who has their gun stolen and doesn't report it doesn't have the desire for someone to go out and kill someone else with their stolen gun.
By Joey's logic, you should be able to prosecute the car dealer that sold you the car, if you use it to kill someone.
Ever notice all the hate the anti gunners show to the people who didn't use the gun to commit the crime.....? They want to just smash them......and only think of the actual trigger pullers as an after thought......they are really messed up in the head.....
They chastise someone like me that had a gun stolen from his LOCKED car that was sitting on PRIVATE PROPERTY. However, they say nothing about the thief that unlawfully went into that LOCKED car, while it was on PRIVATE PROPERTY, and took something that DIDN'T belong to him/her. Somehow they consider it my fault for not breaking the law and give a pass to the person that did, all the while, thinking background checks will stop things like that.
I am NOT against people being armed. My problem is when some loon and monster becomes armed only to go kill dozens of people.
You have repeatedly said you want gun store clerks in prison based on what their customers do with a gun, despite the clerk following all the federal, state and local laws, and despite the clerk having no way of knowing what the customer plans to do. That is not "reasonable". You want guns banned. At least have the balls to be honest about it.
Yes, that's what I'd like to see. I'd also like to see all the Mormons sent to a Cult Deprogramming Camp, but heck, I'm willing to be reasonable, unlike you guys.
You know, guys who apparently think that someone who can't get on an airliner because the FBI thinks he might be a terrorist, but he's totally free to buy an AR-15 and a 100 round clip like Joker Holmes and Omar Mateen did.
The problem is YOU want to define reasonable.
No. The problem is that *you* don't think anything is reasonable
